2004 National 

Postsecondary Student 

Aid Study (NPSAS:04) 

Full-Scale Methodology 

Report

U.S. Department of Education 

Institute of Education Sciences 

NCES 2006-180 Technical Report 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

2004 National 

Postsecondary Student 

Aid Study (NPSAS:04) 

Full-Scale Methodology 

Report 

U.S. Department of Education 

Institute of Education Sciences 

NCES 2006-180 

Technical Report 

 June 2006 

 

 

 

Melissa Cominole 

Peter Siegel 

Kristin Dudley 

David Roe 

Theresa Gilligan 

RTI International

James Griffith

Project Officer 

National Center for Education Statistics

_________________________ 

*RTI International is a trade name of Research Triangle Institute. 
U.S. Department of Education

Margaret Spellings 

Secretary 

Institute of Education Sciences 

Grover J. Whitehurst 

Director 

National Center for Education Statistics 

Mark Schneider 

Commissioner 

The National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) is the primary federal entity for collecting, analyzing, 

and reporting data related to education in the United States and other nations. It fulfills a congressional 

mandate to collect, collate, analyze, and report full and complete statistics on the condition of education 

in the United States; conduct and publish reports and specialized analyses of the meaning and 

significance of such statistics; assist state and local education agencies in improving their statistical 

systems; and review and report on education activities in foreign countries. 

NCES activities are designed to address high-priority education data needs; provide consistent, reliable, 

complete, and accurate indicators of education status and trends; and report timely, useful, and highquality data to the U.S. Department of Education, Congress, state and other education policymakers, 

practitioners, data users, and the general public. 

We strive to make our products available in a variety of formats and in language that is appropriate to a 

variety of audiences. You, as our customer, are the best judge of our success in communicating 

information effectively. If you have any comments or suggestions about this or any other NCES product or 

report, we would like to hear from you. Please direct your comments to: 

National Center for Education Statistics 

Institute of Education Sciences 

U.S. Department of Education 

1990 K Street NW 

Washington, DC 20006-5651 

June 2006 

The NCES World Wide Web Home Page address is http://nces.ed.gov/.

The NCES World Wide Web Electronic Catalog is http://nces.ed.gov/pubsearch/.

Suggested Citation 

Cominole, M., Siegel, P., Dudley, K., Roe, D., and Gilligan, T. 2004 National Postsecondary Student Aid 

Study (NPSAS:04) Full Scale Methodology Report (NCES 2006–180). U.S. Department of Education. 

Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics. 

To download, view, and print the report as a PDF file, go to 

http://nces.ed.gov/pubsearch/pubinfo.asp?pubid=2006-180. 

Contact: 

Aurora D'Amico 

aurora.d’amico@ed.gov

(202) 502-7334
iii 

Executive Summary 

Introduction 

The 2004 National Postsecondary Student Aid Study (NPSAS:04), conducted for the U.S. 

Department of Education’s National Center for Education Statistics (NCES), collected 

comprehensive data regarding how students and their families pay for postsecondary education. 

The primary objective of NPSAS:04 is to produce reliable national estimates of characteristics 

related to financial aid for postsecondary students. NPSAS:04 also served as the base year of 

data collection for the Beginning Postsecondary Students Longitudinal Study (BPS), which will 

follow a cohort of students from the start of their postsecondary education and collect further 

data from them in 2006 and 2009. 

For the first time, NPSAS:04 was conducted as the student component study of the 2004 

National Study of Faculty and Students (NSoFaS:04). The faculty component—the 2004 

National Study of Postsecondary Faculty (NSOPF:04)—is primarily a separate study, with the 

exception of institutional sampling and contacting. Historically, there has been considerable 

overlap in the institutions selected for participation in NPSAS and NSOPF; therefore, 

institutional sampling and contacting activities for both studies were coordinated in order to 

minimize response burden on institutions and to realize data collection efficiencies. 

This report only describes the methodology and findings of NPSAS:04, which took place 

during the 2003–04 school year. The methodology and findings of NSOPF:04 are provided in a 

separate report. 

Sample Design 

The NPSAS:04 target population consists of all eligible students enrolled at any time 

between July 1, 2003 and June 30, 2004 in postsecondary institutions in the United States or 

Puerto Rico which had signed Title IV participation agreements with the U.S. Department of 

Education making them eligible for the federal student aid programs (Title IV institutions). 

NPSAS:04 is based on a nationally representative sample of all students (aided and nonaided) in 

those institutions. The institutions sampled represented all types and levels of postsecondary 

institutions in the United States, including public, private for-profit, and private not-for-profit 

institutions, at the 4-year, 2-year, and less-than-2-year levels. In the institutional sample, 1,670 

institutions1 were selected. Of these, 1,630 were determined to be eligible for NPSAS:04.2

Enrollment lists were obtained from 1,360 of the 1,630 eligible institutions. 

Approximately 109,210 undergraduate, graduate, and first-professional students enrolled 

in postsecondary education between July 1, 2003, and April 30, 2004, comprised the student 

sample, with special concern for the accurate sampling of students eligible to participate in the 

BPS longitudinal studies in the future. Students were selected on a flow basis from the 

institutions providing lists. Of the 109,210 students sampled, 8,200 were determined to be 

ineligible for the study, resulting in 101,010 eligible student sample members. 

 

1

 The numbers appearing in the tables and text of this report have been rounded to the nearest tens to maintain the 

confidentiality of study respondents. However, percentages are based on unrounded numbers. 2

 1,080 of these institutions were also included in the NSOPF institutional sample. 
Executive Summary 

iv 

Study Respondents 

Student-level data for NPSAS:04 were collected from a variety of sources, including 

student records (using computer-assisted data entry [CADE]), student interviews, and extant 

federal and private databases (CPS, and National Student Loan Data System [NSLDS]). For 

NPSAS:04, a definition of the minimum data requirements, regardless of source, to be 

considered a study respondent was adopted. About 90,750 of 101,010 eligible sample students 

had sufficient data across sources to be classified as study respondents, for a weighted response 

rate of 91 percent. Among the 90,750 study respondents, 92 percent were classified as CADE 

respondents and 70 percent were student interview respondents. The match rates to the other data 

services are also discussed. 

Instrumentation 

Unlike in previous NPSAS cycles, the NPSAS:04 student instrument was designed as a 

web-based instrument to be used both for self-administered “interviews” via the Web and by 

telephone interviewers. In addition, a study website was developed for access to the selfadministered interview and to provide sample members with additional information about the 

study. 

The instrument was designed to accommodate the mixed-mode data collection approach 

and to ensure the collection of the highest quality data. Design considerations included the 

following: appropriate question wording for both self-administered and telephone interviews; the 

provision of extensive help text to assist self-administered respondents and telephone 

interviewers; and pop-up boxes indicating out-of-range values. 

The instrument consisted of six sections grouped by topic. The first section determined 

student eligibility for the NPSAS:04 study and the future BPS study, and obtained enrollment 

history. The second section contained questions relating to student expenses and financial aid. 

Included in this section were items regarding employment at the NPSAS institution, such as 

work-study participation, assistantships, and fellowships. Section three focused on employment 

and finances. Educational experiences, such as courses taken and admission test scores, were 

included in the fourth section, as well as educational experience items specific only to BPS 

respondents. The fifth section of the interview gathered background and demographic 

information about students and their family members. The final section, applicable only to BPS 

respondents, requested contacting information in order to make subsequent follow-up contact 

with them easier for future surveys. 

Data Collection Design and Outcomes 

Training 

Training programs were developed for different types of project staff: institutional 

contactors, field data collectors for student record abstraction, help desk operators, and telephone 

interviewers. Institution contactors were trained to work with institutional staff to inform them of 

the nature of the study and to gain institutional participation. Training for field data collectors for 

student record abstraction emphasized the use of the various systems to monitor and transfer 

data. It also focused on the nature of the study and the processes associated with financial aid 

from an institutional perspective. Help desk operators received specific training on “frequently 
Executive Summary 

v 

asked questions” regarding the instrument and technical issues related to completion of the 

instrument via the Web. Help desk operators were also trained to conduct the student interview 

when requested by sample members. Programs on successfully locating and interviewing sample 

members were developed for all telephone interviewers. Topics covered in telephone interviewer 

training included administrative procedures required for case management; quality control of 

interactions with sample members, parents, and other contacts; the purpose of NPSAS:04 and the 

uses of the data to be collected; and the organization and operation of the web-based student 

instrument to be used in data collection. 

Institutional Contacting 

Once institutions were sampled, attempts were made to contact the chief administrator to 

verify institutional eligibility, solicit participation, and request the appointment of an institutional 

coordinator to oversee data collection within the institution. Institutional coordinators were asked 

to provide lists or data files of all eligible students enrolled at any time between July 1, 2003, and 

April 30, 2004. Several checks on quality and completeness of student lists were implemented 

prior to sampling students from each institution. Of the 1,630 eligible institutions sampled for the 

field test, about 1,360 provided lists, resulting in an overall institutional participation rate of 

about 80 percent (weighted). 

Institutional Record Abstraction 

A web-based CADE software system was used for the abstraction of student records from 

institutions. Institutions were given the option of completing CADE using their own staff, or, 

upon request, having an RTI International (RTI) field data collector complete the record 

abstraction process at the institution. Prior to the initialization of the CADE software system for 

an institution, records for all students sampled from a school were requested from the U.S. 

Department of Education’s Central Processing System (CPS), which contains financial aid 

application data. This information was preloaded into the CADE system to provide edit checks 

for the data entered by an institution. The CADE system consisted of three sections focusing on 

eight topics: locating information, demographic characteristics, admissions tests, enrollment, 

tuition, financial aid awards, needs analysis, and institutional student information records 

(ISIRs). Of the 1,360 eligible and participating institutions, about 1,300 institutions provided 

information for about 88,920 students. The institutional and student-level weighted response 

rates for record abstraction were 96 percent and 92 percent, respectively. 

Student Locating and Interviewing 

The NPSAS:04 data collection design involved initial locating of sample members, 

providing an opportunity for the student to complete the self-administered interview via the Web, 

following up with Web nonrespondents after 4 weeks, and attempting to conduct a telephone 

interview with them if necessary. Upon receipt of student enrollment lists, batch-locating 

activities were implemented to update address and telephone activities. Sources for this task 

included the CPS, the U.S. Postal Service National Change of Address (NCOA) system, and 

Telematch. Students were then sent a notification mailing containing a lead letter, informational 

brochure, and username and password for completing the interview via the Web. Telephone 

contact began for self-administered Web nonrespondents 4 weeks after the initial mailing. 

Locating and tracing activities by telephone interviewers occurred simultaneously with efforts to 
Executive Summary 

vi 

gain cooperation from sample members. When all tracing options were exhausted by the 

interviewer, cases were sent to RTI’s Call Center Services (CCS) Tracing Services. Cases for 

which further contacting information was obtained were sent back for contact by telephone 

interviewers; those for whom no additional information could be obtained were finalized as 

unlocatable. 

As discussed earlier, there were 90,750 study respondents among the 101,010 eligible 

sample members. About 62,220 completed the student interview, for a weighted response rate of 

71 percent. Among those who completed the student interview, about 25,000 BPS respondents 

eligible for the longitudinal follow-up studies (BPS:04/06 and BPS:04/09) were identified.3

 Of 

all completed student interviews, about 53 percent (weighted) were completed with a telephone 

interviewer, and 47 percent (weighted) were completed via self-administration over the Web. 

The average overall time to complete the student interview for all respondents was about 27 

minutes, regardless of the mode of completion. 

Evaluation of Operations and Data Quality 

Evaluations4

 of operations and procedures focused on the newly introduced joint 

institutional contacting endeavor, the timeline for data collection from both institutions (CADE) 

and students (self-administered and interviewer-administered), tracing and locating procedures, 

refusal conversion efforts, the effectiveness of incentives for increasing early response via the 

Web and for refusal conversion, and the length of the student interview. Evaluations of data 

quality included an examination of items with high rates of missing data, use of online help text, 

item-level nonresponse conversion efforts, and question delivery and data entry quality control 

procedures. 

Analysis Weights 

Cross-sectional weights were developed for analyzing respondents to the NPSAS:04 

interview. Variances were computed using the Taylor series and bootstrap techniques. Weighted 

response rates, nonresponse bias analyses, and survey design effect tables are also provided. 

Data Files 

Throughout the data collection period, data were processed and examined for quality 

control purposes. Following completion of all study data collection, separate Data Analysis 

System (DAS) files were created for undergraduate and graduate/first-professional students. The 

first DASs, both undergraduate and graduate/first-professional, were adjudicated and approved 

for public release in February 2005. The primary analysis file, from which the study DASs were 

constructed, contains data for approximately 90,750 study respondents,5

 including about 35,510 

first-time beginner (FTB) students, 44,340 other undergraduates, and 10,890 graduate and firstprofessional students. The primary analysis file contains over 500 variables, developed from 

multiple sources (including student interviews, institutional records, and extant data sources). 

 

3

 Institutions identified all potential first time beginners (FTBs) as they prepared enrollment lists for sampling 

purposes. Eligibility for inclusion in the BPS:04 cohort was confirmed for those who completed the student interview. 

Study respondents who did not complete the student interview are retained on the data file as potential FTBs and 

their eligibility will be confirmed as part of the follow-up interview. 

4

 All comparisons have been tested using a significance level of 0.05. 5

 Study respondents are those who met the minimum data requirements regardless of data source. 
Executive Summary 

vii 

The survey data files used to create variables in the DASs, and the associated electronic 

codebooks and file documentation, are available to researchers who have obtained a restricted 

data license from NCES. 

Products 

NPSAS:04 reports or data products that have or will be published include the following: 

• 2004 National Postsecondary Student Aid Study (NPSAS:04): Student Financial Aid 

Estimates for 2003–04. This E.D. TAB is the first publication based on the 2003–04 

data. The E.D. TAB describes the percentages of students receiving various types of 

financial aid and average amounts received, by type of institution attended, 

attendance pattern, dependency status, and income level. 

• 2004 National Postsecondary Student Aid Study (NPSAS:04): Undergraduate 

Financial Aid Estimates for 2003–04 by Type of Institution. This E.D. TAB is the 

second publication based on the 2003–04 data. This E.D. TAB focuses only on 

undergraduates, including separate tables for those who attended public 4-year, 

private-not-for-profit 4-year, public 2-year, or private for-profit postsecondary 

institutions during the 2003–04 academic year. It describes average tuition and fees, 

average total price of attendance, and the percentages of undergraduates receiving 

various types and combinations of financial aid and average amounts received, with a 

particular focus on grants and loans. 

• 2004 National Postsecondary Student Aid Study (NPSAS:04): Undergraduate Data 

Analysis System. The NPSAS:04 Undergraduate DAS contains the data on a sample 

of about 80,000 undergraduates who were enrolled at any time between July 1, 2003, 

and June 30, 2004, in about 1,400 postsecondary institutions. It represents all 

undergraduate students enrolled in postsecondary institutions in the 50 states, the 

District of Columbia, and Puerto Rico that were eligible to participate in the federal 

financial aid programs in Title IV of the Higher Education Act. 

• 2004 National Postsecondary Student Aid Study (NPSAS:04): Graduate Data 

Analysis System. The NPSAS:04 Graduate DAS contains the data on a sample of 

about 11,000 graduate students who were enrolled at any time between July 1, 2003, 

and June 30, 2004, in about 1,400 postsecondary institutions. It represents all 

graduate students enrolled in postsecondary institutions in the 50 states, the District of 

Columbia, and Puerto Rico that were eligible to participate in the federal financial aid 

programs in Title IV of the Higher Education Act. 

• Profile of Undergraduates in U.S. Postsecondary Education Institutions: 2003–04.

Describes the demographic and enrollment characteristics of undergraduate students. 

• Student Financing of Undergraduate Education: 2003–04. Focuses on undergraduate 

tuition, total price of attendance, types and sources of financial aid received, net price, 

financial aid need, and unmet need. 

• Student Financing of Graduate and First-Professional Education: 2003–04. 

Describes the demographic and enrollment characteristics of graduate and firstprofessional students and the types and sources of financial aid received. 
Executive Summary 

viii 

This page left intentionally blank. 
ix 

Foreword 

This report describes and evaluates the methods and procedures used in the 2004 

National Postsecondary Student Aid Study (NPSAS:04), the student component of the 2004 

National Study of Faculty and Students (NSoFaS:04). NPSAS:04 included important changes 

from previous NPSAS studies. One of the most significant changes was the fielding of the 

institutional contacting stage of the study jointly with that for the faculty component of 

NSoFaS:04, the 2004 National Study of Postsecondary Faculty (NSOPF:04). A second major 

change was conducting student record abstraction from institutional records and student 

interviewing simultaneously, rather than sequentially as had been done in previous NPSAS 

cycles. Another change was the development of a single web-based instrument for selfadministration by sample members and use by telephone interviewers alike. 

We hope that the information provided in this report will be useful to interested readers. 

Additional information about NPSAS:04 is available on the Web at http://www.nces.ed.gov/

surveys/npsas. 

C. Dennis Carroll 

Associate Commissioner 

Postsecondary Studies Division 
Foreword 

x 

This page left intentionally blank. 
xi 

Acknowledgments 

The authors gratefully acknowledge the assistance of staff members of the National 

Center for Education Statistics (NCES) for their advice, guidance, and review in the design of 

the study, and in preparation of this document. We are particularly grateful to C. Dennis Carroll, 

Associate Commissioner, Postsecondary Studies Division; Paula R. Knepper, Senior Technical 

Advisor, Postsecondary Studies Division; James Griffith, Program Director, Postsecondary 

Longitudinal and Sample Survey Studies (PLSSS); Tracy Hunt-White, Statistician (PLSSS); and 

Linda Zimbler, Statistician (PLSSS), for their constructive input and review. 

Particular thanks are also extended to the Technical Review Panel members, who 

provided considerable insight and guidance in the development of the design and instrumentation 

of the study and to Heath Brown, Melanie Corrigan, and Adam Stoll for their careful review of 

this report. 

Thanks are also extended to the many project staff members who assisted with the 

production of this report. Special acknowledgment is given to John Riccobono, who served as 

the study’s Project Director. Appreciation is extended to Jim Chromy and Roy Whitmore for 

their consultation and guidance on the statistical design of the study. Also, thanks to those who 

contributed to many of the statistical analyses presented here, including Karol Krotki, Kim Ault, 

Ruby Johnson, Jane Eslinger, Stephen Black, Jeremy Porter, and Darryl Creel. 

Jeff Franklin, Brian Kuhr, and Robert Bozick are recognized for their contributions to the 

design and analysis of the data collection efforts and data quality evaluations. Finally, the tireless 

efforts of Sallie Fiore, Craig Hollingsworth, Sharon Powell, and Lynne Hawley in preparing this 

document are appreciated. 

Most of all, we are greatly indebted to the institutions and students who generously 

participated in the survey. Their willingness to take the time to share information made this study 

a success. 
Acknowledgments 

xii 

This page left intentionally blank. 
xiii 

Contents 

Executive Summary ...................................................................................................................................iii

Foreword.....................................................................................................................................................ix

Acknowledgments ......................................................................................................................................xi

List of Tables ............................................................................................................................................xvi

List of Figures...........................................................................................................................................xix

Chapter 1 Overview of NPSAS:04.............................................................................................................1

1.1 Background and Purpose of NPSAS ............................................................................................2

1.2 Major Design Changes .................................................................................................................2

1.2.1 Combining NPSAS and NSOPF......................................................................................2

1.2.2 State-Representative Samples..........................................................................................2

1.3 Schedule and Products of NPSAS:04...........................................................................................3

1.3.1 Schedule ..........................................................................................................................3

1.3.2 Products ...........................................................................................................................3

Chapter 2 Design and Methodology of NPSAS:04...................................................................................5

2.1 Sampling.......................................................................................................................................5

2.1.1 Target Population and Sampling Overview.....................................................................5

2.1.2 Institutional Sample and Eligibility...............................................................................11

2.1.3 Student Sample and Eligibility ......................................................................................14

2.2 Sources of Data...........................................................................................................................18

2.3 Data Collection Design...............................................................................................................18

2.3.1 Institutional Contacting .................................................................................................19

2.3.2 Student Enrollment List Acquisition .............................................................................23

2.3.3 Matching to Federal Databases (CPS, NSLDS) ............................................................25

2.3.4 Data Abstraction from Student Records (CADE)..........................................................26

2.3.5 Student Interview...........................................................................................................31

2.3.6 Data Quality Evaluation ................................................................................................42

2.4 Data Collection Systems.............................................................................................................42

2.4.1 Instrument Development and Documentation System (IDADS) ..................................42

2.4.2 Integrated Management System (IMS)..........................................................................43

2.4.3 Variable Tracking System (VTS) ..................................................................................46

Chapter 3 Data Collection Outcomes......................................................................................................47

3.1 Institutional Participation ...........................................................................................................47

3.1.1 National Sample ............................................................................................................47

3.1.2 State Samples.................................................................................................................48

3.2 Study Respondents......................................................................................................................50

3.2.1 National Sample ............................................................................................................50

3.2.2 State Samples.................................................................................................................52

3.3 Data Collection Results, by Source ............................................................................................53

3.3.1 Student Record Matching ..............................................................................................53

3.3.2 Outcomes of Student Record Abstraction .....................................................................57

3.3.3 Student Interview Completion.......................................................................................60

3.3.4 Student Locating and Response Rate Summary............................................................63

3.3.5 Conversion of Nonrespondents .....................................................................................65
Contents 

xiv 

3.4 Completeness of Data Records among Study Respondents .......................................................66

Chapter 4 Evaluation of Field Operations and Data Quality ...............................................................69

4.1 Enrollment List Collection .........................................................................................................69

4.1.1 Early Contacting Activities ...........................................................................................69

4.1.2 Institutional Participation ..............................................................................................69

4.1.3 Quality of Enrollment Lists ...........................................................................................71

4.2 Student Record Abstraction........................................................................................................73

4.2.1 Preloading Data into CADE ..........................................................................................73

4.2.2 Timeliness of Record Abstraction .................................................................................74

4.2.3 CADE Data Completeness ............................................................................................76

4.3 Student Interviewing...................................................................................................................77

4.3.1 Identification of First Time Beginners (FTBs)..............................................................77

4.3.2 Data Collection Evaluations ..........................................................................................79

4.3.3 Instrument Usability ......................................................................................................88

4.3.4 Item Nonresponse..........................................................................................................90

4.3.5 CATI Monitoring and Quality Assurance .....................................................................95

Chapter 5 Variable Construction and File Development......................................................................99

5.1 Overview of the NPSAS:04 Data Files ......................................................................................99

5.2 Online Coding and Verification................................................................................................100

5.2.1 Online Coding .............................................................................................................100

5.2.2 Range and Consistency Checks...................................................................................100

5.3 Data Editing..............................................................................................................................101

5.4 Data Perturbation......................................................................................................................103

5.5 Statistical Imputations ..............................................................................................................103

5.6 Composite and Derived Variable Construction........................................................................105

Chapter 6 Unit Nonresponse Bias Analyses, Weighting, and Variance Estimation .........................107

6.1 Institution Nonresponse Bias Analysis and Weighting ............................................................109

6.1.1 Initial Institution Weight Components ........................................................................109

6.1.2 Assessing Institution Nonresponse Bias......................................................................110

6.1.3 Adjusting Institution Weights......................................................................................111

6.1.4 Institution Weighting Adjustment Performance..........................................................116

6.2 Student Nonresponse Bias Analysis and Weighting.................................................................118

6.2.1 Initial Student Weight Components.............................................................................118

6.2.2 Assessing Student Nonresponse Bias ..........................................................................121

6.2.3 Adjusting Student Weights..........................................................................................122

6.2.4 Student Weighting Adjustment Performance ..............................................................135

6.3 Item Nonresponse Bias Analysis..............................................................................................137

6.4 Variance Estimation .................................................................................................................146

6.4.1 Taylor Series................................................................................................................147

6.4.2 Bootstrap Replicate Weights .......................................................................................148

6.4.3 Variance Approximation .............................................................................................149

References................................................................................................................................................151

Appendixes 

A. Technical Review Panel................................................................................................................A-1 

B. Sampling Details........................................................................................................................... B-1 

C. Data Collection Notification Materials......................................................................................... C-1 
Contents 

xv 

D. Endorsements ...............................................................................................................................D-1 

E. Facsimiles ..................................................................................................................................... E-1 

F. Training Materials ..........................................................................................................................F-1 

G. Data-CADE Specifications ...........................................................................................................G-1 

H. Imputations...................................................................................................................................H-1 

I. Analysis Variables ............................................................................................................................I-1 

J. GEM Adjustment Procedure........................................................................................................... J-1 

K. Nonresponse Bias Analysis ..........................................................................................................K-1 

L. Details of the Bootstrap Variance Estimation ............................................................................... L-1 

M. Weighted Analysis Considerations.............................................................................................. M-1 

N. Design Effects...............................................................................................................................N-1 
xvi 

List of Tables 

Table Page 

1. Schedule of major NPSAS:04 activities: 2002–04 ..................................................................... 3

2. Target numbers of sample students, by institutional stratum and type of student: 2004............. 9

3. Target numbers of sample students in the 12 state representative samples, by 

institutional stratum and type of student: 2004......................................................................... 10

4. Institutional sampling rates and number of certainty and noncertainty institutions, by 

institutional stratum: 2004 ........................................................................................................ 12

5. Planned and achieved NPSAS:04 student samples, by student stratum and level of 

offering: 2004............................................................................................................................ 16

6. Initial classification of NPSAS:04 student sample, by institutional characteristics and 

student stratum .......................................................................................................................... 17

7. Summary of NPSAS:04 evaluations ......................................................................................... 42

8. Numbers of NPSAS:04 sampled, eligible, and participating institutions and enrollment 

list participation rates, by institutional characteristics: national sample................................... 48

9. Numbers of NPSAS:04 sampled, eligible, and participating institutions and enrollment 

list participation rates, by institutional characteristics: state samples....................................... 49

10. Numbers of NPSAS:04 sampled and eligible students and response rates, by 

institutional characteristics and student type: national sample ................................................. 51

11. Numbers of NPSAS:04 sampled, eligible, and responding students and response rates, 

by institutional characteristics: state samples ........................................................................... 52

12. Results of Central Processing System (CPS) matching for 2003–04 and 2004–05, by 

institutional characteristics and student type: 2004 .................................................................. 55

13. Results of National Student Loan Data System (NSLDS) matching, by institutional 

characteristics and student type: 2004....................................................................................... 56

14. Student record abstraction method: 2004.................................................................................. 57

15. Institutional-level computer-assisted data entry (CADE) completion rates, by 

institutional characteristics and abstraction method: 2004 ....................................................... 58

16. Student-level computer-assisted data entry (CADE) completion rates, by institutional 

characteristics and student type: 2004....................................................................................... 59

17. Student locating, by institutional characteristics and student type: 2004.................................. 60

18. Batch processing record match rates, by tracing source: 2004 ................................................. 61

19. Students requiring intensive tracing procedures, by institutional characteristics and 

student type: 2004 ..................................................................................................................... 62

20. Locate and interview rates, by intensive tracing efforts: 2004 ................................................. 62

21. Student interview completion results, by institutional characteristics and student type: 

2004........................................................................................................................................... 64

22. Student interview completion mode: 2004 ............................................................................... 65
List of Tables 

xvii 

23. Percent of student respondents with data, by institutional characteristics, student type, 

and source: 2004 ....................................................................................................................... 67

24. Cumulative flow of enrollment list receipt: 1996 and 2004...................................................... 69

25. Institutional NPSAS:04 enrollment list participation, by prior NPSAS participation .............. 70

26. Distribution of participating NPSAS:04 institutions, by 2000 Carnegie classification ............ 71

27. NPSAS participation of historically Black colleges and universities (HBCUs): 1987–

2004........................................................................................................................................... 71

28. Types of discrepancies encountered with student lists, by highest level of offering: 

2004........................................................................................................................................... 72

29. Nature and source of elements preloaded into computer-assisted data entry (CADE): 

2004........................................................................................................................................... 73 

30. Comparison of NPSAS:04 student record data element completion rates, by method of 

abstraction: 2004....................................................................................................................... 77

31. First-time beginner (FTB) determination, by student type: 2004 ............................................. 79

32. Help desk incidents, by type: 2004 ........................................................................................... 80

33. Average time to complete full-scale student interview, by student type: 2004......................... 83

34. Average time to complete full-scale student interview, by interview section and 

student type: 2004 ..................................................................................................................... 83

35. Average time to complete full-scale student interview, by interview section and mode 

of administration: 2004 ............................................................................................................. 84

36. Average on-screen and transit time, by response mode: 2004 .................................................. 85

37. Average time to complete self-administered student interview, by internet connection 

type: 2004.................................................................................................................................. 86

38. Average calls per case, by interview status: 2004..................................................................... 86

39. Average calls per case, by institutional characteristics and student type: 2004 ........................ 87

40. Summary of coding results for major field of study, by respondent type: 2004 ....................... 88

41. Rates of help text usage for items accessed by 5 percent or more of respondents, by 

interview screen and administration mode: 2004...................................................................... 89

42. Conversion rates for critical items: 2004 .................................................................................. 91

43. NPSAS:04 interview item nonresponse for items with more than 10 percent missing ............ 92

44. NPSAS:04 interview item nonresponse for items with more than 10 percent "don't 

know," by mode of administration ............................................................................................ 94

45. Description of missing data codes: 2004 ................................................................................ 101

46. Summary of institution nonresponse bias analysis for all institutions, by type of 

institution: 2004 ...................................................................................................................... 111

47. Weight adjustment factors for institution poststratification: 2004 .......................................... 112

48. Weight adjustment factors for institution nonresponse adjustment: 2004 .............................. 113

49. Institution weight distribution and unequal weighting effects (UWEs): 2004........................ 117

50. Weight adjustment factors for unknown student eligibility status: 2004 ................................ 120
List of Tables 

xviii 

51. Summary of student nonresponse bias analysis for all students, in public 2-year 

institutions: 2004..................................................................................................................... 122

52. Weight adjustment factors for student location nonresponse adjustment: 2004 ..................... 124

53. Weight adjustment factors for student refusal nonresponse adjustment: 2004 ....................... 126

54. Weight adjustment factors for student other nonresponse adjustment: 2004.......................... 128

55. Weight adjustment factors for student poststratification: 2004............................................... 133

56. Student weight distribution and unequal weighting effects (UWEs): 2004............................ 136

57. Summary of item response rates for all students, by type of institution: 2004 ....................... 138
xix 

List of Figures 

Figure Page 

1. Schematic of sequential NPSAS:04 sampling operations........................................................... 6

2. The 2004 National Study of Faculty and Students institution website home page ................... 21

3. The 2004 National Study of Faculty and Students (NSoFaS:04) institution website 

status screen .............................................................................................................................. 23

4. Structure and content of computer-assisted data entry (CADE) student record 

abstraction instrument: 2004..................................................................................................... 27

5. The 2004 National Postsecondary Student Aid Study (NPSAS:04) web-CADE home 

page........................................................................................................................................... 30

6. Structure and flow of student interview: 2004.......................................................................... 34

7. Overview of student data collection: 2004................................................................................ 36

8. The 2004 National Postsecondary Student Aid Study (NPSAS:04) website home page.......... 39

9. NPSAS:04 locating and interview outcomes ............................................................................ 63

10. Cumulative flow of computer-assisted data entry (CADE) completions: 1996 and 2004........ 75

11. Computer-assisted data entry (CADE) completions, by abstraction mode: 2004..................... 75

12. Visual representation of on-screen and transit times: 2004....................................................... 82

13. The 2004 National Postsecondary Student Aid Study (NPSAS:04) error rate: question 

delivery ..................................................................................................................................... 96

14. The 2004 National Postsecondary Student Aid Study (NPSAS:04) error rate: data 

entry .......................................................................................................................................... 96

15. Receiver Operating Characteristics (ROC) curve for overall institution response 

propensity: 2004...................................................................................................................... 118

16. Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) curve for overall student response 

propensity: 2004...................................................................................................................... 136
List of Figures 

xx 

This page left intentionally blank. 
1 

Chapter 1 

Overview of NPSAS:04 

This document provides a description of the methodological procedures and results for 

the 2004 National Postsecondary Student Aid Study (NPSAS:04). The 2004 study is being 

conducted for the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) of the U.S. Department of 

Education, Washington, DC, as authorized by Title I, Section 153 of the Education Sciences 

Reform Act of 2002, P.L. 107-279, 116 Stat. 1940 (2002). For reference, previous cycles of 

NPSAS and its longitudinal spin-off studies, the Beginning Postsecondary Students Longitudinal 

Study (BPS) and the Baccalaureate and Beyond Longitudinal Study (B&B), were authorized by 

the following legislation: 

The General Education Provisions Act, as amended, 20 U.S.C. §1221 e-1 (2001). 

The Higher Education Act of 1965, as amended by the Higher Education Amendments of 

1986, Title XIII(a), Section 1303, and Title XIV, 20 U.S.C. §1070 et seq. (1994). 

The Higher Education Act of 1965, Augustus F. Hawkins – Robert T. Stafford 

Elementary and Secondary School Improvement Amendments of 1988, 20 U.S.C. §2911 

to 2976 (2001). 

Sections 404(a), 408(a), and 408(b) of the National Education Statistics Act of 1994, 20 

U.S.C. 9001 et seq. (2002). 

NPSAS:04 is being conducted as the student component study of the 2004 National 

Study of Faculty and Students (NSoFaS:04) under contract by RTI International (RTI).1 Results 

for the faculty component study of NSoFaS:04—the 2004 National Study of Postsecondary 

Faculty (NSOPF:04)—are provided in a separate methodology report (Heuer et al. forthcoming). 

This introductory chapter describes the background, purposes, schedule, and products of 

the NPSAS:04 study. In chapter 2, study design and methods are described. Overall outcomes of 

the several stages of data collection are presented in chapter 3. Chapter 4 presents evaluations of 

procedures used to collect information from institutions and students and the quality of the data 

collected. Chapter 5 describes the procedures used in data file preparation. Chapter 6 presents the 

nonresponse bias analyses, weighting procedures, and variance estimation. Materials used during 

the study are provided as appendixes to the report and cited in the text where appropriate. 

All analyses conducted to evaluate the effectiveness of the NPSAS:04 procedures are 

discussed. Unless otherwise indicated, a criterion probability level of 0.05 was used for all tests 

of significance. Throughout this document, reported numbers of sample institutions and students 

have been rounded to further ensure confidentiality of individual student data. As a result, row 

and column entries in tables may not sum to their respective totals, and reported percentages may 

differ somewhat from those that would result from these rounded numbers. 

 

1 RTI International is a trade name of Research Triangle Institute. 
Chapter 1. Overview of NPSAS:04 

2 

1.1 Background and Purpose of NPSAS 

NPSAS is a comprehensive nationwide study to determine how students and their 

families pay for postsecondary education. The study is based on a nationally representative 

sample of all students (aided and nonaided) in postsecondary education institutions. 

Undergraduate, graduate, and first-professional students comprise the sample; these students 

attend all types and levels of institutions, including public and private for-profit and not-forprofit institutions, and less-than-2-year institutions to 4-year colleges and universities. 

The first NPSAS study was conducted in 1986–87 to meet the need for national-level 

data about significant financial aid issues. Since 1987, NPSAS has been fielded every 3 to 

4 years, with the last cycle conducted during the 1999–2000 academic year. Beginning in 1990, 

each NPSAS data collection has provided the sample and base-year data for either the BPS or the 

B&B. NPSAS:04 serves as the base-year study for BPS. These students will be followed up in 

2006 and again in 2009. 

A main objective of NPSAS:04 is to produce reliable national estimates of characteristics 

related to financial aid for postsecondary students. No other single national database contains 

student-level records for students receiving financial aid from all of the numerous and disparate 

programs funded by the federal government, the states, postsecondary institutions, employers, 

and private organizations. The data are part of NCES’s comprehensive information on student 

financial aid and other characteristics of those enrolled in postsecondary education. The study 

focuses on three general questions with important policy implications for financial aid programs: 

• How do students and their families finance postsecondary education? 

• How does the process of financial aid work, in terms of both who applies for and who 

receives aid? 

• What are the effects of financial aid on students and their families and on 

postsecondary institutions? 

1.2 Major Design Changes 

1.2.1 Combining NPSAS and NSOPF 

For the first time, NPSAS and NSOPF were conducted together under one contract: 

NSoFaS:04. There has historically been a great deal of overlap in the institutional samples for 

these two studies since the target populations for both studies involve postsecondary institutions. 

To minimize institutional burden, and also to maximize efficiency in data collection procedures, 

the two studies were combined. This report will document the methodology and procedures used 

in NPSAS:04 and will discuss issues related to NSOPF when such procedures were relevant for 

NPSAS as well. 

1.2.2 State-Representative Samples 

Another important change is that NPSAS:04 was designed to provide state-level 

representative estimates for undergraduate students within three institutional strata—public 2-

year institutions; public 4-year institutions; and private not-for-profit 4-year institutions for 12 

states that were categorized into three groups based on population size—four large, four 

medium, and four small: California, Connecticut, Delaware, Georgia, Illinois, Indiana, 
Chapter 1. Overview of NPSAS:04 

3 

Minnesota, Nebraska, New York, Oregon, Tennessee, and Texas. These states were chosen for 

this “demonstration” study from a set of volunteering states that expressed interest and a 

willingness to support and encourage participation by their institutions. 

1.3 Schedule and Products of NPSAS:04 

1.3.1 Schedule 

Table 1 summarizes the schedule of major activities for the full-scale study. 

Table 1. Schedule of major NPSAS:04 activities: 2002–04 

Activity Start date1 End date2

Select institutional sample 8/9/02 7/18/03 

Mail and make phone contact with chief administrator 3/10/03 7/17/04 

Mail and make phone contact with institutional coordinator 3/24/03 7/17/04 

Obtain lists for student sampling 1/7/04 7/12/04 

Select student samples 1/19/04 7/13/04 

Send prenotification mailing to students 2/3/04 7/22/04 

Request/obtain CPS data 1/21/04 7/14/04 

Preload CPS data into CADE records 1/22/04 7/20/04 

Implement CADE record abstraction 2/4/04 9/9/04 

Implement Web interviewing of students 2/4/04 9/9/04 

Implement CATI of students 3/4/04 9/9/04 

1 This is the date on which the activity was initiated for the first applicable institution and/or its associated students. 2 This is the date on which the activity was completed for the last applicable institution and/or its associated students. 

NOTE: CPS = Central Processing System; CADE = computer-assisted data entry; CATI = computer-assisted 

telephone interviewing. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 2004 National Postsecondary 

Student Aid Study (NPSAS:04). 

1.3.2 Products 

The following reports based on NPSAS:04 will be published by NCES in the future: 

• Profile of Undergraduates in U.S. Postsecondary Education Institutions: 2003–04.

Describes the demographic and enrollment characteristics of undergraduate students. 

• Student Financing of Undergraduate Education: 2003–04. Focuses on undergraduate 

tuition, total price of attendance, types and sources of financial aid received, net price, 

financial aid need, and unmet need. 

• Student Financing of Graduate and First-Professional Education: 2003–04. 

Describes the demographic and enrollment characteristics of graduate and firstprofessional students and the types and sources of financial aid received. 

The following products have already been published and are available on the NCES 

website (http://nces.ed.gov/), including the first E.D. TAB and Data Analysis System (DAS): 

• 2004 National Postsecondary Student Aid Study (NPSAS:04): Student Financial Aid 

Estimates for 2003–04. This E.D. TAB is the first publication based on the 2003–04 

data. The E.D. TAB describes the percentages of students receiving various types of 

financial aid and average amounts received, by type of institution attended, 

attendance pattern, dependency status, and income level. 
Chapter 1. Overview of NPSAS:04 

4 

• 2004 National Postsecondary Student Aid Study (NPSAS:04): Undergraduate 

Financial Aid Estimates for 2003–04 by Type of Institution. This E.D. TAB is the 

second publication based on the 2003–04 data. This E.D. TAB focuses only on 

undergraduates, including separate tables for those who attended public 4-year, 

private-not-for-profit 4-year, public 2-year, or private for-profit postsecondary 

institutions during the 2003–04 academic year. It describes average tuition and fees, 

average total price of attendance, and the percentages of undergraduates receiving 

various types and combinations of financial aid and average amounts received, with a 

particular focus on grants and loans. 

• 2004 National Postsecondary Student Aid Study (NPSAS:04): Undergraduate Data 

Analysis System. The NPSAS:04 Undergraduate DAS contains the data on a sample 

of about 80,000 undergraduates who were enrolled at any time between July 1, 2003, 

and June 30, 2004, in about 1,400 postsecondary institutions. It represents all 

undergraduate students enrolled in postsecondary institutions in the 50 states, the 

District of Columbia, and Puerto Rico that were eligible to participate in the federal 

financial aid programs in Title IV of the Higher Education Act. 

• 2004 National Postsecondary Student Aid Study (NPSAS:04): Graduate Data 

Analysis System. The NPSAS:04 Graduate DAS contains the data on a sample of 

about 11,000 graduate students who were enrolled at any time between July 1, 2003, 

and June 30, 2004, in about 1,400 postsecondary institutions. It represents all 

graduate students enrolled in postsecondary institutions in the 50 states, the District of 

Columbia, and Puerto Rico that were eligible to participate in the federal financial aid 

programs in Title IV of the Higher Education Act. 

Contact Aurora D’Amico, or visit the website (http://nces.ed.gov/dasol/) to access a 

NPSAS:04 DAS application or one of the NPSAS:04 reports. 

Aurora D’Amico 

Postsecondary Studies Division 

Phone: (202) 502-7334 

E-mail: aurora.d’amico@ed.gov

NPSAS:04 restricted use data files. The survey data files used to create variables in the 

Data Analysis Systems, and the associated electronic codebooks and file documentation, are 

available to researchers who have obtained a restricted data license from NCES. Information on 

the NCES Statistical Standards Program, including Restricted Use Data Licenses Procedures, is 

available from the NCES website: http://nces.ed.gov/statprog. Further information on obtaining a 

restricted data license may be found in the NCES Restricted Use Data Procedures Manual (U.S. 

Department of Education 1999), at http://nces.ed.gov/statprog/rudman, and also from Cynthia 

Barton. 

Cynthia L. Barton 

Data Security Assistant 

Phone: (202) 502-7307 

E-mail: cynthia.barton@ed.gov
5 

Chapter 2 

Design and Methodology of NPSAS:04 

This chapter provides a detailed summary of the design and the methods implemented in 

the 2004 National Postsecondary Student Aid Study (NPSAS:04). All procedures and methods 

were developed in consultation with a Technical Review Panel comprised of nationally 

recognized experts in higher education. A complete listing of this panel is provided in 

appendix A. Sampling is discussed in particular detail because it occurs in several stages in this 

study. For example, the base-year NPSAS sample design must take into account the sampling 

needs for the Beginning Postsecondary Students Longitudinal Study follow-up surveys 

(BPS:04/06 and BPS:04/09), since the longitudinal cohort is generated from the NPSAS:04 

sample. In addition, institutional contacting, instrument development, data collection procedures, 

data quality evaluations, and data management systems are described. 

2.1 Sampling 

2.1.1 Target Population and Sampling Overview 

The NPSAS:04 target population consists of all eligible students enrolled at any time 

between July 1, 2003, and June 30, 2004, in postsecondary institutions in the United States or 

Puerto Rico which had signed Title IV participation agreements with the U.S. Department of 

Education making them eligible for the federal student aid programs (Title IV institutions). To be 

eligible for NPSAS, students had to be enrolled in either an academic program with at least one 

course for credit that could be applied toward fulfilling the requirements for an academic degree 

or enrolled in an occupational or vocational program that requires at least 3 months or 300 clock 

hours of instruction to receive a degree, certificate, or other formal award. Eligible students 

could not be concurrently enrolled in high school and could not be enrolled solely in a general 

equivalency diploma (GED) or other high school completion program. 

An overview of the sequential statistical sampling process for NPSAS:04 is provided in 

figure 1. The institution sampling frame for NPSAS:04 was constructed from the 2000–01 

Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System (IPEDS) Institutional Characteristics (IC) and 

header files. The IPEDS data used for the initial sampling frame were collected in 2001, and the 

IPEDS data used for sample freshening (described in section 2.1.2) were collected in 2002. Thus, 

any institutions that came into existence or became eligible between the IPEDS data collections 

in 2002 and June 30, 2004 were not covered in the sampling frame. Institutions in the file that 

were not eligible (e.g., institutions located outside the United States and Puerto Rico, central 

offices, military academies) were deleted from the population file. The eligible institutions on the 

sampling frame were partitioned into 58 institutional strata based on institutional level, 
Chapter 2. Design and Methodology of NPSAS:04 

6 

institutional control, highest level of offering, Carnegie classification, and state.2 All other 

students from these states were selected as part of the national sample. 

Figure 1. Schematic of sequential NPSAS:04 sampling operations 

Construct sampling frame from 

2000–01 IPEDS files

Stratify 6,430 institutions by 

institutional control, institutional level, 

highest level of offering, Carnegie 

classification, and state

Select probabilities proportional to 

size (pps) sample of 1,630 

institutions

Construct sampling frame for sample 

freshening from 2001–02 IPEDS files

Stratify 280 institutions eligible for 

freshening by institutional control, 

institutional level, highest level of 

offering, Carnegie classification, and 

state

Select probabilities proportional to 

size sample of 30 freshened 

institutions

Verify institution eligibility and obtain 

student lists from 1,360 of 1,6301 

eligible institutions

Use fixed rates to sample 109,210 

students within institutions from up to 

eight student strata per participating 

eligible institution

1

 The 1,630 eligible institutions include the 1,630 originally selected, minus 30 ineligible institutions, plus 30 

institutions from the freshened sample. 

NOTE: IPEDS = Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 2004 National Postsecondary 

Student Aid Study (NPSAS:04). 

 

2

 NPSAS:04 includes state-representative undergraduate student samples for three types of institutions (public 4-

year, public 2-year, and private not-for-profit 4-year) in 12 states. These 12 states were selected by NCES from those 

expressing interest. The 12 states were categorized into three groups based on population size: four small states 

(Connecticut, Delaware, Nebraska, Oregon), four medium-size states (Georgia, Indiana, Minnesota, Tennessee), and 

four large states (California, Illinois, New York, Texas). 
Chapter 2. Design and Methodology of NPSAS:04 

7 

The 58 institutional strata, 22 nationally-representative and 36 state-representative, are shown 

below. 

1. Public less than 2-year 

2. Public 2-year, associate’s Carnegie 

classification 

3. Public 2-year, other Carnegie 

classification—degree-granting 

4. Public 2-year, other Carnegie 

classification—NPSAS only 

5. Public 4-year non-doctorate-granting, 

master’s Carnegie classification 

6. Public 4-year non-doctorate-granting, 

bachelor’s Carnegie classification 

7. Public 4-year non-doctorate-granting, 

other Carnegie classification 

8. Public 4-year doctorate-granting, 

doctor’s Carnegie classification 

9. Public 4-year doctorate-granting, other 

Carnegie classification 

10. Public 4-year NPSAS only 

11. Private not-for-profit less-than-4-year, 

associate’s Carnegie classification 

12. Private not-for-profit less-than-4-year, 

other Carnegie classification—degreegranting 

13. Private not-for-profit less-than-4-year, 

other Carnegie classification—NPSAS 

only 

14. Private not-for-profit 4-year nondoctorate-granting, master’s Carnegie 

classification 

15. Private not-for-profit 4-year nondoctorate-granting, bachelor’s Carnegie 

classification 

16. Private not-for-profit 4-year nondoctorate-granting, other Carnegie 

classification 

17. Private not-for-profit 4-year doctorategranting, doctor’s Carnegie classification 

18. Private not-for-profit 4-year doctorategranting, master’s Carnegie 

classification 

19. Private not-for-profit 4-year doctorategranting, other Carnegie classification 

20. Private not-for-profit 4-year—NPSAS only 

21. Private for-profit less-than-2-year 

22. Private for-profit 2-year or more 

23. California public 2-year 

24. California public 4-year 

25. California private not-for-profit 4-year 

26. Connecticut public 2-year 

27. Connecticut public 4-year 

28. Connecticut private not-for-profit 4-year 

29. Delaware public 2-year 

30. Delaware public 4-year 

31. Delaware private not-for-profit 4-year 

32. Georgia public 2-year 

33. Georgia public 4-year 

34. Georgia private not-for-profit 4-year 

35. Illinois public 2-year 

36. Illinois public 4-year 

37. Illinois private not-for-profit 4-year 

38. Indiana public 2-year 

39. Indiana public 4-year 

40. Indiana private not-for-profit 4-year 

41. Minnesota public 2-year 

42. Minnesota public 4-year 

43. Minnesota private not-for-profit 4-year 

44. Nebraska public 2-year 

45. Nebraska public 4-year 

46. Nebraska private not-for-profit 4-year 

47. New York public 2-year 

48. New York public 4-year 

49. New York private not-for-profit 4-year 

50. Oregon public 2-year 

51. Oregon public 4-year 

52. Oregon private not-for-profit 4-year 

53. Tennessee public 2-year 

54. Tennessee public 4-year 

55. Tennessee private not-for-profit 4-year 

56. Texas public 2-year 

57. Texas public 4-year 

58. Texas private not-for-profit 4-year 

Institutions were selected using Chromy’s sequential probability minimum replacement 

(pmr) sampling algorithm (Chromy 1979), which is similar to systematic sampling, to select 

institutions with probabilities proportional to a composite measure of size based on expected 
Chapter 2. Design and Methodology of NPSAS:04 

8 

enrollment. A sample of 1,630 institutions was selected in Fall 2002 so that these institutions 

could be notified early of their selection and to allow a separate sample to be selected for the 

field test from the remaining institutions on the sampling frame. In Summer 2003, an additional 

sample of about 30 institutions was selected from a frame of institutions not included on the 

initial sampling frame. Of the sample institutions selected for the full-scale study, about 810 

were selected with certainty. The certainty institutions were either in strata in which all 

institutions were selected, or had expected frequencies of selection greater than unity (1.00). 

About 1,630 of the sampled institutions were found to be NPSAS eligible, and about 1,360 of 

these eligible institutions provided student enrollment lists for use as the second stage (i.e., 

student) sampling frame. 

The sampling frames provided by sample institutions included paper and electronic lists 

of students enrolled in terms or courses of instruction during the previously defined NPSAS year. 

Student lists were sampled on a flow basis as they were received, using equal probability 

stratified systematic sampling. There were eight student sampling strata: 

1. in-state first-time beginner students; 

2. out-of-state first-time beginner students; 

3. in-state other undergraduate students; 

4. out-of-state other undergraduate students; 

5. master’s students; 

6. doctoral students; 

7. other graduate students; and 

8. first-professional students. 

First-time beginner students (FTBs) were stratified separately from other undergraduate 

students because they were oversampled to allow for sufficient numbers to be surveyed in the 

2006 follow-up study (BPS:04/06). FTBs and other undergraduate students were each divided 

into in-state and out-of-state strata because undergraduate in-state students were oversampled in 

the 12 states with state-representative samples. These in-state and out-of-state strata were used 

for all institutions to allow for sampling ease and consistency; however, in states that did not 

have state-representative samples, in-state students were sampled at the same rate as out-of-state 

students. 

For each student stratum, the enrollment list was sampled at a rate designed to provide 

approximately equal student-level probabilities. Student sampling rates were adjusted after 

sufficient lists had been received to accurately estimate the overall sample yield. The sampling 

rates were set to meet the sample sizes shown in table 2 for the national sample and table 3 for 

the state sample. The overall target sample size was about 121,680; however, the sampling 

procedures resulted in the selection of about 109,210 students. The actual sample is lower than 

the target sample size because institutional participation rates were somewhat lower than 

expected3

 and sampling rates were not adjusted high enough and early enough for the 

participating institutions to compensate for the loss of sample yield from the non-participating 

institutions. 

 

3

 See section 3.1 for the results of institutional participation. 
Chapter 2. Design and Methodology of NPSAS:04 

9 

The sample size for NPSAS:04 is larger than past NPSAS studies. The primary reason for 

the increased sample size was to ensure sufficient yield for analytic purposes. The sample size 

was designed so that respondent yield would be sufficient for analyses even if actual response 

rates were lower than the targeted rates. Second, the National Center for Education Statistics 

(NCES) desired one weight to make the data easier for analysts to use. Also, as mentioned 

above, NPSAS:04 includes state-representative undergraduate student samples for three types of 

institutions (public 2-year, public 4-year, and private not-for-profit 4-year) in 12 states. A larger 

overall sample size was necessary to achieve state-representative samples in addition to the 

nationally-representative sample. 

Table 2. Target numbers of sample students, by institutional stratum and type of student: 2004 

Undergraduates 

Institutional stratum 

All 

students 

All 

undergraduates FTBs 

Other 

undergraduates 

Graduate 

students 

Firstprofessionals 

 All institutions 121,680 110,560 56,070 54,490 9,340 1,780 

Public less than 2-year 4,990 4,990 4,540 440 † †

Public 2-year 45,060 45,060 20,280 24,780 † †

Public 4-year non-doctorategranting 

11,270 10,480 3,380 7,110 790 † 

Public 4-year doctorategranting 

21,130 15,060 4,570 10,490 5,210 860 

Private not-for-profit lessthan-4-year 

3,310 3,310 2,740 570 † †

Private not-for-profit 4-year 

non-doctorate-granting 

10,250 9,650 4,320 5,340 600 † 

Private not-for-profit 4-year 

doctorate-granting 

10,220 6,620 2,750 3,870 2,680 920 

Private for-profit less-than-2-

year 

9,040 9,040 8,830 210 † †

Private for-profit 2-year or 

more 

6,430 6,340 4,670 1,680 80 † 

† Not applicable. 

NOTE: Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. First-time beginner (FTB) and other undergraduate counts 

are based on the status known at the time of sampling. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 2004 National Postsecondary 

Student Aid Study (NPSAS:04). 
Chapter 2. Design and Methodology of NPSAS:04 

10 

Table 3. Target numbers of sample students in the 12 state representative samples, by 

institutional stratum and type of student: 2004 

Institutional stratum All undergraduates FTBs Other undergraduates 

California 11,510 1,910 9,590 

 Public 2-year 8,620 1,120 7,500 

 Public 4-year 2,070 490 1,570 

 Private not-for-profit 4-year 820 310 520 

Connecticut 1,510 660 850 

 Public 2-year 590 250 340 

 Public 4-year 500 210 290 

 Private not-for-profit 4-year 420 210 210 

Delaware 1,770 800 970 

 Public 2-year 720 290 440 

 Public 4-year 640 320 320 

 Private not-for-profit 4-year 410 200 210 

Georgia 2,340 1,200 1,140 

 Public 2-year 1,160 750 410 

 Public 4-year 800 280 530 

 Private not-for-profit 4-year 380 180 200 

Illinois 4,170 1,680 2,490 

 Public 2-year 2,560 1,120 1,440 

 Public 4-year 790 230 560 

 Private not-for-profit 4-year 810 330 480 

Indiana 1,970 910 1,060 

 Public 2-year 470 250 220 

 Public 4-year 1,010 420 600 

 Private not-for-profit 4-year 490 240 250 

Minnesota 2,390 1,320 1,070 

 Public 2-year 1,360 910 440 

 Public 4-year 640 220 420 

 Private not-for-profit 4-year 390 190 200 

Nebraska 1,400 650 750 

 Public 2-year 530 270 260 

 Public 4-year 580 250 330 

 Private not-for-profit 4-year 290 130 160 

New York 5,140 2,230 2,910 

 Public 2-year 1,900 1,030 870 

 Public 4-year 1,380 410 970 

 Private not-for-profit 4-year 1,860 790 1,070 

Oregon 1,970 860 1,110 

 Public 2-year 1,090 490 600 

 Public 4-year 590 230 360 

 Private not-for-profit 4-year 290 140 150 

Tennessee 1,810 800 1,010 

 Public 2-year 750 370 380 

 Public 4-year 660 230 430 

 Private not-for-profit 4-year 400 200 200 

Texas 6,260 2,970 3,290 

 Public 2-year 4,030 2,280 1,740 

 Public 4-year 1,640 450 1,190 

 Private not-for-profit 4-year 600 240 360 

NOTE: Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. First-time beginner (FTB) and other undergraduate counts 

are based on the status known at the time of sampling. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 2004 National Postsecondary 

Student Aid Study (NPSAS:04). 
Chapter 2. Design and Methodology of NPSAS:04 

11 

2.1.2 Institutional Sample and Eligibility 

The target population for NPSAS:04 included nearly all Title IV participating 

postsecondary institutions in the 50 states, the District of Columbia, and Puerto Rico.4 To be 

eligible for NPSAS:04, an institution was required, during the 2003–04 academic year, to

• offer an educational program designed for persons who had completed secondary 

education; 

• offer at least one academic, occupational, or vocational program of study lasting at 

least 3 months or 300 clock hours; 

• offer courses that were open to more than the employees or members of the company 

or group (e.g., union) that administered the institution; 

• be located in the 50 states, the District of Columbia, or Puerto Rico; 

• be other than a U.S. Service Academy;5

 and 

• have a signed Title IV participation agreement with the U.S. Department of 

Education. 

As indicated above, institutions providing only avocational, recreational, or remedial 

courses or only in-house courses for their own employees were excluded. The listed eligibility 

requirements are consistent with those used in previous NPSAS rounds, with two exceptions: the 

last requirement was new for NPSAS:2000, and offering more than just correspondence courses 

was no longer a requirement beginning with NPSAS:04. 

The student sample was allocated to the separate applicable institutional and student 

sampling strata, defined above. Student sampling rates, which were used to compute institutionlevel composite measures of size, were based on the 2000 IPEDS Fall Enrollment Survey counts 

and the required sample sizes (see appendix B for details). 

An independent sample of institutions was selected for each institutional stratum using 

Chromy’ssequential probability minimum replacement (pmr) sampling algorithm (Chromy 

1979) to select institutions with probabilities proportional to their computed measures of size. 

However, rather than multiple selections of sample institutions being allowed,6

 those with 

expected frequencies of selection greater than unity (1.00) were selected with certainty. The 

remainder of the institutional sample was selected from the remaining institutions within each 

stratum. The sampling algorithm was implemented with a random start for each institutional 

stratum to ensure the positive pairwise probabilities of selection that were needed for proper 

variance estimation (Chromy 1981). 

The sample of institutions was initially selected in September 2002 to allow the field test 

sample institutions to be selected from the complement of the full-scale sample. In July 2003, a 

freshened sample of institutions was selected from a frame of institutions that were not on the 

 

4 Title IV participating institutions excluded from the target population were the five U.S. Service Academies. 5

 These academies were not eligible for this financial aid study because of their unique funding/tuition base. 6

 Precluding institutions with multiple selections at the first stage of sampling made it unnecessary to select multiple 

second-stage samples of students. 
Chapter 2. Design and Methodology of NPSAS:04 

12 

original sampling frame because they were either new institutions or newly eligible institutions.7

Freshening was done to ensure the representativeness of the sample because the initial sample 

was selected a year earlier. The measures of size for the supplemental sampling frame from 

which the freshened sample was selected were based on the 2002 IPEDS Fall Enrollment Survey 

counts. 

Table 4 shows the institution sampling rates and the numbers of certainty and 

noncertainty institutions selected for each of the 22 national strata and the 36 state strata, 

respectively. The institutions included in the national sample were selected from all 58 strata, 

while institutions included in the state samples were selected only from the 36 state strata. Within 

each institutional stratum, additional implicit stratification was accomplished by sorting the 

stratum sampling frame by the following classifications: (1) historically Black colleges and 

universities (HBCU) indicator; (2) Carnegie classifications of postsecondary institutions; (3) the 

Office of Business Economics (OBE) Region from the IPEDS header file (Bureau of Economic 

Analysis of the U.S. Department of Commerce Region);8

 and (4) the institution measure of size. 

The objective of this implicit stratification was to approximate proportional representation of 

institutions on these measures. 

Table 4. Institutional sampling rates and number of certainty and noncertainty institutions, by 

institutional stratum: 2004 

Number of sample institutions 

Institutional stratum1

Size of 

universe2

Sampling 

rate Total Certainty Noncertainty 

Total 6,706 0.25 1,670 810 860 

Public less than 2-year 317 0.21 70 20 50 

Public 2-year associate 623 0.12 70 # 70 

Public 2-year other—degree-granting 36 0.14 10 # # 

Public 2-year other—NPSAS only3

 69 0.45 30 10 20 

Public 4-year non-doctorate-granting, master’s 118 0.17 20 # 20 

Public 4-year non-doctorate-granting, bachelor’s 65 0.17 10 # 10 

Public 4-year non-doctorate-granting, other 47 0.06 # # # 

Public 4-year doctorate-granting, doctor’s 126 1.00 130 130 # 

Public 4-year doctorate-granting, other 49 0.20 10 # 10 

Public 4-year NPSAS only3

 16 0.13 # # # 

Private not-for-profit less-than-4-year, associate 108 0.31 30 # 30 

Private not-for-profit less-than-4-year, other—degree-granting 24 0.08 # # # 

Private not-for-profit less-than-4-year, other—NPSAS only3

 240 0.16 40 10 30 

Private not-for-profit 4-year non-doctorate-granting, master’s 132 0.09 10 # 10 

Private not-for-profit 4-year non-doctorate-granting, bachelor’s 293 0.12 30 # 30 

Private not-for-profit 4-year non-doctorate-granting, other 202 0.16 30 # 30 

Private not-for-profit 4-year doctorate-granting, doctor’s 52 1.00 50 50 # 

Private not-for-profit 4-year doctorate-granting, master’s 61 0.18 10 # 10 

Private not-for-profit 4-year doctorate-granting, other 143 0.09 10 # 10 

Private not-for-profit 4-year—NPSAS only3

 51 0.06 # # # 

Private for-profit less-than-2-year 1,445 0.12 170 10 170 

Private for-profit 2-year or more 1,149 0.10 110 10 110 

See notes at end of table. 

 

7

 Some of the IPEDS data provided by institutions that was used to determine eligibility for the original frame was 

sufficiently different from the IPEDS data subsequently provided by institutions to determine eligibility for the 

freshening frame. 

8 For sorting purposes, Alaska and Hawaii were combined with Puerto Rico in the Outlying Areas region rather than in 

the Far West region. 
Chapter 2. Design and Methodology of NPSAS:04 

13 

Table 4. Institutional sampling rates and number of certainty and noncertainty institutions, by 

institutional stratum: 2004—Continued 

Number of sample institutions 

Institutional stratum1

Size of 

universe2

Sampling 

rate Total Certainty Noncertainty 

California 298 0.38 110 50 60 

 Public 2-year 114 0.33 40 # 40 

 Public 4-year 33 1.00 30 30 # 

 Private not-for-profit 4-year 151 0.27 40 20 20 

Connecticut 45 1.00 50 50 # 

 Public 2-year 15 1.00 20 20 # 

 Public 4-year 10 1.00 10 10 # 

 Private not-for-profit 4-year 20 1.00 20 20 # 

Delaware 9 1.00 10 10 # 

 Public 2-year 3 1.00 # # # 

 Public 4-year 2 1.00 # # # 

 Private not-for-profit 4-year 4 1.00 # # # 

Georgia 108 0.79 90 60 30 

 Public 2-year 53 0.57 30 10 30 

 Public 4-year 21 1.00 20 20 # 

 Private not-for-profit 4-year 34 1.00 30 30 # 

Illinois 148 0.49 70 40 40 

 Public 2-year 48 0.63 30 10 20 

 Public 4-year 12 1.00 10 10 # 

 Private not-for-profit 4-year 88 0.34 30 10 20 

Indiana 71 0.85 60 50 10 

 Public 2-year 16 1.00 20 20 # 

 Public 4-year 14 1.00 10 10 # 

 Private not-for-profit 4-year 41 0.73 30 20 10 

Minnesota 90 0.86 80 70 10 

 Public 2-year 43 0.70 30 20 10 

 Public 4-year 11 1.00 10 10 # 

 Private not-for-profit 4-year 36 1.00 40 40 # 

Nebraska 29 1.00 30 30 # 

 Public 2-year 7 1.00 10 10 # 

 Public 4-year 7 1.00 10 10 # 

 Private not-for-profit 4-year 15 1.00 20 20 # 

New York 249 0.43 110 70 30 

 Public 2-year 37 1.00 40 40 # 

 Public 4-year 45 0.67 30 20 10 

 Private not-for-profit 4-year 167 0.24 40 20 20 

Oregon 52 1.00 50 50 # 

 Public 2-year 17 1.00 20 20 # 

 Public 4-year 10 1.00 10 10 # 

 Private not-for-profit 4-year 25 1.00 30 30 # 

Tennessee 75 0.81 60 50 10 

 Public 2-year 21 1.00 20 20 # 

 Public 4-year 10 1.00 10 10 # 

 Private not-for-profit 4-year 44 0.68 30 20 10 

See notes at end of table. 
Chapter 2. Design and Methodology of NPSAS:04 

14 

Table 4. Institutional sampling rates and number of certainty and noncertainty institutions, by 

institutional stratum: 2004—Continued 

Number of sample institutions 

Institutional stratum1

Size of 

universe2

Sampling 

rate Total Certainty Noncertainty 

Texas 166 0.54 90 50 40 

 Public 2-year 68 0.44 30 10 20 

 Public 4-year 43 0.70 30 20 10 

 Private not-for-profit 4-year 55 0.55 30 20 10 

# Rounds to zero. 

1 Stratum reflects institutional categorization as determined from the 2000–01 Integrated Postsecondary Education Data 

System (IPEDS) file; some institutions were categorized differently in later IPEDS files. 2 Based on the 2000–01 and 2002–03 IPEDS files. 

3

 “NPSAS-only” refers to institutions that were not included on the sampling frame for NSOPF—the faculty component of 

NSoFaS. 

NOTE: Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 2004 National Postsecondary Student 

Aid Study (NPSAS:04). 

2.1.3 Student Sample and Eligibility 

The postsecondary students eligible for NPSAS:04 were those who attended a NPSASeligible institution during the 2003–04 academic year and who were 

• enrolled in either (1) an academic program; (2) at least one course for credit that 

could be applied toward fulfilling the requirements for an academic degree; or (3) an 

occupational or vocational program that required at least 3 months or 300 clock hours 

of instruction to receive a degree, certificate, or other formal award; 

• not concurrently enrolled in high school; and 

• not enrolled solely in a GED or other high school completion program. 

Each sampled institution that was verified as NPSAS-eligible was asked to provide a list 

of all its students who satisfied all the NPSAS eligibility conditions, preferably an 

“unduplicated” electronic list (i.e., one in which each student’s name appeared only once), 

together with identifying, classifying, and locating information (see section 2.3.2). Although 

electronic files were preferred, student lists were accepted in a variety of formats, as long as they 

were complete. 

Several checks on quality and completeness of student lists were implemented before the 

sample students were selected. Institutions providing lists that failed these checks were contacted 

to resolve the detected problems. Enrollment lists failed quality control checks under the 

following conditions: 

• FTBs were not identified (unless the institution only enrolled graduate/firstprofessional students or explicitly indicated that no FTBs existed in the school); 

and/or 

• student level—undergraduate, master’s, doctoral, other graduate, or first 

professional—was not clearly identified. 

Quality checks on student counts were performed separately for FTBs and all other 

students. The “unduplicated” FTB counts were checked against the fall enrollment counts from 

the IPEDS Fall Enrollment Survey because IPEDS does not have “unduplicated” annual FTB 
Chapter 2. Design and Methodology of NPSAS:04 

15 

counts. The check failed if the count for any “unduplicated” list was at least 50 percent less than 

the IPEDS count. The list counts were expected to almost always be more than the IPEDS counts 

because the IPEDS counts were not annual counts. This check identified institutional enrollment 

lists that under-reported FTBs. The “unduplicated” counts of other undergraduates, graduates, 

and first-professionals were checked against the “unduplicated” annual enrollment counts from 

the IPEDS Fall Enrollment Survey. The check failed if the count for any “unduplicated” list 

differed by at least 50 percent from the IPEDS count.9

As student lists were received from institutions, students were sampled using 

predetermined sampling rates that varied by student stratum. Stratified systematic sampling was 

used to ensure comparable sampling procedures for both paper and electronic lists. After the 

sample of students had been selected for an institution, Social Security numbers (SSNs) of those 

sampled were compared to those of students who had already been selected from other 

institutions to eliminate cross-institution duplication. Multiplicity adjustments in the sample 

weighting (described in more detail in section 6.2.1) accounted for the fact that any students who 

attended more than one institution during the NPSAS year had more than one chance of 

selection. 

Some institutional systems sent in lists for multiple institutions or campuses. If the lists 

were separate for each institution or campus, then the samples were selected separately and 

independently. If the lists were combined into one list with no identifier mapping students to 

institution or campus, then one student sample was selected that represented all of the institutions 

or campuses included on the list. In such cases, sampling rates were adjusted, and a weight 

adjustment was made (see section 6.1.1). 

For paper lists, samples were selected manually, and then the list of sample students was 

entered into an electronic file. When students from different strata (e.g., FTBs and other 

undergraduates) were combined on a paper list, the sampling rate from the stratum with the 

higher rate was used. Then after the sample was entered into an electronic file, the students from 

the other stratum (or strata) were subsampled to match the sampling rates for that stratum.10

Initial student sampling rates were calculated for each sample institution using sampling 

rates designed to generate approximately equal probabilities of selection within the ultimate 

institution-by-student sampling strata (see appendix B). However, these rates were sometimes 

modified as follows: 

• Student sampling rates were increased, as needed, so that the sample size achieved at 

each sample institution would be at least 10 sample students, where possible, to 

ensure sufficient yield for variance estimation. 

• Student sampling rates were decreased if the sample size was more than 50 greater 

than the institution had been told to expect, which was based on the sampling rate 

applied to the enrollment count on the sampling frame.11

 

9

 If provided paper lists were not “unduplicated,” an “unduplicated” total was estimated by applying an empirically 

determined multiplicity factor (0.50) to the student count from the provided lists. 10 The issue of combined strata was not a problem for electronic lists since the file could be sorted by stratum prior to 

sampling. 

11 This was to ensure minimal burden for the institutions participating in computer-assisted data entry (CADE) data 

abstraction. 
Chapter 2. Design and Methodology of NPSAS:04 

16 

• Sample yield was monitored throughout enrollment list collection and student 

sampling rates were adjusted periodically for institutions for which sample selection 

had not yet been performed to ensure that the desired student sample sizes were 

achieved. 

These adjustments to the initial sampling rates resulted in some additional variability in 

the student sampling rates and, hence, in some increase in survey design effects (variance 

inflation—see section 6.4.3). 

The planned and achieved sample sizes by student stratum and level of offering are 

shown in table 5. The initial classification of the student sample overall and by institution type 

and student stratum are shown in table 6. As mentioned earlier, the achieved sample yield was 

less than what was planned (109,210 students as compared to the target of 121,680). Institutional 

participation rates were somewhat lower than expected, and sampling rates were not adjusted 

high enough and early enough for the participating institutions to compensate for the loss of 

sample yield from the non-participating institutions. Overall, there were more doctoral and other 

graduate students in the sample than planned, and there were fewer FTBs, other undergraduate 

students, and master’s students than planned. (See appendix B, section B.4 for additional detail 

on the sample allocation.) 

Table 5. Planned and achieved NPSAS:04 student samples, by student stratum and level of 

offering: 2004 

Students sampled 

Student stratum1 Institutional level2 Number expected3

 Number achieved4 Percent5

 Total All institutions 121,680 109,210 89.8 

FTB Subtotal 56,070 49,410 88.1 

 Less-than-2-year 14,080 11,370 80.8 

 2- to 3-year 24,530 22,250 90.7 

 4-year 42,700 15,790 37.0 

 

Other undergraduate Subtotal 54,490 47,680 87.5 

 Less-than-2-year 800 920 115.1 

 2- to 3-year 25,990 19,660 75.6 

 4-year 27,690 27,100 97.9 

Master's 4-year 5,310 3,720 70.1 

Doctor's 4-year 3,630 4,950 136.1 

Other graduate 4-year 400 1,660 416.3 

First-professional 4-year 1,780 1,790 100.7 

1 As expected the sampling frames misclassified some individual students with respect to first-time beginner (FTB), 

undergraduate, graduate, and first-professional status; statistics presented in this table are based on the sampling 

frame classification. The two FTB strata (in-state and out-of-state) have been combined, and the two other 

undergraduate strata (in-state and out-of-state) have been combined. 2 Institutional level is based on the 2003–04 Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System (IPEDS) file. This file 

was used to reflect the level during the NPSAS year, which may be different than the level at the time of sampling. 3 Based on sample allocation. 

4 The student sample was drawn from 1,360 eligible institutions that provided enrollment lists. 5 Percent reported reflects the ratio of “achieved” to “expected.” 

NOTE: Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. FTB = first-time beginner. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 2004 National Postsecondary 

Student Aid Study (NPSAS:04). 
17 

Table 6. Initial classification of NPSAS:04 student sample, by institutional characteristics and student stratum 

Total sample1 Student sampling stratum2

FTB sample3

Other undergraduate 

sample Graduate samp

Institutional characteristics Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent Number Per

All institutions 109,210 100.0 49,410 100.0 47,680 100.0 10,330 1

Institutional level 

Less-than-2-year 12,310 11.3 11,370 23.0 920 1.9 20 2-year 41,960 38.4 22,250 45.0 19,660 41.2 40 4-year non-doctorate-granting 21,550 19.7 8,220 16.6 12,130 25.4 1,180 4-year doctorate-granting 33,400 30.6 7,570 15.3 14,970 31.4 9,100 

Institutional control 

Public 71,030 65.0 27,820 56.3 35,720 74.9 6,570 Private not-for-profit 22,730 20.8 8,770 17.8 9,450 19.8 3,640 Private for-profit 15,460 14.2 12,820 26.0 2,510 5.3 120 

Type of institution 

Public less-than-2-year 2,780 2.5 2,330 4.7 440 0.9 # Public 2-year 36,340 33.3 17,780 36.0 18,520 38.8 30 Public 4-year non-doctorate-granting 9,210 8.4 2,680 5.4 5,970 12.5 550 Public 4-year doctorate-granting 22,700 20.8 5,030 10.2 10,790 22.6 5,980 Private not-for-profit 2-year or less 3,020 2.8 2,350 4.8 670 1.4 10 Private not-for-profit 4-year non-doctorate-granting 9,310 8.5 3,920 7.9 4,840 10.2 540 Private not-for-profit 4-year doctorate-granting 10,400 9.5 2,510 5.1 3,940 8.3 3,090 Private for-profit less-than-2-year 8,750 8.0 8,280 16.8 460 1.0 10 Private for-profit 2-year or more 6,710 6.1 4,540 9.2 2,050 4.3 110 

# Rounds to zero. 1 The student sample was drawn from 1,360 eligible institutions that provided enrollment lists. 2 As expected, the sampling frames misclassified some individual students as to first-time beginner (FTB), undergraduate, graduate, and first-pro

presented in this table are based on the sampling frame classification. This explains why some graduate/first-professional students were sample

not have such students. 

3 The two FTB strata (in-state and out-of-state) have been combined, the two other undergraduate strata (in-state and out-of-state) have been co

doctorate, and other graduate strata have been combined. NOTE: Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 2004 National Postsecondary Student Aid Study (NPSAS:04)
Chapter 2. Design and Methodology of NPSAS:04 

18 

2.2 Sources of Data 

Information for NPSAS:04 was obtained from several sources, including the following: 

• Student Record abstraction (computer-assisted data entry [CADE]): Data from 

institutional financial aid and registrar records at the sampled institutions currently 

attended. These data were entered at the institution by institutional personnel or field 

data collectors in 2003–04 using a web-based computer-assisted data entry program 

(web-CADE) or directly downloaded to a data file (data-CADE). 

• Student Interview: Data collected directly from sampled students via web-based 

self-administered or interviewer-administered questionnaires. 

• Central Processing System (CPS): U.S. Department of Education database of 

federal financial aid applications for the 2003–04 academic year. Data provided by 

students on the Free Application for Federal Student Aid (FAFSA) form. 

• National Student Loan Data System (NSLDS): U.S. Department of Education 

database of federal Title IV loans and Pell Grants. The accessed NSLDS Pell Grant 

and loan files included information for the year of interest, as well as a complete 

federal grant or loan history for each applicable student. 

• Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System (IPEDS): U.S. Department of 

Education, National Center for Education Statistics, database of descriptive 

information about individual postsecondary institutions attended by sample students. 

These diverse and sometimes overlapping data sources provided some information that 

could not be collected directly from institutions or students. They also provided a way to “fill in” 

certain data that were also gathered via student record abstraction or the student interview but 

were missing for individual sample members (e.g., demographics). Finally, these overlapping 

data sources sometimes served to check or confirm the accuracy of similar information obtained 

from other sources. 

2.3 Data Collection Design 

As mentioned in the previous section, NPSAS data are gathered from multiple sources, 

some directly from institutions and students, and some from extant data sources. The various 

data collections will be described in the following sections. As with previous rounds of NPSAS, 

the first step involved contacting the institutions, describing the nature and purpose of the study, 

identifying institutional coordinators, and asking for institutional participation. Next, institutions 

were asked to provide lists of enrolled students from which the student sample could be selected. 

Student-level data were then collected via the institutional student record abstraction and the 

student interview. 

Two important changes of note involve the sequence of student-level data collection 

processes. In past rounds of NPSAS, institutions were not asked to provide any contact 

information for students until the student sample had been selected. Information needed to locate 

and contact students for participation in the student interview was collected as part of the student 

record abstraction, to avoid unduly burdening institutions by asking for information for students 

that would not ultimately become part of the student sample. However, in the past, the sequential 
Chapter 2. Design and Methodology of NPSAS:04 

19 

linkage between CADE record abstraction and the student interview has adversely impacted the 

overall data collection schedule, and in turn, subsequent release of the data. Therefore, in 

NPSAS:04, student contact information was obtained with the enrollment lists, so that student 

interviewing could occur simultaneously with CADE and, thereby, reduce the amount of time 

required for data collection. 

Another significant change in data collection procedures was the introduction of a single 

web-based instrument for both self-administered and interviewer-administered student 

interviews, which benefited the study in several ways, including facilitating the expeditious 

processing and documentation of data files. 

The following sections describe the procedures implemented at each stage of data 

collection in more detail. 

2.3.1 Institutional Contacting 

Training 

Three training sessions were held for institution contactors. In each session, institution 

contactors were trained to 

• prompt institutions to provide requested data within schedule constraints; 

• handle help desk questions on all components; 

• avert and convert refusals; 

• deal effectively with gatekeepers and other institutional staff; and 

• use the Institutional Contacting System12 (ICS) to document calls, schedule 

appointments, and send problems to project staff for resolution. 

The first training session focused on institution recruitment—contacting the office of the 

chief administrator, making an initial contact to the designated institution coordinator, and 

prompting for completion of the Coordinator Response Form. The second training coincided 

with the mailing of the complete the National Study of Faculty and Students (NSoFaS) binder to 

the coordinators, and focused on prompting for student and faculty lists. The third training 

included an introduction to the CADE component, and focused on coordinating data collection 

and prompting activities for the student and faculty components of NSoFaS. 

Each training session consisted of 2 days of classroom instruction and practice sessions in 

which contactors paired off with other contactors to rehearse prompting calls, answering help 

desk questions and using the ICS. 

Additional ad hoc trainings on specific issues (refusal aversion and conversion, handling 

multi-campus institutions, etc.) were held as needed, often as part of regularly scheduled quality 

control meetings. 

 

12 The ICS is designed to track and document the status of sample institutions through the various phases of the 

project including initial contacting, coordinator contracting, enrollment list preparation, sampling, and data collection. 

See section 2.4.2 for more detail. 
Chapter 2. Design and Methodology of NPSAS:04 

20 

Institutional contacting 

The eligible institutional sample for NSoFaS:04 consisted of about 1,630 institutions, all 

of which were sampled for NPSAS and 1,080 of which were also sampled for the National Study 

of Postsecondary Faculty (NSOPF). The process of recruiting institutions and initiating 

coordinator contacts began well before the beginning of the academic year of interest for several 

reasons. First, such early notification allowed schools time to plan for the resources required for 

participation within the study’s schedule constraints. Early contacting also allowed institutions 

enough time for any required internal review and approval procedures, and time for institutions 

to work with project staff to resolve any potential obstacles to their participation. This advance 

notification was intended to increase the institutional response rate, accelerate the receipt of 

student lists, and increase the response rate of student sample identification. 

Prior to the field test, endorsements from major professional associations and 

organizations that had previously endorsed NPSAS were renewed, as appropriate, to both 

NSoFaS component studies. An effort was also made to solicit new endorsements from other 

organizations. In all, 25 organizations endorsed NSoFaS.13 These endorsements were featured on 

all project letterhead, pamphlets, and on the NSoFaS website. In addition, several of these 

organizations continued to promote the study throughout the data collection period in newsletters 

and other communications. 

For NPSAS, the overall process of student enrollment list collection proceeded according 

to the following steps which are described in detail below: 

• initial contact; 

• institution recruitment, and 

• student list collection. 

Initial contact. Institution contactors were hired and initially trained to confirm the name 

and contact information for the chief administrator, who served to confirm the institution’s 

intention to participate in the study. Institutional eligibility was also confirmed at this time. 

Institutions flagged as potentially ineligible—including closed institutions and 

institutions that indicated they were not Title IV eligible or open to the general public—were 

reviewed by project staff. Instances of sampled institutions that merged with other institutions 

(sampled or unsampled), possible changes in mission that could affect the institution’s sampling 

strata, and changes in name or address were also reviewed. 

Institution recruitment 

Notification materials. Institution recruitment began in Spring 2003. Chief administrators 

at institutions sampled for NSoFaS were sent the following materials. (Copies of letters and 

pamphlets sent to chief administrators and institutional coordinators can be found in 

appendix C.) 

• A cover letter, printed on NCES letterhead, providing background information on 

NPSAS and NSOPF.14 The letter requested that the chief administrator designate an 

institutional coordinator. 

 

13 One of these organizations, associated with for-profit schools, was asked only for an endorsement for NPSAS. 14 Materials regarding NSOPF were included only to institutions that were also selected to participate in NSOPF. 
Chapter 2. Design and Methodology of NPSAS:04 

21 

• An NSoFaS pamphlet summarized the objectives of both NPSAS and NSOPF, and 

provided background information and selected findings for each component. 15

• A NPSAS pamphlet, included to show what had been prepared for sampled students. 

• A project timeline outlining the flow of activities for both component studies of 

NSoFaS, and the projected schedule for each. 

• If sampled for NSOPF, an NSOPF pamphlet was included to show what had been 

prepared for mailing to the sampled faculty. 

Institution website. A website was developed for use by institutions selected for 

participation in NSoFaS and the address was provided in all materials sent to institutions. The 

NSoFaS website served a number of functions for institutions selected for participation in 

NSoFaS. In addition to providing general information about the NPSAS and NSOPF studies 

being conducted, it served as a central repository for all study documents and instructions. It also 

allowed for the uploading of electronic lists of enrolled students. Figure 2 presents the home 

page of the NSoFaS website. 

Figure 2. The 2004 National Study of Faculty and Students institution website home page 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 2004 National Study of Faculty 

and Students (NSoFaS:04) website. 

 

15 The institution website provided all necessary information and documentation to institutions that participated in 

NSoFaS. All were selected for NPSAS and many were also selected for NSOPF. Study-specific materials were 

provided as appropriate. 
Chapter 2. Design and Methodology of NPSAS:04 

22 

Visitors to the website were provided with the following links (see navigation bar on the 

left side of the screen): 

• Early Contacting provided information about the early institution contacting for 

NSoFaS:04 for the initial stage.

• About NPSAS and About NSoPF provided information on each study’s mandate and 

research objectives, with a link to NCES reports from previous study cycles. 

• Instructions provided links that allowed institution staff to view and print copies of 

various NPSAS and NSoPF forms. 

• Endorsements listed the 25 national organizations that endorsed the studies. (These 

are listed in appendix D.) 

• Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) included questions and answers concerning all 

stages of data collection for both components of NSoFaS. 

• Help provided the help desk toll-free number and e-mail address for contacting 

project staff, along with instructions for logging in. 

• Contact Us contained address information for RTI. 

• Other NCES Sites linked to three NCES web pages that provided more information 

about NCES programs: 

− Site map of NCES website—http://nces.ed.gov/help/sitemap.asp; 

− Postsecondary Education Studies—

http://nces.ed.gov/surveys/surveygroups.asp?group=2; and 

− To order publications and products—http://nces.ed.gov/pubsearch. 

A status screen, shown in figure 3, indicated which stages of institution data collection 

were completed (denoted by a check mark) and allowed institutions to select from those stages 

that were not yet completed. Once a stage was completed, it was no longer accessible via the 

Web. 
Chapter 2. Design and Methodology of NPSAS:04 

23 

Figure 3. The 2004 National Study of Faculty and Students (NSoFaS:04) institution website 

status screen 

Source: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 2004 National Study of Faculty and 

Students (NSoFaS:04) website. 

Designation of institutional coordinator. A team of institutional contactors followed up 

with the chief administrators by telephone. The chief administrators were asked to name an 

institutional coordinator whose role was to respond to requests for data and coordinate data 

production and delivery efforts. Once an institutional coordinator was designated, they received 

the same packet of notification materials described above. 

Working with Institutional Review Boards. Institutional coordinators who indicated 

that a formal review process, such as an Institutional Review Board (IRB) review, was necessary 

before their institution would agree to participate were forwarded additional project materials as 

appropriate. A complete IRB packet was prepared for this purpose and mailed to the coordinator 

upon request. This packet included copies of questionnaires, as well as complete descriptions of 

relevant survey procedures, including confidentiality and informed consent. 

2.3.2 Student Enrollment List Acquisition 

Complete instructions for providing the student enrollment lists, and other requested 

materials were provided to institutional coordinators. 

Due dates for providing the enrollment list of students requested for NPSAS were based 

on the term structure of each institution. Institutions were encouraged to submit an electronic list 

by uploading it to the secure website. The data items requested for each listed student were the 

following: 
Chapter 2. Design and Methodology of NPSAS:04 

24 

• full name; 

• student ID; 

• Social Security number; 

• educational level; 

• FTB status (defined as one with no transfer credits from another institution, first 

enrolled as a freshman between July 1, 2003, and April 30, 2004, or has not 

completed a postsecondary class prior to July 1, 2003); 

• local address; 

• local telephone number; 

• campus e-mail; 

• permanent address; and 

• permanent e-mail. 

Follow-up with institutional coordinators was conducted by telephone, mail, and e-mail. 

Telephone prompts to the institutional coordinators were made for institutions that had not 

provided lists. E-mail reminders that encouraged participation were sent to institutional 

coordinators prior to pending deadlines. As enrollment lists were received, they were reviewed 

for completeness, readability, and accuracy. Additional follow-up to clarify the information 

provided or retrieve key missing information was conducted by the institution contactors as 

necessary. This included follow-up with institutions that failed quality control checks against 

IPEDS files, and institutions that failed to provide key variables (FTB status, etc.). 

Reimbursement for staff time involved in providing student lists was offered to 

institutions reporting difficulty meeting the schedule for submitting lists. A refusal conversion 

letter was mailed to institutions that had not responded. 

Systemwide participation and multi-campus enrollment lists 

In some instances, state postsecondary systems and private multi-campus institutions 

were able to provide enrollment lists for all their sampled institutions from a central office. In 

these instances, a “lead institution” was appointed, and a coordinator was designated to report for 

all sampled institutions. 

Systemwide offices also provided other data collection assistance. One large multicampus system devised a software program that would allow institutions within the system to 

easily download the information requested for the list in a usable format and distributed the 

software to their sampled campuses. Others—particularly within the 12 oversample states—

actively encouraged their campuses to participate. More than 200 institutions reported as part of 

a multi-campus system. 

Student enrollment lists from NSLDS 

To increase representation within certain strata in which institutional participation was 

low, some student lists were obtained directly from NSLDS records for individual institutions, 

rather than the institutions themselves. These lists had two important drawbacks which limited 
Chapter 2. Design and Methodology of NPSAS:04 

25 

their usefulness to a small number of institutions for which reliable lists could not otherwise be 

obtained. First, NSLDS lists only contained records for federal financial aid recipients, and did 

not represent all enrolled students. Second, the NSLDS lists did not contain as much locating 

data for students as did enrollment lists provided by institutions. Thus, additional locating 

information had to be obtained to contact the students. For these reasons, NSLDS lists were used 

only when most students at these institutions were thought to be aid recipients.16 NSLDS lists 

were used for sampling for only about 10 institutions. Among these 10 institutions for which 

sampling frames were obtained from NSLDS, 55 percent were for-profit less than 2-year 

institutions, 36 percent were for-profit, and 9 percent were private not-for-profit less than 4-year 

institutions. 

12-state cooperation and assistance 

A point of contact was identified in each of the 12 states with representative samples of 

undergraduates at the state level. These individuals were regularly updated on the participation 

status of institutions within their states. They also assisted with ongoing efforts to encourage 

institutional participation by contacting the chief administrators and institution coordinators at 

sampled institutions. 

2.3.3 Matching to Federal Databases (CPS, NSLDS) 

To reduce institutional burden in subsequent study data collections, information related to 

applications for federal financial aid during the financial aid year was obtained from the U.S. 

Department of Education’s CPS. Students enter this information on the FAFSA form; it is then 

converted to an electronic form, analyzed, and provided to requesting institutions and other 

approved parties. As was the case in NPSAS:96 and NPSAS:2000, RTI was assigned a “special 

designation code” by CPS. Under this procedure, financial aid application data were requested 

through a standard Federal Data Request process.17 The CPS was accessed daily to download 

data from the completed request. 

Data on the nature and amount of Pell Grants or federal student loans were obtained from 

the NSLDS database maintained by the U.S. Department of Education. The electronic data 

interchange with NSLDS was performed twice during the data collection period and once after 

data collection ended in order to send the most up-to-date data for matching as possible. It 

included a query of both federal student loan and Pell Grant files. A successful match with the 

NSLDS loan and Pell database required that the student have a valid application record within 

the database. The accessed NSLDS Pell Grant and loan files included information for the year of 

interest, as well as a complete federal grant or loan history for each applicable student. 

 

16 Student enrollment lists were used from NSLDS when IPEDS data indicated that the percentage of grant-receiving 

students was at least 80 percent, and the percentage of students receiving loans was at least 90 percent. In most 

cases, both percentages were higher than 90 percent. 

17 This is a request process similar to that available to state and federal requests from the system, through which 

information can be requested about individuals regardless of the institution they attend. Requests made by an 

institution are restricted to applicants to that institution only. 
Chapter 2. Design and Methodology of NPSAS:04 

26 

2.3.4 Data Abstraction from Student Records (CADE) 

Instrument development 

Three modes were used for student record abstraction: 1) institutions entered data directly 

into the web-based CADE system (referred to as self-CADE); 2) institutions provided student 

record information in data files according to specifications (data-CADE); and 3) trained RTI 

field data collectors abstracted the student record data into the web-based CADE system (fieldCADE). The web-based CADE system was created using Active Server Pages technology 

against a structured query language (SQL) server database. The overall content of the NPSAS:04 

CADE instrument was very similar to the instrument used in NPSAS:2000 and NPSAS:96 as it 

had worked very well in obtaining the desired data elements from the institutions. However, the 

instrument was modified so that NPSAS:2000 items specific to the B&B cohort were deleted and 

items necessary to identify the BPS cohort were added. 

A facsimile of the CADE instrument is presented in appendix E. It consisted of three 

sections grouped by topic. The first section collected financial aid information and included three 

subsections: financial aid awards, need analysis, and Institutional Student Information Report 

(ISIR). The second section collected registration and admissions information and it also 

contained three subsections: locating, student characteristics, and admissions tests. The third and 

last section consisted of two subsections: enrollment and tuition. Figure 4 shows the layout of the 

CADE instrument along with additional details from each subsection. 
Chapter 2. Design and Methodology of NPSAS:04 

27 

Figure 4. Structure and content of computer-assisted data entry (CADE) student record 

abstraction instrument: 2004 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 2004 National Postsecondary 

Student Aid Study (NPSAS:04). 

Training 

The training for RTI field-CADE staff was held in two separate sessions to allow for 

efficient use of the field staff immediately following training. Prior to these separate sessions, 

field supervisors participated in a telephone conference training. The field supervisors were 

Section 1: Financial Aid Information

 Financial Aid 

- Awards and associated amounts, categorized by source of 

award 

 Need Analysis 

 - Expected family contribution (EFC) 

 - Dependency status 

 - Cost of attendance/budget 

 Institution Student Information Record (ISIR) 

 - Social Security number and last name from ISIR for purposes of 

 matching Central Processing System (CPS)

Section 2: Registration and Admissions

 Locating 

 - Local and permanent addresses, phone numbers, and e-mail 

 addresses 

 Characteristics 

 - Date of birth 

 - Gender 

 - Marital status 

 - High school degree 

 - Race 

 Admissions Tests 

- Scholastic Aptitude Test (SAT) and American College Testing 

(ACT) scores for undergraduates 

- Graduate Record Exam (GRE) scores for graduate and first 

professional students

Section 3: Enrollment and Tuition

 Enrollment 

 - Terms of enrollment during 2003–04 academic year 

 - Degree program 

 - Class level 

 - Grade point average (GPA) 

 - Major field of study 

 Tuition 

 - Amount of tuition and fees charged 

 - State prepaid or savings plan information
Chapter 2. Design and Methodology of NPSAS:04 

28 

trained as data collectors and all participated as data collectors for the field test in 2003. The 

majority had prior experience as supervisors in NPSAS:2000 and were familiar with the study 

protocols and history. The training focused mainly on administrative responsibilities and 

identifying appropriate staff. 

The initial field data collectors training was conducted for staff in the eastern states and 

Puerto Rico. The second training session was for data collectors in western states. The field 

supervisor training included a half-day session dealing with the project’s hiring objectives and 

time frame, as well as supervisory and administrative responsibilities, procedures for recruiting 

field data collectors, and use of the systems (Case Management, Assignment and Transfer 

[WebATS], and e-mail). The field data collector training consisted of NPSAS:04 study 

objectives and time frame, an explanation of how the financial aid process works on campuses, 

procedures for working with the institutional coordinator and other staff at the institutions, and 

instruction in and practice with locating records (including review of ISIRs). The training also 

covered a review of and practice with each section of the CADE instrument and electronic 

transmission of completed cases. Finally, procedures for contacting field supervisors and other 

administrative procedures were discussed. 

During this training, considerable use was made of location and abstraction of records 

using mock student case studies developed, with the assistance of National Association of 

Student Financial Aid Administrators (NASFAA) staff, to represent diversity in record keeping 

at different types of postsecondary institutions. Laptop computers were provided to all trainees 

for their use during training and subsequent field work. The tables of contents for the training 

guides used, as well as the field data collector training agenda, are included in appendix F. 

All institutional coordinators, regardless of mode of CADE completion chosen, were 

provided with materials to assist them with CADE. A packet was sent to all institutional 

coordinators once the sample had been selected and CADE preloads were available that included 

• a letter containing the username and password for access to the web-CADE system; 

• the NSoFaS:04, National Postsecondary Student Aid Study: NPSAS webCADE: 

User’s Guide, which included complete specifications, instructions, and system 

requirements needed for webCADE submission. Also included was a link to the 

institution website as well as information on alternative methods of data submission. 

The user’s guide also discussed the study’s confidentiality procedures; and 

• a hardcopy list of the sampled students. 

The CADE website allowed institutions to access an electronic list of the sample, which 

enabled them to create programs to provide the requested data from their systems for only the 

sampled students. All this could be done in preparation for the data entry, regardless of whether 

institutional staff or field staff were entering data into CADE. Several features were available 

from within the system to assist data entry for institutions doing self-CADE, including: help 

screens embedded within the program, a help desk telephone number, and an e-mail generator 

for problem reports. The help desk provided assistance to institutions if questions or problems 

arose during data entry. The help desk also provided support to institutions using the data-CADE 

option which generated a set of problem reports upon uploading a data file, including completed 

CADE information for students sampled at the institution. These reports provided comments on 
Chapter 2. Design and Methodology of NPSAS:04 

29 

any errors found in the file. The help desk ensured that institutional staff and project staff worked 

together to correct data while it was still being provided. 

Data collection 

Institutional record data for sampled students were collected using procedures similar to 

those successfully tested and implemented during NPSAS:2000 and during the NPSAS:04 field 

test. As discussed above, a web-based CADE software system was developed for use in 

collecting data from student records and the same CADE system was loaded onto laptops used 

by the RTI field data collectors for field-CADE. Institutions could choose either to enter the data 

themselves (self-CADE) or have an RTI-employed field data collector enter the data (fieldCADE). In addition, a third option was made available for schools with programming 

capabilities in which electronic files could be submitted via a secured website (data-CADE). 

These are described in more detail below. 

Self-CADE. Figure 5 presents the home page of the NPSAS CADE website. As can be 

seen, visitors to the website were first asked to complete their institution-level defaults (credit 

versus clock hour programs, grade-point average (GPA) scale, and institutional grants and 

scholarships). After completing these defaults, which are used by the CADE application, the user 

would enter all of the data for each student by clicking on the Enter Student Level Data link. 

Finally, the user would lock each case that was complete to indicate it was ready for processing. 

If cases were locked in error, there was a mechanism to request that a case be unlocked, provided 

that case had not been locked for longer than 3 days (after 3 days the user would have to call the 

help desk for any data changes). The website also provided the help desk phone number and 

e-mail address. 

The home page, and all further-nested pages within the CADE application, were 

protected via a Secure Sockets Layer (SSL) encryption safeguard. Further security was provided 

by an automatic “time out” feature, through which the user was automatically logged out of the 

CADE application if the system was idle for 20 minutes or longer. The system did not use any 

persistent “cookies” (i.e., those that remain on the hard drive after the browser has been closed), 

thus adhering to the U.S. Department of Education’s privacy policy. Selected CPS data were 

preloaded before data collection began to reduce data entry burden for institution staff. 
Chapter 2. Design and Methodology of NPSAS:04 

30 

Figure 5. The 2004 National Postsecondary Student Aid Study (NPSAS:04) web-CADE home 

page 

Source: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 2004 National Study of Faculty and 

Students (NSoFaS:04) website. 

Data-CADE. As an alternative to keying data into the web-CADE application, 

institutions, particularly those with large sample sizes, were given the option of submitting data 

files containing student record data. Explicit instructions for uploading comma-separated or 

delimited flat files were provided to institutions choosing this option (see appendix G). This 

method of data abstraction was first used in NPSAS:2000. The file specifications were 

customized for each institution so that they would have their own coding schemes for reporting 

various types of state aid and institution aid (the names of which were obtained from the 

institutional coordinator during the institution contacting phase of the study). Eight data files, 
Chapter 2. Design and Methodology of NPSAS:04 

31 

including student-level, term-level, and aid award-level files, were required from each dataCADE institution to accurately match the identical data structure of the database underlying the 

web-CADE application. Upon completion of the data-CADE file preparation, institutions 

submitted their data files back to RTI via the NSoFaS website. Upon submission, an automated 

quality control system processed the files and instantly reported back to the institutions any 

anomalies in the data (e.g., incorrect student ID variables, lack of term-level data for sample 

students, incorrect file names, etc.). 

Field-CADE. Consistent with procedures implemented in past NPSAS studies, 

institutions were given the option of having an RTI-employed field data collector visit the 

institution and provide student record data-entry services at no expense to the institution. This 

CADE abstraction method is referred to as field-CADE. 

Field data collectors used laptops with a local version of web-CADE loaded for entering 

data abstracted from student records. All features in the Web version were present in the laptop 

version, including real-time edit features to help detect out-of-range or inconsistent entries. In 

addition, data previously obtained from CPS were preloaded into the system before data 

collection began, to reduce the data collectors’ level of effort. Upon completing data entry, the 

field data collectors transmitted the data to the same database used by web-CADE, keeping all of 

the completed student records together in one location. 

Preloading CPS data into CADE. The first step of the CADE record abstraction process 

involved sending the student sample to the CPS to obtain financial aid application data. Upon 

completion of the CPS matching (typically a 24-hour turnaround), a number of data elements 

were preloaded into the CADE database, thus initializing the CADE system for that institution. 

These preloaded elements included an indicator of whether the student had been matched 

successfully to the CPS system, as well as selected CPS variables for use in CADE software edit 

checks. In addition, the system was customized for each institution by preloading the names of 

institutional financial aid programs and up to 12 state financial aid programs to assist in 

identifying common types of financial aid received by students. 

Once CADE was initialized for a particular institution, an informational packet was sent 

to the designated institutional coordinator. These packets contained a listing of the students 

sampled and instructions for accessing the website. RTI’s call center staff made follow-up phone 

calls to notify institutions that the CADE data collection could begin. Coordinators who 

previously indicated a willingness to complete the data collection via self-CADE were provided 

with a username and password to gain access to the web-CADE systems. As a security measure, 

only the coordinator was provided this password via an automatic e-mail. Based on daily status 

reports summarizing the progress of the self-CADE institutions, calls were made periodically to 

the coordinators to prompt completion of the record abstraction. Institutions using the fieldCADE option were also notified by mail and contacted by the field data collector at which time 

an appointment was made to visit the institution. 

2.3.5 Student Interview 

Instrument development 

The overall content of the NPSAS:04 student interview was based on items used 

successfully in NPSAS:2000 and NPSAS:96 in order to provide data users with the ability to 

make comparisons over time. Items relevant to the BPS were drawn from NPSAS:96, the last 
Chapter 2. Design and Methodology of NPSAS:04 

32 

NPSAS that served as the base year for a BPS cohort. NPSAS:2000 items specific to the B&B 

cohort were deleted. The NPSAS:04 instrument content was also modified to reflect changes in 

policy issues and topics relevant to researchers. 

The student interview was developed as a web-based application, consisting of six 

sections grouped by topic. Figure 6 displays the structure and flow of the student instrument. The 

first section determined student eligibility for the NPSAS:04 study and obtained information 

about degree program, field of study, and enrollment history. The second section contained 

questions relating to student expenses and financial aid. Included in this section were items 

regarding employment at the NPSAS institution, such as work-study, assistantships, and 

fellowships. Section three focused on other employment and finances. Educational experiences 

such as courses taken and admission test scores were included in the fourth section, as well as 

items specific to BPS respondents such as first-year experiences. The fifth section of the 

interview gathered background and demographic information about students and their family 

members. The final section, applicable only to BPS respondents, requested contacting 

information in order to make subsequent follow-up contact in future studies. 

In past rounds of NPSAS, data collection was administered by trained interviewers 

(primarily computer-assisted telephone interview [CATI], with some in-person interviews, or 

computer-assisted personal interview [CAPI]). For the first time, NPSAS:04 also included an 

option for self-administration via the Web. Regardless of completion mode, a single web-based 

instrument was employed. Mixed-mode surveys introduce benefits and challenges not 

experienced with single-mode surveys. Self-administration provides sample members with the 

ability to complete the survey at their convenience. However, interviewers are able to clarify 

question intent and probe when responses are unclear. Self-administered surveys require 

modifications to account for the mixed-mode presentation (i.e., self-administered and CATI) to 

maintain data quality and to make the interview process as efficient as possible for respondents. 

The NPSAS student interview included the following features to accommodate the mixed-mode 

nature of the survey: 

• Question wording was written so that it could be read by a respondent or read to a 

respondent by a telephone interviewer, while also maintaining question integrity. 

• Help text was provided on all screens to assist both self-administered respondents and 

telephone interviewers in completing the interview. 

• Pop-up boxes were displayed when out-of-range values were entered as a value for an 

item. 

• Explicit “don’t know” responses were allowed only for items in which that was a 

legitimate response (such as parents’ income, use of educational tax credits, etc.). For 

the remaining items, respondents who did not know the answer or wished not to 

provide an answer could simply leave the screen blank and proceed with the 

interview. 

• After three consecutive screens with no response, pop-up boxes were displayed to 

encourage participation. The prompt box reiterated the importance of the study and 

completeness of data, reminded sample members of the confidentiality of their 

responses, and requested that the respondent complete the items left blank. 
Chapter 2. Design and Methodology of NPSAS:04 

33 

With an instrument as large and complex as the NPSAS student interview, another 

critical factor was the determination of skip logic. Not only was it important to determine the 

appropriate routing from item to item on the basis of respondent status (e.g., FTB, 

undergraduate, graduate student), but it was also necessary to ensure that the skip logic was as 

efficient as possible. Sending respondents from one screen to another can add considerable 

transit time to web-based instruments. This increases the burden on the respondent and can lead 

to increased data collection costs as interviewers wait for screens to load during the interview. 

Another important consideration in developing the NPSAS:04 interview was the introduction of 

variation in response time. Web users connect through a variety of sources (e.g., dial-up, T1, 

high-speed cable access), use different operating systems, and have different computer resources. 

All of these factors were relevant to designing the instrument in order to ensure minimal burden 

on the respondent. 

Once the instrument was programmed, rigorous testing was conducted over several 

iterations. Project staff and NCES staff tested numerous scenarios to evaluate the skip logic, 

question wording, screen layout, and efficiency of the instrument for the various student profiles 

expected to occur in the sample. Testing was done from a variety of locations, using a range of 

internet connections, and at varied times of the day to ensure that data collection would run 

smoothly. This process was facilitated by the use of RTI’s Instrument Development and 

Documentation System (IDADS), which is described in detail in section 2.4.1. IDADS allowed 

project staff and NCES to coordinate testing efforts and provided a historical account of all 

problems and the solutions implemented. 

An abbreviated interview was developed that contained a subset of key items from the 

main interview. This version was used during refusal conversion toward the end of data 

collection. A facsimile is presented in appendix E. The abbreviated interview was also translated 

into Spanish so that bilingual telephone interviewers could conduct hardcopy interviews with 

Spanish-speaking respondents. 
Chapter 2. Design and Methodology of NPSAS:04 

34 

Figure 6. Structure and flow of student interview: 2004 

NOTE: FTB = First-time beginner. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 2004 National Postsecondary Student Aid Study 

(NPSAS:04). 

Section A: Eligibility and Enrollment

 Current enrollment 

 Enrollment history 

 Degree program, field of study 

 Eligibility determination 

 FTB determination

Section B: Student Expenses and Financial Aid

 Work-study, assistantships, earnings 

 Financial aid (federal, institutional, state, and other 

sources) 

 Loan amounts 

 Parental support 

 Use of educational tax credits

Section C: Employment

 Employment while enrolled 

 Impact of work on education 

 Income, assets, and credit

Section D: Education Experiences

 Remedial courses 

 Distance education 

 Undergraduates experiences 

 College choice considerations 

 Personal goals

Section E: Student Background

 Demographics 

 Citizenship 

 Dependents 

 Civic participation 

 Disabilities

Section F: Locating

 Contact information 

 Address verification
Chapter 2. Design and Methodology of NPSAS:04 

35 

Staff training 

Various types of data collection staff were used for the NPSAS:04 student data 

collection, including tracing specialists, supervisors and monitors, help desk agents, and 

telephone interviewers. Specialized training sessions were conducted for each of these groups. A 

sample training agenda and table of contents from a training manual are provided in appendix F. 

Each training session covered an overview of the study, review of confidentiality requirements, a 

demonstration interview, question-by-question review of the instrument, as well as hands-on 

practice with the tracing module, instrument, and coding systems. In addition, each training 

session contained specialized instruction for each job, as described below. 

• Tracing specialists received instruction on project-specific tracing protocols for 

tracing the sample members, as well as on the most effective tracing sources. 

• Supervisors and monitors received instruction on project specific supervision and 

monitoring guidelines. 

• Help desk agents received training on answering questions about the study, as well as 

technical questions from sample members, and were trained to document each call 

made to the study hotline. 

• Telephone interviewers received information on the content of the interview, as well 

as on gaining cooperation from sample members, parents, and other contacts, and 

techniques for refusal avoidance and addressing the concerns of reluctant participants. 

At the end of the project-specific training, interviewers were evaluated and certified upon 

successful completion of the training session.18 The certification process involved the successful 

administration of the NPSAS instrument in a paired “mock” interview with a fellow trainee (one 

assuming the role of the interviewer and the other the sample member, and then vice versa). 

Trainers monitored these sessions, noting any difficulties experienced with questionnaire 

administration; accuracy of data entry; and voice tone, speed, and quality. In addition to 

successfully administering a “mock” interview, interviewers were also required to pass an oral 

certification exam, which focused on addressing anticipated questions and concerns from 

respondents. 

Approximately 8 weeks after the start of student interviewing, project staff and RTI Call 

Center Services (CCS) supervisory staff began conducting a series of refusal conversion 

trainings for a subset of high-performing telephone interviewers. CATI supervisors and monitors 

evaluated the effectiveness of telephone interviewers in dealing with respondent objections and 

overcoming barriers to participation. The most effective interviewers received additional and 

specialized instruction in specific refusal conversion techniques, including obtaining cooperation 

from sample members, addressing concerns raised by parents and other sample gatekeepers, 

validating the importance of the study, and encouraging participation among sample members 

who were nonrespondents prior to these conversion efforts. 

 

18 Certification was required of all interviewers prior to beginning work on NPSAS. 
Chapter 2. Design and Methodology of NPSAS:04 

36 

Data collection 

Procedures used to locate sample members and conduct student interviews are described 

in the following section. Figure 7 presents the flow of activities used in locating and 

interviewing. 

Figure 7. Overview of student data collection: 2004 

1

 Even after attempts to pursue a telephone interview were exhausted, sample members could initiate and complete the student 

interview via the Web through the end of data collection. 

NOTE: CPS = Central Processing System; NCOA = National Change of Address; CATI = Computer-assisted telephone interview. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 2004 National Postsecondary Student Aid Study 

(NPSAS:04). 
Chapter 2. Design and Methodology of NPSAS:04 

37 

Locating 

RTI’s approach to tracing sample members included two basic stages: (1) advance tracing 

and (2) intensive tracing. The advance tracing stage included batch database searches and lead 

letter mailings to sample members. The intensive tracing stage consisted of interactive tracing 

conducted by Call Center Services (CCS) Tracing Services. 19 The techniques described in the 

following sections were designed to yield the maximum number of locates with the least 

expense. The most cost-effective steps were taken first, minimizing the number of cases that 

required more costly intensive tracing efforts. 

Advance tracing. Locating information obtained during institutional record abstraction 

was incorporated into the locator database. The data files were updated with information 

obtained from batch searches, from the National Change of Address (NCOA)20 system, the 

Department of Education’s CPS,

21 and Telematch.22 Batch searches were conducted on a flow 

basis. After the locator database had been updated with the new information, a lead letter packet 

was mailed to the best known address for the sample member that included a standard lead letter, 

a study brochure, and instructions on how to access the survey via the Web (see appendix C). In 

the event that a sample member had moved from the mailing address in our locator database, 

mail forwarding from the U.S. Postal Service was requested. The most current information for 

the student and any other contacts were then preloaded into the CATI system. 

CATI-internal locating. When assigned a case, the telephone interviewer called the 

telephone number designated by the system as the best number (i.e., the number among all 

available locator numbers that appeared to have the greatest potential for contacting the sample 

member) and attempted to interview the designated sample member. If the person answering the 

call said that the sample member could not be reached at that number, the interviewer asked the 

person how to contact the sample member. If this query did not provide the information needed, 

the interviewer initiated tracing procedures, using all information available to call other contact 

persons in an attempt to locate the sample member. If all tracing options available to the 

interviewer were exhausted without success, the case was assigned to intensive tracing via 

FastData,23 or CCS Tracing Services. 

 

19 Tracing Services is a highly specialized unit within RTI Call Center Services (CCS) that was created in response to 

the recurring needs of certain research methodologies to locate large numbers of sample members. The sole focus of 

this unit is tracing sample members so that they can be located for research studies; the unit does not conduct any 

data collections. 

20 The National Change of Address (NCOA) is a database consisting of change of address data submitted to the U.S. 

Postal Service. Almost 100 million records are updated every 2 weeks and stored for 3 years. 21 The Central Processing System (CPS) provides information for students who have applied for and/or received 

financial aid. The CPS computes student aid applicants’ eligibility for student aid to assist them in attending 

postsecondary schools. CPS receives data from the Multiple Data Entry (MDE) contractor and sends a Student Aid 

Report (SAR) to the aid applicant. 

22 Telematch is a computerized residential telephone number look-up service consisting of over 65 million listings, 

over one million not-yet-published numbers of new movers, and over 10 million businesses. Telematch uses a name, 

street address, and ZIP code as search criteria and Reverse Telematch uses telephone numbers as the search 

criteria to provide the names under which telephones are listed. 23 FastData is a series of database searches used to locate sample members after pre-CATI batch database 

searches have been done but before sending cases for intensive interactive tracing. 
Chapter 2. Design and Methodology of NPSAS:04 

38 

Intensive tracing. All cases that were not located during the advance tracing process 

were submitted to CCS Tracing Services for intensive locating. CCS implemented a two-tiered 

intensive tracing plan. The first tier identified sample members with SSNs and processed them 

through the following electronic databases.24 

• Query of Credit Bureau databases. Equifax, a credit bureau that maintains credit files 

on a large number of individuals; Experian, which holds more demographic and 

credit information on individuals and businesses than any other company in the world 

and TransUnion, which also holds demographic and credit information on 

individuals and businesses, were all used to locate sample members. 

• Query of internet databases. Contractor staff had direct electronic access to various 

databases, which included names, SSNs, and current and former addresses and 

telephone numbers of individuals. 

• Query of the Select Phone Book CD-ROM data. This database contains every 

published telephone number in the United States, with associated names and 

addresses. It can be sorted within city by address, to obtain telephone numbers and 

names of neighbors. 

New telephone numbers generated from the above searches were sent back into the Case 

Management System for telephone interviewing. If a new address was generated, but no 

telephone number, tracers used directory assistance or other databases to obtain telephone 

numbers. This first level of effort minimized the time that cases were out of production. 

All remaining cases (those lacking new information from the SSN search) underwent a 

more intensive level of tracing in the second-tier approach. This approach involved the following 

procedures: (1) checking directory assistance for telephone listings at various addresses; (2) 

using electronic reverse-match databases to obtain the names and telephone numbers of 

neighbors and then calling the neighbors; (3) calling persons with the same unusual surname in 

small towns or rural areas to see if they were related to or knew the sample member; (4) 

contacting the current or last-known residential sources such as neighbors, landlords, current 

residents, tax assessors, realtors, and other business establishments related to previous addresses 

associated with the sample member; (5) calling colleges, military establishments, and 

correctional facilities to follow up on leads generated from other sources; and (6) checking 

various tracing websites. Tracers checked new leads produced by these tracing steps to confirm 

the address and telephone numbers for the sample members. When the information was 

confirmed, the case was returned to the CMS for completion. If the information could not be 

confirmed (e.g., there were no working telephone numbers or numbers for relevant neighborhood 

sources were unpublished), no further attempts were made to locate such sample members.25

Notification materials and student resources 

Student website. A study website was designed for students. The website provided 

important information about NPSAS:04, such as the purpose and history of the study and a 

summary of findings from prior interviews. Confidentiality procedures were described and the 

 

24 Tracing activities were restricted to the collection of locating/directory information. 25 Unlocatable sample members always had the opportunity to complete self-administered interview or to call in for a 

telephone interview through the end of data collection. 
Chapter 2. Design and Methodology of NPSAS:04 

39 

use of the data was explained. It also provided contact information for the study’s help desk and 

project staff and links to the NCES and RTI websites. The website also provided a link from 

which sample members could log in to the student interview. The website address was included 

with all mailings to sample members. 

The NPSAS:04 website (figure 8) was designed in accordance with NCES Web policies. 

A two-tier security approach was used to protect all address and interview data collected through 

the website. At the first tier, sample members were required to log on to the secure areas of the 

website using a unique and randomly assigned study ID and password sent by mail. At the 

second tier of security, data entered on the NPSAS:04 website—both contact information and 

interview responses—were protected with SSL technology, ensuring that only encrypted data 

were transmitted over the Internet. As an additional security measure, the interview contained an 

automatic “time-out” feature through which a respondent was logged-out if the system was idle 

for 30 minutes. 

Figure 8. The 2004 National Postsecondary Student Aid Study (NPSAS:04) website home page 

Source: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 2004 National Study of Faculty and 

Students (NSoFaS:04) website. 
Chapter 2. Design and Methodology of NPSAS:04 

40 

Help desk. The help desk staff was available to assist sample members who had 

questions or problems accessing and/or completing the self-administered interview. A toll-free 

hotline was set up to accept incoming help desk calls. If technical difficulties prevented a sample 

member from completing a self-administered interview, a help desk staff member, who was also 

trained to conduct telephone interviews, would encourage him/her to complete a telephone 

interview rather than to attempt the self-administered interview. 

The help desk application documented all incoming calls from sample members. In 

addition to this primary documentation function, it provided the following: 

• information needed to verify a sample member’s identity to assist with login 

difficulties; 

• login information allowing a sample member to access the Web interview; and 

• means for tracking problems that could not be immediately resolved. 

The help desk application also provided project staff with various reports on the type and 

frequency of problems experienced by sample members, as well as a way to monitor the 

resolution status of all help desk inquiries. 

Lead letter mailing. Once a valid address for a sampled student was identified either 

through the participating institution or a batch database search, each sample member was mailed 

a lead letter. The personalized lead letter signed by the NCES commissioner provided 

information about the study, a description of the options for completing the questionnaire via the 

Web or telephone, the electronic address (URL) for the project website, and the sample 

member’s username and password for secure access to the website. A study brochure was also 

included with the mailing. 

The letter was used to inform sample members that they were eligible to complete the 

NPSAS:04 interview at their convenience on the Web and provided them with the technical 

information on how to do so. The letter also provided an e-mail address and the NPSAS:04 tollfree telephone number to the help desk as a means for sample members to update their contact 

information, schedule an appointment, or complete the interview by telephone. Lead letter 

mailouts began in early February 2004 and by the end of July 2004, 138,320 lead letter packets 

had been mailed. 

Electronic mail (E-mail). E-mail was an important tool in the locating and interviewing 

process. In addition to sending a lead letter mailing, students were sent a lead e-mail as an 

additional way of making initial contact. The content of this e-mail mirrored the content of the 

lead letter but also included a hyperlink Web address so students were able to click on the 

address to be taken directly to the Web survey. E-mail follow-up messages were sent to sample 

members with valid e-mail addresses 1 day, 7 days, and 14 days after the initial hard-copy 

mailing. 

E-mail was also used as a tool for locating hard-to-reach sample members and for 

prompting participation among nonrespondents. The e-mail messages were used to encourage 

sample members either to complete the web-based self-administered survey or to contact RTI to 

complete the survey or to set an appointment for a telephone interview. 
Chapter 2. Design and Methodology of NPSAS:04 

41 

Student interviews 

Self-administered interviews. The data collection notification materials invited sample 

members to log into the study website and provided all the information needed to do so. During 

the 4 weeks immediately following the notification letter, only self-administered interviews via 

the Web were completed unless a student called in to the help desk for assistance and completed 

the telephone interview. Outbound calls by interviewing staff were not initiated until sample 

members had sufficient opportunity to complete the interview. E-mail prompts were sent to 

sample members periodically during the 4-week period to encourage participation and remind 

them of the address for the study website, as well as the toll-free help desk telephone number. 

Sample members were assured of the confidentiality of their responses. They were also 

informed of the voluntary nature of the survey, noting that they could decline to answer any 

survey question. Furthermore, the convenience features of the web-based survey were 

emphasized—especially that the survey could be completed at any time from any location with 

internet access and that respondents could break off and resume the interview if needed. The web 

interview site remained available 24 hours per day, 7 days per week throughout the entire data 

collection period. This availability gave sample members the option to complete interviews 

online during the entire data collection period. 

Telephone interviews. Attempts to locate and interview study sample members who had 

not yet completed an interview began 4 weeks after sample members were invited to complete 

the self-administered interview. Once located, an attempt was made to conduct the full interview 

with the sample member. However, some cases required special treatment. To deal with those 

who initially refused to participate (including locator sources who acted as “gatekeepers,” 

preventing access to the sample member), certain interviewers were trained in refusal conversion 

techniques. Sample members and their locator sources who spoke only Spanish, primarily 

located in Puerto Rico, were assigned to bilingual CATI interviewers. 

Use of incentives. In an effort to increase study response rates, sample members were 

offered an incentive of $10 for completing a self-administered interview in the first 4 weeks. 

Sample members would receive the incentive regardless of participation mode, provided that 

they completed their interview prior to their individual deadline. 

Toward the end of data collection, a different incentive plan was used with particular 

types of nonrespondents: (1) cases where the sample member initially refused the interview; (2) 

sample members for whom intensive tracing yielded a good mailing address, but no telephone 

number; and (3) cases identified as “hard to reach” (i.e., those with 20 or more call attempts, 

where contact had been established with the sample member and no “hard” appointment was 

pending). The incentive offer consisted of a letter from the project director on RTI letterhead, or 

an e-mail tailored to the specific type of nonrespondent (i.e., refusal or hard to reach/no 

telephone number). Respondents were promised a check for $20 if they completed the interview, 

regardless of the mode they used to do so. The incentive letters were mailed on a flow basis as 

respondents met one of the three criteria described above. 

Finally, in an effort to convert sample members who still had not responded to the 

previous incentive offers near the end of data collection, all pending cases received a final letter 

requesting participation by the end of the data collection period. Postcards and letters 

reemphasized the importance of the study and offered all remaining respondents a check for $30 

if they completed the interview, regardless of the mode they used to do so. 
Chapter 2. Design and Methodology of NPSAS:04 

42 

2.3.6 Data Quality Evaluation 

All stages and components of NPSAS:04 were carefully monitored and evaluated 

throughout the course of development and production. Table 7 outlines some of the major 

evaluations conducted as part of the full-scale study. 

Table 7. Summary of NPSAS:04 evaluations 

Major area of evaluation Evaluation approaches 

Training for data collection Debrief field abstractors.1 

Debrief computer-assisted telephone interview (CATI) staff.1

 

Enrollment list acquisition Analyze overall response rate, accuracy, and time to produce lists. 

 

Student record abstraction Analyze overall outcomes, including institutional participation, nonresponse, and 

refusal 

Analyze data quality (missing data) under conditions of web-CADE, field-CADE, and 

data file production approaches. 

 Debrief institutional coordinators.1

 Debrief field staff. 1

 

Debrief tracing staff and supervisors.1 Student tracing and locating 

activities Analyze all sources and levels of tracing results and costs. 

 

Student interviewing Analyze quality control monitoring data. 

Analyze CATI operational parameters (e.g., numbers of calls per case, total 

interviewer hours per completed interview). 

 Analyze interview response burden, overall and by section. 

 Debrief interviewers, monitors, and supervisors.1

Analyze response rates and patterns of interview nonresponse, overall and by mode 

of administration. 

 Analyze impact of financial incentive on response rate. 

 

Nonresponse bias analysis Analyze nonresponse bias at the following levels: institutional, student, and item. 

1 Informal debriefings of staff involved in different data collection tasks were conducted throughout the study. 

Information gathered through these debriefings was used to enhance understanding of the outcomes of more formal 

evaluations and is therefore not described separately in this report. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 2004 National Postsecondary 

Student Aid Study (NPSAS:04). 

2.4 Data Collection Systems 

2.4.1 Instrument Development and Documentation System (IDADS) 

IDADS is a controlled web environment in which project staff developed, reviewed, 

modified, and communicated changes to specifications, code, and documentation for the 

NPSAS:04 student interview. All information relating to the instrument was stored in an SQL 

server database and was made accessible through WindowsTM and Web interfaces. IDADS 

contains three modules: specification, programming, and documentation. 
Chapter 2. Design and Methodology of NPSAS:04 

43 

Initial specifications were generated within the IDADS specification module. This 

module enabled access for searching, reviewing, commenting on, updating, exporting, and 

importing information associated with instrument development. All records were maintained 

individually for each item, which provided a historical account of all changes requested by both 

project staff and NCES. 

Once specifications were finalized, the programming module within IDADS produced 

hypertext transfer markup language (HTML), Active Server Pages (ASPs), and JavaScript 

template program code for each screen based on the contents of the SQL Server database. This 

output included screen wording, response options, and code to write the responses to a database, 

as well as code to automatically handle such web-instrument functions as backing up and moving 

forward, recording timer data, and linking to context-specific help text. Programming staff edited 

the code that was automatically generated by this module to customize screen appearance and 

program response-based routing. 

The documentation module contained the finalized version of all instrument items, the 

screen wording for each, and variable and value labels. Also included in this module were the 

more technical descriptions of items such as variable types (alpha or numeric), information 

regarding to whom the item was administered and to whom the item applied, and frequency 

distributions for response categories. The documentation module was used to generate the 

student interview facsimile and the associated documentation files to be used as input to the VTS 

(discussed in section 2.4.3). 

2.4.2 Integrated Management System (IMS) 

The IMS is a comprehensive set of desktop tools designed to give project staff and NCES 

easy access to a centralized repository for project data and documents. The NPSAS:04 IMS was 

developed based on a framework initially developed (and refined) under previous NCES studies 

conducted by RTI. These include NPSAS:2000, B&B:2000/01, and B&B:93/03. As with these 

previous studies, the NPSAS:04 IMS consisted of independent, but integrated, modules. To the 

extent possible, the NPSAS:04 IMS was developed using commercial, nonproprietary PC-based 

software systems. 

The major modules of the NPSAS:04 IMS include the following: 

IMS website 

• Contains tools and strategies to assist project staff and the NCES project officer in 

managing the study. All information pertinent to the study is located there, accessible 

via the Web, in a secure desktop environment. Available on the IMS are the current 

project schedule, monthly progress reports, daily data collection reports and status 

reports, project plans and specifications, key project information and deliverables, 

instrument specifications, staff contacts, the project bibliography, and a document 

archive. The IMS also has a download area from which the client and subcontractors 

can retrieve files when necessary. 

• Infrastructure was programmed in ASP. 

• SQL Server 2000 serves as the back-end database where applicable (maintaining the 

project staff contact list, Technical Review Panel membership, confidentiality reports, 

etc.) 
Chapter 2. Design and Methodology of NPSAS:04 

44 

Receipt Control System (RCS)

• An integrated set of systems that monitors all activities related to data collection, 

including tracing and locating. Through the RCS, project staff are able to perform 

stage-specific activities, track case statuses, identify problems early, and implement 

solutions effectively. RCS locator data were used for a number of daily tasks related 

to sample maintenance. 

• Back-end database is Microsoft SQL Server 2000. 

• Front-end interface and reports were programmed in ASP and SQL Server Reports 

Server. 

Institution Contacting System (ICS) 

• The ICS allows staff to log all contacts with institutions and determine the next steps 

for staff working with specific institutions. From within the ICS, the mailout program 

produces mailings to sample members, the electronic mailout program produces email notifications and reminders to sample members, the tracing program enables 

staff to send and receive tracing information from locating firms, the query system 

enables administrators to review the locator information and status for a particular 

case, and the mail return system enables project staff to update the locator database. 

The RCS also interacts with the Case Management System (discussed below) and the 

CCS Tracing Services databases, sending locator data between the three systems as 

necessary. 

• Back-end database is Microsoft SQL Server 2000. 

• Front-end interface and reports were programmed in ASP and SQL Server Reports 

Server. 

Case Management System (CMS) 

• The technological infrastructure that connects the various components of the CATI 

system, including the student questionnaire, utility screens, databases, call scheduler, 

report modules, links to outside systems, and other system components. It utilizes a 

call scheduler to assign cases to interviewers in a predefined priority order. In 

addition to delivering appointments to interviewers at the appropriate time, the call 

scheduler also calculates the priority scores (the order in which cases need to be 

called based on preprogrammed rules), sorts cases in nonappointment queues, and 

computes time zone adjustments to ensure that cases are not delivered outside the 

specified calling hours. The call scheduler also permits callbacks to be set, and 

assigns status codes to the case. In addition, each case contains one or more roster 

lines that detail specific contact information for a case (e.g., home phone number, 

work phone number, etc.). The call scheduler uses a call algorithm based on the 

previous call results to determine which roster line should be called next. 

• Back-end database is SQL Server 2000.

• Infrastructure was programmed in Visual Basic (VB). 
Chapter 2. Design and Methodology of NPSAS:04 

45 

Student instrument 

• Back-end database is SQL Server 2000. 

• Instrument was programmed in ASP. 

• Edit checks were programmed using JavaScript. 

• Web security was implemented using SSL certification with 128-bit encryption. 

• Users’ browsers were required to support, and be enabled for, JavaScript and session 

cookies (i.e., those that are erased from the hard drive after the browser has been 

closed). 

• Final student interview database was maintained in SAS 8 (subsequently upgraded to 

SAS 9.1). 

• Student status and summary reports were programmed in SAS 8 (subsequently 

upgraded to SAS 9.1). 

CADE 

• Back-end database is Microsoft SQL Server 2000. 

• Front-end interface was programmed in ASP. 

• Edit checks were programmed using JavaScript. 

• Reports were developed using ASP. 

• Web security was implemented using SSL certification with 128-bit encryption. 

• Users’ browsers were required to support, and be enabled for, JavaScript and session 

cookies (i.e., those that are erased from the hard drive after the browser has been 

closed). 

• Final CADE database was maintained in SAS 8 (subsequently upgraded to SAS 9.1). 

Automated processing 

During data collection, a series of automated batch files were executed nightly via 

Windows XP scheduled processing to ensure that project staff were able to closely monitor 

progress during all stages of data collection. These automated processes included the following: 

• Dataload. This program contained many different subprocesses, with the overall 

purpose being to process transactions generated during the day by various project 

systems and activities, and post the transactions to the RCS, updating institution and 

student-level case status information. Transactions included results from enrollment 

list processing, sampling, CPS matching, CADE preload and data receipt processing, 

lead-letter mailout and return, and student instrument preloading and interviewing. 

• RCS report generator. Each night following the completion of the dataload process, 

the RCS report generator created HTML pages detailing both the institution- and 

student-level current status reports. It also produced miscellaneous project 

management reports including: Abstraction Method Report, Enrollment (list type) 

Report, Chief Administrator Participation Report, Enrollment List Acquisition 
Chapter 2. Design and Methodology of NPSAS:04 

46 

Report, CADE Status Summary Report (overall and for the BPS cohort), and Student 

Interview Summary Reports. The process automatically posted these reports to the 

IMS. 

• Data upload to master files. Each night this process would update master files 

containing CADE and student interview data with newly acquired data, including 

complete and partial cases. 

• Data processing. Separate programs ran nightly to edit the raw CADE and student 

interview data (see chapter 5 for more detail). 

2.4.3 Variable Tracking System (VTS) 

The central mechanism for constructing input files for the NCES Electronic Codebook 

(ECB) was a software application called the Variable Tracking System (VTS). The VTS tracked 

and stored documentation for both interview and derived variables required for the ECB and 

NCES’ Data Analysis System (DAS). This included weighted and unweighted variable 

distributions, variable labels, value codes and labels, and a text field describing the development 

and source of each variable and, if applicable, the programming code used to construct it. Input 

files for the ECB and DAS systems were automatically produced by the VTS according to NCES 

specifications. 
47 

Chapter 3 

Data Collection Outcomes 

This chapter summarizes the results of the various stages of data collection implemented 

in the 2004 National Postsecondary Student Aid Study (NPSAS:04). Study response rates for 

institutions and students are presented first. Next, completion rates for individual data sources 

are discussed, including rates of matching to extant databases, locating results, and interviewing 

outcomes (by mode of survey administration). 

3.1 Institutional Participation 

Eligible sample institutions were asked to participate in two stages of NPSAS:04 by 

(1) providing a comprehensive list of enrolled students for sample selection and (2) providing 

data from student records for the sampled students. Consequently, the potential for institutional 

nonresponse existed at these two points in the survey process. Rates of institutional response—

for the national and state-representative samples—are discussed in the following sections. 

3.1.1 National Sample 

Counts of eligible institutions in the national sample are shown in table 8, by institutional 

level, institutional control, and type of institution. About 1,630 of the 1,670 institutions initially 

selected for the full-scale study were determined to be eligible for NPSAS:04. Table 8 also 

shows that about 1,360 (84 percent) of the 1,630 eligible sample institutions provided a list of 

enrolled students that could be used for sample selection.26 List provision rates (among eligible 

institutions) varied by type of institution, ranging from 77 percent for public less-than-2-year 

institutions to 89 percent for private not-for-profit less-than-4-year institutions. Weighted 

participation rates were calculated based on the institutional probabilities of selection and 

enrollment27 and are also shown in table 8.28 The overall weighted participation rate was 80 

percent.29

 

26 Two institutions provided a list that had no student identifying information, and the institutions were not willing to 

provide this information. These lists were not sufficient for sample selection. 27 In addition to the probabilities of selection, the participation rates accounted for the institution enrollment from the 

2003 Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System (IPEDS). The unit of analysis for NPSAS is a student, so 

factoring the enrollment into the participation rates, gives an indication of what percentage of students are 

represented by the participating institutions. 

28 The weighted response rates can be interpreted as the estimated percentages of institutions in the population that 

would have provided a usable student sampling list, if asked. 

29 When the weighted response rates differ from the unweighted response rates, it is due to the nonresponding 

institutions having, on average, a lower or higher weight than the responding institutions. NPSAS:04 was designed to 

produce efficient estimates only at the student level. Institutions were selected with probabilities proportional to size; 

therefore, weighted institution-level estimates are subject to a high level of sampling variation. 
Chapter 3. Data Collection Outcomes 

48 

Table 8. Numbers of NPSAS:04 sampled, eligible, and participating institutions and enrollment 

list participation rates, by institutional characteristics: national sample 

Institutions providing lists1

Institutional characteristics2 Sampled 

institutions 

Eligible

institutions3 Number 

Unweighted 

percent 

Weighted 

percent 

All institutions 1,670 1,630 1,360 83.5 80.0 

 

Institutional level 

Less-than-2-year 260 250 200 82.1 80.8 

2-year 490 480 410 85.4 78.0 

4-year non-doctorate-granting 460 460 380 83.3 74.6 

4-year doctorate-granting 450 450 370 82.4 85.6 

 

Institutional control 

Public 810 800 680 84.9 79.6 

Private not-for-profit 570 560 450 81.2 79.8 

Private for-profit 290 270 230 84.2 86.7 

 

Type of institution 

Public less-than-2-year 70 60 50 76.6 74.3 

Public 2-year 380 380 320 85.4 77.6 

Public 4-year non-doctorate-granting 130 130 110 85.1 70.3 

Public 4-year doctorate-granting 230 230 200 86.3 87.1 

Private not-for-profit less-than-4-year 70 70 70 89.0 92.6 

Private not-for-profit 4-year non-doctorategranting 280 270 220 81.9 78.1 

Private not-for-profit 4-year doctorate-granting 220 220 170 77.7 80.8 

Private for-profit less-than-2-year 170 160 140 84.0 82.3 

Private for-profit 2-year or more 110 110 90 84.4 88.2 

1

 Percents are based on the eligible institutions within the row under consideration. 2

 Institutional characteristics are based on data from the sampling frame which was formed from the 2000–01 and 

2002–03 Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System (IPEDS). 3

 Among the 30 ineligible institutions: 10 closed after the sampling frame was defined, and 10 failed to meet one or 

more of the criteria for institutional NPSAS eligibility. The remainder were treated as merged institutions because two 

or more campuses were included on one combined student list. 

NOTE: Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 2004 National Postsecondary 

Student Aid Study (NPSAS:04). 

3.1.2 State Samples 

Counts of eligible institutions for the state samples are shown in table 9, by state and type 

of institution. Table 9 also shows the weighted and unweighted enrollment list provision rates 

(among eligible institutions), which varied by state and type of institution considered. The 

weighted participation rate ranged from 53 percent to 100 percent. 
Chapter 3. Data Collection Outcomes 

49 

Table 9. Numbers of NPSAS:04 sampled, eligible, and participating institutions and enrollment 

list participation rates, by institutional characteristics: state samples 

Institutions providing lists1

Institutional characteristics2

Sampled 

institutions 

Eligible 

institutions Number 

Unweighted 

percent 

Weighted 

percent 

California 

 Public 2-year 40 40 30 65.8 66.2 

 Public 4-year 30 30 20 57.6 53.3 

 Private not-for-profit 4-year 40 40 30 73.2 77.6 

 

Connecticut 

 Public 2-year 20 20 10 86.7 99.9 

 Public 4-year 10 10 10 100.0 100.0 

 Private not-for-profit 4-year 20 20 20 85.0 99.2 

Delaware 

 Public 2-year # # # 100.0 100.0 

 Public 4-year # # # 100.0 100.0 

 Private not-for-profit 4-year # # # 100.0 100.0 

Georgia 

 Public 2-year 30 30 30 100.0 100.0 

 Public 4-year 20 20 20 100.0 100.0 

 Private not-for-profit 4-year 30 30 30 81.8 91.1 

Illinois 

 Public 2-year 30 30 30 90.0 90.0 

 Public 4-year 10 10 10 83.3 87.7 

 Private not-for-profit 4-year 30 30 20 75.9 77.1 

 

Indiana 

 Public 2-year 20 20 20 100.0 100.0 

 Public 4-year 10 10 10 100.0 100.0 

 Private not-for-profit 4-year 30 30 30 90.0 92.0 

Minnesota 

 Public 2-year 30 30 30 100.0 100.0 

 Public 4-year 10 10 10 100.0 100.0 

 Private not-for-profit 4-year 40 40 30 85.7 94.6 

Nebraska 

 Public 2-year 10 10 10 71.4 67.2 

 Public 4-year 10 10 10 85.7 97.0 

 Private not-for-profit 4-year 20 20 10 86.7 68.2 

New York 

 Public 2-year 40 40 30 86.5 93.0 

 Public 4-year 30 30 30 93.1 94.2 

 Private not-for-profit 4-year 40 40 30 81.6 82.6 

Oregon 

 Public 2-year 20 20 10 82.4 85.3 

 Public 4-year 10 10 10 90.0 97.0 

 Private not-for-profit 4-year 30 20 20 91.7 94.7 

Tennessee 

 Public 2-year 20 20 20 100.0 100.0 

 Public 4-year 10 10 10 100.0 100.0 

 Private not-for-profit 4-year 30 30 20 80.0 84.6 

Texas 

 Public 2-year 30 30 30 93.1 91.5 

 Public 4-year 30 30 30 86.7 87.7 

 Private not-for-profit 4-year 30 30 20 80.0 84.4 

# Rounds to zero. 

1

 Percents are based on the eligible institutions within the row under consideration. 2

 Institutional characteristics are based on data from the sampling frame which was formed from the 2000–01 and 2002–03 

Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System (IPEDS). 

NOTE: Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 2004 National Postsecondary Student Aid Study 

(NPSAS:04). 
Chapter 3. Data Collection Outcomes 

50 

3.2 Study Respondents 

As noted in the previous chapter, student-level data for NPSAS:04 are collected from a 

variety of sources, including student records (computer-assisted data entry [CADE]), student 

interviews, and extant federal and private databases (Central Processing System [CPS], National 

Student Loan Data System [NSLDS], ACT, and SAT files). For NPSAS:04, a definition of the 

minimum data requirements, regardless of source, to be considered a study respondent was 

adopted. Specifically, a study respondent is defined as any sample member who is determined to 

be eligible for the study (based on the eligibility criteria specified in chapter 2) and, minimally, 

has valid data from any source for the following: 

• student type (undergraduate or graduate/first professional); 

• date of birth or age; 

• gender; and 

• at least 8 of the following 15 variables: 

− dependency status; 

− marital status; 

− any dependents; 

− income; 

− expected family contribution (EFC); 

− degree program; 

− class level; 

− first-time beginner (FTB) status; 

− months enrolled; 

− tuition; 

− received federal aid; 

− received non-federal aid; 

− student budget; 

− race; and 

− parent education. 

Student-level study response rates for both the national sample and the state samples are 

presented below. 

3.2.1 National Sample 

Counts of eligible students are shown in table 10, by type of institution. About 8,200 (8 

percent) of the 109,210 students initially selected for the full-scale study were determined to be 

ineligible for NPSAS:04. Upon the completion of data collection, 90 percent of the 101,010 

eligible sample members had sufficient key data to be classified as study respondents. Weighted 
Chapter 3. Data Collection Outcomes 

51 

response rates were calculated based on the institutional weights and student probabilities of 

selection and are also shown in table 10.30 The student weighted response rate was 91 percent.31

Table 10 also shows that the unweighted student response rates (among eligible students) 

varied by type of institution, ranging from 81 percent for students from public 2-year institutions 

to 96 percent for students from private not-for-profit 4-year non-doctorate institutions. Response 

rates also varied by student type: 91 percent for FTBs, 87 percent for other undergraduates, and 

94 percent for graduate and first-professional students. 

Table 10. Numbers of NPSAS:04 sampled and eligible students and response rates, by 

institutional characteristics and student type: national sample 

Responding students1,2

Institutional characteristics and student type3

Sampled 

students 

Eligible

students4 Unweighted 

percent 

Weighted 

percent 

 All students 109,210 101,010 89.8 91.0 

Institutional level 

 Less-than-2-year 13,320 11,330 92.6 93.6 

 2-year 41,510 37,290 83.1 84.6 

 4-year non-doctorate-granting 21,450 20,550 94.0 94.8 

 4-year doctorate-granting 32,930 31,840 94.1 94.7 

Institutional control 

 Public 71,030 65,540 87.0 89.2 

 Private not-for-profit 22,730 21,660 95.3 96.1 

 Private for-profit 15,460 13,820 95.0 96.1 

Type of institution 

 Public less-than-2-year 3,180 2,580 84.2 90.6 

 Public 2-year 36,300 32,450 81.3 83.9 

 Public 4-year non-doctorate-granting 9,200 8,880 91.9 93.3 

 Public 4-year doctorate-granting 22,350 21,620 93.7 94.2 

 Private not-for-profit less-than-4-year 3,060 2,770 94.3 94.6 

 Private not-for-profit 4-year non-doctorate 9,740 9,300 96.3 96.9 

 Private not-for-profit 4-year doctorate-granting 9,930 9,590 94.5 95.4 

 Private for-profit less-than-2-year 9,270 8,030 94.9 94.3 

 Private for-profit 2-year or more 6,190 5,790 95.0 96.7 

Student type 

 Total undergraduates 97,090 89,480 89.3 90.3 

 Potential FTB 49,410 44,670 91.2 91.4 

 Other undergraduates 47,680 44,810 87.3 90.0 

 Graduate/first professional 12,120 11,530 94.2 95.1 

1

 A responding student is defined as any eligible student for whom sufficient data were obtained from one or more sources, 

including student interview, institutional records, and the Department of Education’s Central Processing System (CPS). 2

 Percents are based on the eligible students within the row under consideration. 3

 Institutional characteristics are based on data from the sampling frame which was formed from the 2000–01 and 2002–03 

Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System (IPEDS). Student type is based on data from the sampling frames which 

were the enrollment lists received from participating institutions. 4

 Ineligible students were identified during the student interview or from institutional records if student eligibility was not 

determined from a student interview. 

NOTE: Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. FTB = first-time beginner. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 2004 National Postsecondary Student 

Aid Study (NPSAS:04). 

 

30 The weighted response rates can be interpreted as the estimated percentages of students in the population that 

would have responded, if asked. 

31 When the weighted response rates differ from the unweighted response rates, it is due to the nonresponding 

students having, on average, a lower or higher weight than the responding students. 
Chapter 3. Data Collection Outcomes 

52 

3.2.2 State Samples 

Counts of eligible students for the representative undergraduate state samples are shown 

in table 11, by state and type of institution. Table 11 also shows that the unweighted and 

weighted response rates (among eligible students) varied by state and type of institution. The 

weighted response rates range from 61 percent to 100 percent. 

Table 11. Numbers of NPSAS:04 sampled, eligible, and responding students and response 

rates, by institutional characteristics: state samples 

Responding undergraduate students1,2

Institutional characteristics3

Sampled 

undergraduate 

students 

Eligible 

undergraduate 

students4

Unweighted 

percent 

Weighted

percent 

California 

 Public 2-year 5,390 4,800 59.4 64.5 

 Public 4-year 1,390 1,400 90.2 91.3 

 Private not-for-profit 4-year 840 820 90.1 91.1 

 

Connecticut 

 Public 2-year 610 570 73.9 77.5 

 Public 4-year 520 500 99.0 99.1 

 Private not-for-profit 4-year 490 480 95.4 95.5 

 

Delaware 

 Public 2-year 900 840 55.0 60.6 

 Public 4-year 610 590 91.6 98.3 

 Private not-for-profit 4-year 540 530 85.7 93.0 

 

Georgia 

 Public 2-year 2,110 1,930 90.5 93.4 

 Public 4-year 940 910 95.4 94.9 

 Private not-for-profit 4-year 470 450 98.2 98.2 

 

Illinois 

 Public 2-year 1,950 1,640 86.4 88.8 

 Public 4-year 740 730 95.2 95.5 

 Private not-for-profit 4-year 740 710 95.9 96.5 

 

Indiana 

 Public 2-year 410 350 98.3 98.4 

 Public 4-year 930 920 92.8 95.1 

 Private not-for-profit 4-year 560 540 98.3 98.5 

 

Minnesota 

 Public 2-year 1,430 1,320 60.0 61.0 

 Public 4-year 630 620 79.5 78.4 

 Private not-for-profit 4-year 510 500 97.8 98.8 

 

Nebraska 

 Public 2-year 450 390 97.0 98.2 

 Public 4-year 520 510 95.7 94.4 

 Private not-for-profit 4-year 340 330 100.0 100.0 

 

New York 

 Public 2-year 2,200 2,030 83.6 87.1 

 Public 4-year 1,490 1,450 85.2 84.7 

 Private not-for-profit 4-year 1,660 1,590 96.6 96.8 

 

Oregon 

 Public 2-year 1,040 920 90.7 92.8 

 Public 4-year 640 630 97.1 97.7 

 Private not-for-profit 4-year 340 330 98.2 99.4 

See notes at end of table. 
Chapter 3. Data Collection Outcomes 

53 

Table 11. Numbers of NPSAS:04 sampled, eligible, and responding students and response 

rates, by institutional characteristics: state samples—Continued 

Responding undergraduate students1,2

Institutional characteristics3

Sampled 

undergraduate 

students 

Eligible 

undergraduate 

students4

Unweighted 

percent 

Weighted

percent 

Tennessee 

 Public 2-year 1,120 960 89.2 90.5 

 Public 4-year 790 760 90.9 93.3 

 Private not-for-profit 4-year 390 390 96.4 95.3 

 

Texas 

 Public 2-year 3,170 2,800 88.2 90.8 

 Public 4-year 1,620 1,560 95.7 96.0 

 Private not-for-profit 4-year 640 620 98.6 98.4 1

 A responding student is defined as any eligible student for whom sufficient data were obtained from one or more 

sources, including: student interview, institutional records, and the Department of Education’s Central Processing 

System (CPS). 

2

 Percents are based on the eligible students within the row under consideration. 3

 Institutional characteristics are based on data from the sampling frame which was formed from the 2000–01 and 

2002–03 Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System (IPEDS). 4

 Ineligible students were identified during the student interview or from institutional records if student eligibility was 

not determined from a student interview. 

NOTE: Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 2004 National Postsecondary 

Student Aid Study (NPSAS:04). 

3.3 Data Collection Results, by Source 

Chapter 2 described the various sources of data for NPSAS:04 and the methods through 

which they were obtained. The following section presents the results of each stage of data 

collection. This section presents results for individual data sources. An individual sample 

member’s status as a study respondent was determined by the amount of data across sources (see 

Section 3.2 for a definition of the requirements for study respondent classification). Thus, rates 

presented for the following data sources do not correspond to study response rates. 

3.3.1 Student Record Matching 

Central Processing System (CPS) 

Table 12 summarizes the results of matching and downloading student data from the U.S. 

Department of Education’s CPS. The CPS contains data provided to the U.S. Department of 

Education by students and their families when they complete the Free Application for Federal 

Student Aid (FAFSA). Therefore, successful matching to CPS can only occur for sample 

members who are federal student financial aid applicants. 

The initial CPS matching process began after the student sample had been selected for an 

institution, but before student record (CADE) data collection activities had begun. This matching 

was against the CPS data for the 2003–04 financial aid year. Since data obtained from CPS were 

relevant in determining study response status, match rates are presented for all eligible sample 

members for whom a social security number was available. As shown in table 12, not all sample 

students were submitted to the CPS for matching. This was primarily because student Social 

Security numbers and last names were not obtained from some institutions. Following CADE, a 

number of student cases that had not previously matched successfully to CPS were resubmitted, 
Chapter 3. Data Collection Outcomes 

54 

based on either a newly obtained Social Security number or the evidence in the institution 

records that the student had, in fact, applied for federal student aid for the 2003–04 academic 

year. 

The overall matching rate for the 2003–04 CPS data was 60 percent. Match rates varied 

by type of institution, ranging from 50 percent for public 2-year institutions to 84 percent for 

private for-profit 2-year institutions. 

Approximately 35 percent of graduate/first-professional students matched to the 2003–04 

CPS. Also, 64 percent of undergraduate students matched: of these, 69 percent were first-year 

undergraduates and 59 percent were other undergraduates. Nearly all institutions require 

undergraduate aid applicants to file a FAFSA in order to determine their eligibility for federal 

Pell Grants, federal campus-based aid, and federal loans as part of the undergraduate aid 

packaging process. Graduate/first-professional students are not usually required to file a FAFSA 

unless they are specifically applying for federal loans, the only type of federal aid generally 

available to graduate students. Graduate students often apply directly through their institution or 

department for fellowships and assistantships, which are usually not need-based and do not 

require the completion of the federal financial aid forms on which CPS matching is based. 

The NPSAS:04 sample students were also matched to the 2004–05 CPS files. It was 

expected that fewer sample students would successfully match to the 2004–05 CPS files, 

primarily because some students may have completed their postsecondary education during the 

2004–05 NPSAS year. Table 12 shows that, overall, 63 percent of sample students matched to 

either CPS 2003–04 or CPS 2004–05, and 31 percent matched to both data files. 

National Student Loan Data System (NSLDS) 

Results of the matching to NSLDS loan and Pell Grant files are shown in table 13. 

Results presented are based only on study respondents since NSLDS data were not required to 

determine study response status. Successful matching to NSLDS can only occur for sample 

members who have received federal loans and/or Pell Grants. NSLDS files are historical, thus, 

information about receipt of such loans and grants was available not only for the NPSAS study 

year, but also for prior years (where applicable). Therefore, table 13 shows historical match rates 

for eligible study respondents, which does not necessarily mean that the match was for the 

current NPSAS year. 

In total, 48,840 study respondents (56 percent of those submitted) were matched to the 

historical loan database. NSLDS match rates ranged from 34 percent for public less-than-2-year 

institutions, to 87 percent for private for-profit 2-year or more institutions. 

Pell Grant matches were obtained for 39,240 study respondents (45 percent of those 

submitted). The Pell match rate ranged from 27 percent for private not-for profit 4-year 

doctorate-granting institutions to 79 percent for private for-profit less-than-2-year institutions. 
55 

Table 12. Results of Central Processing System (CPS) matching for 2003–04 and 2004–05, by institutional chara

type: 2004 

Matched to 

2003–04 

Matched to 

2004–05 

Matched to 

both years 

Institutional characteristics and student type1 Eligible students2 Number3 Percent Number3 Percent Number3 Perce

All students 95,180 57,370 60.3 32,080 33.7 29,080 30

Institution level 

Less-than-2-year 10,250 8,130 79.3 2,690 26.3 2,570 25

2-year 34,110 18,770 55.0 10,810 31.7 9,230 27

4-non-doctorate-granting 19,710 13,900 70.5 8,570 43.5 8,130 414-year doctorate-granting 31,100 16,570 53.3 10,010 32.2 9,150 29

Institutional control 

Public 60,540 32,020 52.9 18,810 31.1 16,390 27

Private not-for-profit 21,020 14,000 66.6 8,540 40.6 8,100 38

Private for-profit 13,620 11,350 83.3 4,740 34.8 4,590 33

Type of institution 

Public less-than-2-year 2,120 1,370 64.6 520 24.5 460 21Public 2-year 29,010 14,460 49.9 8,540 29.5 7,040 24

Public 4-non-doctorate-granting 8,290 5,240 63.3 3,210 38.7 2,970 35Public 4-year doctorate-granting 21,120 10,950 51.8 6,540 31.0 5,920 28

Private not-for-profit 2-year or less 2,600 2,150 82.5 1,210 46.5 1,160 44Private not-for-profit 4-non-doctorate-granting 8,730 6,410 73.4 3,950 45.3 3,790 43Private not-for-profit 4-year doctorate-granting 9,690 5,440 56.2 3,380 34.8 3,150 32

Private for-profit less-than-2-year 7,530 6,260 83.2 1,970 26.1 1,900 25Private for profit 2-year or more 6,100 5,090 83.5 2,770 45.4 2,690 44

Student type 

Total undergraduate 84,190 53,490 63.5 29,990 35.6 27,220 32

FTB student 37,660 25,860 68.7 14,720 39.1 13,550 36

Other undergraduate 46,530 27,630 59.4 15,260 32.8 13,670 29

Graduate/first-professional 10,990 3,870 35.3 2,090 19.1 1,860 16

1 Both institutional and student classifications were verified to correct classification errors on the sampling frame. 2 Includes all eligible students for whom apparently legitimate Social Security numbers were obtained either before or during computer-a3 The number presented reflects the total number of matches of those submitted and may include students who were classified as study 

NOTE: Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. All percentages are unweighted and based on the number of eligible students 

consideration. FTB = first-time beginner. SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 2004 National Postsecondary Student Aid Study (NP
56 

Table 13. Results of National Student Loan Data System (NSLDS) matching, by institutional characteristics and 

Sent to NSLDS Matched to NSLDS loan1 

Institutional characteristics and student type2 Study respondents3 Number Percent4 Number Percent4 

All students 90,750 87,890 96.8 48,840 55.6 

Institution level 

Less-than-2-year 9,690 9,630 99.4 6,400 66.4 2-year 31,260 29,730 95.1 12,610 42.4 4-non-doctorate-granting 19,400 18,820 97.0 12,520 66.5 4-year doctorate-granting 30,400 29,710 97.7 17,320 58.3 

Institutional control 

Public 56,990 54,610 95.8 25,070 45.9 Private not-for-profit 20,630 20,250 98.1 13,050 64.4 Private for-profit 13,120 13,030 99.3 10,720 82.3 

Type of institution 

Public less-than-2-year 1,930 1,910 99.0 640 33.7 Public 2-year 26,320 24,830 94.3 8,740 35.2 Public 4-non-doctorate-granting 8,160 7,770 95.3 4,390 56.5 Public 4-year doctorate-granting 20,600 20,110 97.6 11,300 56.2 Private not-for-profit 2-year or less 2,570 2,500 97.3 1,370 54.6 Private not-for-profit 4-non-doctorate-granting 8,550 8,430 98.6 5,880 69.7 Private not-for-profit 4-year doctorate-granting 9,510 9,320 98.0 5,810 62.3 Private for-profit less-than-2-year 7,150 7,130 99.8 5,600 78.5 Private for profit 2-year or more 5,970 5,890 98.7 5,120 87.0 

Student type 

Total undergraduate 79,850 77,380 96.9 42,620 55.1 

FTB student 35,510 34,700 97.7 17,270 49.8 Other undergraduate 44,340 42,680 96.2 25,350 59.4 

Graduate/first-professional 10,890 10,510 96.5 6,230 59.2 

1 Matching was completed on historical files. 2 Both institutional and student classifications were verified to correct classification errors on the sampling frame. 3 Includes all study respondents for whom an apparently legitimate social security number was available. 4 Percentages are based on the number of eligible students within the row under consideration. 

NOTE: Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. FTB = first-time beginner. SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 2004 National Postsecondary Student Aid Study (NP
Chapter 3. Data Collection Outcomes 

57 

3.3.2 Outcomes of Student Record Abstraction 

As previously indicated, 1,360 of the 1,630 (84 percent) eligible sample institutions 

provided a student enrollment list that could be used for sample selection (see table 8). These 

institutions were therefore eligible to participate in the student record abstraction phase of the 

study referred to as CADE. NPSAS:04 included three abstraction methods for the student record 

data collection—self-CADE, field-CADE, and data-CADE. Table 14 shows the final data 

abstraction method for all institutions that completed CADE. 

Abstraction method 

Of the 1,300 institutions that provided student record data, the majority (66 percent) did 

so by self-CADE. Data-CADE was the next most common method, with 21 percent of CADE 

completions being submitted via electronic data files. Field data collectors performed the record 

abstraction from the remaining 13 percent of CADE completions. Compared to NPSAS:2000, 

the rate at which institutions opted for the data-CADE in NPSAS:04 was significantly higher: 21 

percent compared to 3 percent in NPSAS:2000 (Z = 12.27, p < 0.05). As was described earlier, 

student sample sizes were larger than in NPSAS:2000, making the data-CADE option more 

attractive. Data-CADE was also useful for institutional systems that provided data for students 

from multiple institutions. There was a corresponding decrease in the use of field-CADE from 

NPSAS:2000; 13 percent compared to 23 percent (Z = 6.0, p < 0.05). 

Table 14. Student record abstraction method: 2004 

Institutions providing CADE Total students1

CADE abstraction method Number Percent2 Number Percent2

Total 1,300 100.0 103,620 100.0 

Abstraction method 

Self-CADE 860 65.8 48,860 47.2 

Data-CADE 280 21.1 33,210 32.0 

Field-CADE 170 13.1 21,550 20.8 1

 The total represents the number of students sampled from institutions that completed computer-assisted data entry 

(CADE) and may include students who were classified as study nonrespondents. 2

 Percentage of total number of eligible institutions/students. 

NOTE: Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 2004 National Postsecondary 

Student Aid Study (NPSAS:04). 

CADE completion rates 

At the institution level, an institution was classified as having completed CADE if 

sufficient data were obtained for at least one sample student. Institution-level weighted and 

unweighted CADE completion rates are shown in Table 15. Overall, 96 percent (weighted) of the 

participating institutions (those that provided enrollment lists from which a student sample could 

be selected) completed CADE. 

A student record was considered to represent a CADE record “complete” if it had 

nonmissing data for any one or more of the following critical items: 
Chapter 3. Data Collection Outcomes 

58 

• received financial aid; 

• enrollment; 

• tuition; 

• degree program; and 

• race. 

Table 15. Institutional-level computer-assisted data entry (CADE) completion rates, by 

institutional characteristics and abstraction method: 2004 

Institutions providing CADE 

Institutional characteristics and abstraction method1 Institutions 

providing lists Number 

Unweighted 

Percent2 Weighted 

Percent 

Total 1,360 1,300 95.4 96.3 

Institutional level 

Less-than-2-year 200 190 94.0 94.0 

2-year 410 390 95.3 96.9 

4-year non-doctorate-granting 380 360 95.8 96.5 

4-year doctorate-granting 380 360 95.8 95.6 

Institutional control 

Public 680 660 96.9 96.2 

Private not-for-profit 450 430 94.3 96.8 

Private for-profit 230 210 93.0 94.5 

Type of institution 

Public less-than-2-year 50 50 100.0 100.0 

Public 2-year 310 310 98.1 97.2 

Public 4-year nondoctorate-granting 110 110 96.5 96.4 

Public 4-year doctorate-granting 200 190 94.5 94.8 

Private not-for-profit 2-year or less 60 50 81.0 82.7 

Private not-for-profit 4-year non-doctorate granting 220 210 95.8 97.0 

Private not-for-profit 4-year doctorate granting 180 170 97.2 97.4 

Private for-profit less than-2-year 130 120 93.0 93.1 

Private for profit 2-year or more 100 90 93.0 95.0 

Abstraction method 

None chosen 10 † † †

Self-CADE 910 860 94.5 93.8 

Data-CADE 280 280 99.3 99.0 

Field-CADE 170 170 97.7 97.5 

† Not applicable. 

1

 Institutional characteristics were verified (where possible) to correct classification errors on the sample frame. 2

 Percentage of institutions providing lists. 

NOTE: Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 2004 National Postsecondary 

Student Aid Study (NPSAS:04). 

Completion rates ranged from 94 percent (weighted) for institutions choosing self-CADE 

to 99 percent for data-CADE. CADE completion rates varied by type of institution, ranging from 

83 percent from private not-for-profit 2-year or less institutions to 100 percent for public lessthan-2-year institution. 
Chapter 3. Data Collection Outcomes 

59 

Student-level CADE completion rates are presented in table 16 by type of institution and 

student type. Overall, the student-level CADE completion rate (the percentage of study-eligible 

cases for whom a completed CADE record was obtained) was 92 percent (weighted). Weighted 

student-level completion rates ranged from 71 percent for private not-for-profit 2-year or less 

institutions, to 96 percent for public less-than-2-year institutions. Weighted completion rates by 

student type were about 92 percent for undergraduate and 93 percent for graduate and firstprofessional students. 

Table 16. Student-level computer-assisted data entry (CADE) completion rates, by institutional 

characteristics and student type: 2004 

CADE completes1

Institutional characteristics and student type2 Eligible 

students3 Number 

Unweighted 

percent 

Weighted 

percent 

Total 101,010 88,920 88.0 91.7 

Institutional level 

Less-than-2-year 10,330 8,800 85.2 87.8 

2-year 37,750 32,150 85.2 88.9 

4-year non-doctorate-granting 20,630 18,530 89.8 94.4 

4-year doctorate-granting 32,310 29,440 91.1 93.7 

Institutional control 

Public 65,540 58,400 89.1 91.6 

Private not-for-profit 21,660 18,920 87.3 93.2 

Private for-profit 13,820 11,600 84.0 89.2 

Type of institution 

Public less-than-2-year 2,150 2,020 93.9 95.9 

Public 2-year 32,540 28,580 87.8 89.6 

Public 4-year non-doctorate-granting 8,890 7,900 88.9 94.8 

Public 4-year doctorate-granting 21,960 19,910 90.6 93.2 

Private not-for-profit 2-year or less 2,730 1,700 62.2 70.8 

Private not-for-profit 4-year non-doctorate granting 8,880 7,990 89.9 93.1 

Private not-for-profit 4-year doctorate granting 10,050 9,240 91.9 94.7 

Private for-profit less than-2-year 7,550 6,350 84.1 87.0 

Private for profit 2-year or more 6,260 5,250 83.8 90.2 

Student type 

Total undergraduate 89,460 78,590 87.9 91.5 

 Potential FTB 39,440 34,590 87.7 90.5 

 Other undergraduates 50,020 44,000 88.0 92.0 

Graduate/first professional 11,560 10,340 89.4 93.0 1 Eligible students who met the criteria for qualification as a CADE completion, which required an indication of 

financial aid receipt, enrollment status, tuition, degree program, or race in the CADE instrument. Numbers presented 

here may include students who were classified as study nonrespondents. 

2

 Both institutional characteristics and student classifications were verified (where possible) to correct classification 

errors on the sample frame. 

3

 Students determined to be eligible in CADE and/or the student interview. 

NOTE: Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. FTB = first-time beginner. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 2004 National Postsecondary 

Student Aid Study (NPSAS:04). 
Chapter 3. Data Collection Outcomes 

60 

3.3.3 Student Interview Completion 

Locating 

When dealing with a mobile group such as the NPSAS:04 student sample, locating can be 

one of the more difficult tasks. A variety of approaches were used during NPSAS:04 to locate 

and interview sampled students. These approaches included the use of an initial mailing to all 

students, follow-up letters and e-mails to nonrespondents, telephone tracing (calling local and 

permanent numbers as well as any other numbers obtained during the course of contacting), and 

intensive tracing (i.e., using consumer databases, Web searches, and a variety of directories). 

As shown in table 17, of the 101,010 eligible sample members, 79 percent were 

successfully located. The highest location rates were for students attending public 4-year 

doctorate-granting institutions (86 percent), while the lowest location rates were among those 

from private for-profit less-than-2-year institutions (66 percent) (χ2 = 2,506, p < 0.001). Graduate 

students proved the easiest group to find, with 88 percent of these students being located, 

compared to 77 percent of other undergraduates, and 80 percent of FTB undergraduates (χ2 

= 

684, p < 0.001). 

Table 17. Student locating, by institutional characteristics and student type: 2004 

Located 

Institutional characteristics and student type1 Total Number Percent 

 Total 101,010 80,050 79.2 

Institutional level 

 Less-than-2-year 10,330 7,030 68.0 

 2-year 37,750 28,210 74.7 

 4-non-doctorate-granting 20,630 17,130 83.0 

 4-year doctorate-granting 32,310 27,690 85.7 

Institutional control 

 Public 65,540 52,360 79.9 

 Private, not-for-profit 21,660 18,140 83.7 

 Private, for-profit 13,820 9,550 69.2 

Type of institution 

 Public less-than-2-year 2,150 1,650 76.7 

 Public 2-year 32,540 24,540 75.4 

 Public 4-non-doctorate-granting 8,890 7,370 82.9 

 Public 4-year doctorate-granting 21,960 18,800 85.6 

 Private not-for-profit 2-year-or-less 2,730 1,930 70.5 

 Private not-for-profit 4-non-doctorate-granting 8,880 7,580 85.4 

 Private not-for-profit 4-year doctorate-granting 10,050 8,640 85.9 

 Private for-profit less-than-2-year 7,550 4,950 65.6 

 Private for-profit 2-year-or-more 6,260 4,600 73.5 

Student type 

 Total undergraduate 89,460 69,900 78.1 

 FTB student 39,440 31,430 79.7 

 Other undergraduate 50,020 38,470 76.9 

 Graduate/first-professional 11,560 10,150 87.8 1

 Both institutional and student classifications were verified to correct classification errors on the sampling frame. 

NOTE: Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. Excludes 8,200 cases determined to be ineligible for the study. 

FTB = first-time beginner. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 2004 National Postsecondary Student 

Aid Study (NPSAS:04). 
Chapter 3. Data Collection Outcomes 

61 

Table 18 presents the results of matching to the various batch searches used to obtain 

locating information for sample members (described in chapter 2). Telematch was the most 

successful, with 50 percent of cases returning address information. The National Change of 

Address (NCOA) system and FastData returned locating information on 9 percent and 6 percent, 

respectively, of the cases submitted. 

Table 18. Batch processing record match rates, by tracing source: 2004 

Method of tracing Number of records sent Number of records matched Percent matched1

 Total 240,750 65,060 27.0 

 

NCOA 109,210 9,360 8.6 

Telematch 109,210 54,390 49.8 

FastData 22,330 1,310 5.9 

1

 Percent is based on the number of records sent for batch tracing. Since records were sent to multiple tracing 

sources, multiple record matches were possible. 

NOTE: NCOA = National Change of Address. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 2004 National Postsecondary 

Student Aid Study (NPSAS:04) 

Intensive tracing during data collection 

Intensive tracing efforts were required for cases in which no interview was obtained via 

self-administration nor did the preloaded computer-assisted telephone interview (CATI) locating 

information result in contact with the sample member. These cases were assigned to RTI Call 

Center Services’ (CCS) Tracing Services for intensive centralized tracing, utilizing searches of 

public and proprietary databases, the Web, and a variety of information directories. Overall, onefourth (26 percent) of eligible sample members required intensive tracing efforts (table 19). 

Intensive tracing varied by institution type, ranging from 17 percent for private not-for-profit 4-

year doctorate-granting institutions, to 38 percent for private for-profit less than 2-year 

institutions. Intensive tracing also varied by student type: 19 percent for graduate and firstprofessional students, and 27 percent for undergraduate students. 
Chapter 3. Data Collection Outcomes 

62 

Table 19. Students requiring intensive tracing procedures, by institutional characteristics and 

student type: 2004 

Cases requiring intensive tracing efforts 

Institutional characteristics and student type1 Total Number Percent 

 Total 101,100 25,940 25.7 

 

Institutional level 

 Less-than-2-year 10,350 3,730 36.0 

 2-year 37,780 11,920 31.5 

 4-non-doctorate-granting 20,640 4,350 21.1 

 4-year doctorate-granting 32,320 5,940 18.4 

 

Institutional control 

 Public 65,590 16,950 25.8 

 Private, not-for-profit 21,670 4,240 19.6 

 Private, for-profit 13,840 4,750 34.3 

 

Type of institution 

 Public less-than-2-year 2,150 630 29.2 

 Public 2-year 32,570 10,260 31.5 

 Public 4-year non-doctorate-granting 8,890 1,910 21.4 

 Public 4-year doctorate-granting 21,970 4,160 18.9 

 Private not-for-profit 2-year-or-less 7,570 2,870 37.9 

 Private not-for-profit 4-year non-doctorate-granting 8,880 1,680 18.9 

 Private not-for-profit 4-year doctorate-granting 10,060 1,740 17.3 

 Private for-profit less-than-2-year 7,570 2,870 37.9 

 Private for-profit 2-year-or-more 6,270 1,880 30.0 

 

Student type 

 Total undergraduate 89,540 23,780 26.6 

 FTB student 39,490 10,170 25.8 

 Other undergraduate 50,050 13,610 27.2 

 Graduate/first-professional 11,560 2,160 18.7 1

 Both institutional and student classifications were verified to correct classification errors on the sampling frame. 

NOTE: Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. Excludes 8,200 cases determined to be ineligible for the 

study. FTB = first-time beginning. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 2004 National Postsecondary 

Student Aid Study (NPSAS:04). 

Table 20 show that of the 25,940 eligible cases requiring intensive tracing, 10,870 (42 

percent) were ultimately located, and approximately 30 percent of them were interviewed. 

Table 20. Locate and interview rates, by intensive tracing efforts: 2004 

Located Interviewed 

Total Number Percent Number Percent 

Weighted 

percent 

Total 101,100 80,090 79.2 62,220 61.5 69.7 

Intensive tracing required 25,940 10,880 41.9 7,850 30.3 77.2 

No intensive tracing required 75,160 69,220 92.1 54,370 72.3 42.5 

NOTE: Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. Excludes 8,200 cases determined to be ineligible for the 

study. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 2004 National Postsecondary 

Student Aid Study (NPSAS:04). 
Chapter 3. Data Collection Outcomes 

63 

3.3.4 Student Locating and Response Rate Summary 

Overall locating and interviewing outcomes are shown in figure 9. Of the 109,210 sample 

members, 80,050 (73 percent) were located, 20,960 (19 percent) were not located, and 8,200 (8 

percent) were located but determined to be ineligible for the study. Of the located sample 

members, 78 percent completed either a full interview, an abbreviated interview used to capture 

critical information from students with a high probability of nonresponse, a hardcopy Spanish 

interview or completed enough of the questionnaire to be considered a partial interview.32 

Figure 9. NPSAS:04 locating and interview outcomes 

NOTE: Detail may not sum to totals due to rounding. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 2004 National Postsecondary 

Student Aid Study (NPSAS:04). 

Table 21 presents student interview completion rates among eligible sample members by 

institutional characteristics and student type. The weighted response rate for the student data 

interview was 71 percent. Weighted student interview completion rates ranged from 49 percent 

for private-for-profit less-than-2-year institutions, to 74 percent for 4-year doctorate-granting 

institutions (public and private, not-for-profit). Weighted completion rates by student type were 

72 percent for undergraduates and 75 percent for graduate and first-professional students. 

 

32 Students who completed the enrollment section of the questionnaire but did not complete the entire survey were 

considered partial interviews. 
Chapter 3. Data Collection Outcomes 

64 

Table 21. Student interview completion results, by institutional characteristics and student 

type: 2004 

Completed interviews1

Institutional characteristics and student type2 Eligible 

students3 Number 

Unweighted 

percent 

Weighted 

percent 

Total 99,450 62,220 62.6 70.6 

Institutional level 

Less-than-2-year 10,210 4,830 47.3 50.2 

2-year 37,130 20,790 56.0 69.3 

4-non doctorate-granting 20,340 13,840 68.0 70.8 

4-year doctorate-granting 31,770 22,760 71.6 73.9 

Institutional control 

Public 64,520 40,620 63.0 71.3 

Private, not-for-profit 21,290 14,620 68.7 71.8 

Private, for-profit 13,640 6,970 51.1 60.4 

Type of institution 

Public less-than-2 year 2,130 1,200 56.4 61.6 

Public 2-year 31,990 18,000 56.3 69.8 

Public 4-non-doctorate-granting 8,760 5,890 67.2 71.9 

Public 4-year doctorate-granting 21,640 15,530 71.8 73.8 

Private not-for-profit 2-year or less 2,690 1,350 50.3 56.3 

Private not-for-profit 4-non-doctorate-granting 8,760 6,250 71.3 70.7 

Private not-for profit 4-year doctorate-granting 9,840 7,030 71.4 74.0 

Private for-profit less than 2-year 7,470 3,420 45.8 48.6 

Private for-profit 2-year or more 6,170 3,550 57.5 65.7 

Student type 

Total undergraduate 88,030 53,680 61.0 71.9 

FTB student 38,850 25,030 64.4 77.4 

Other undergraduate 49,180 28,650 58.3 66.3 

Graduate/first professional 11,420 8,540 74.8 75.1 1 Eligible students who met the criteria for qualification as a student interview completion, which required completing 

at least a partial interview. 

2

 Both institutional and student classifications were verified to correct classification errors on the sampling frame. 3

 Excludes 8,200 cases determined to be ineligible for the study and 1,560 cases who were either deceased, 

unavailable for the duration of the survey, out of the country, incapable/incapacitated, institutionalized/incarcerated, 

had no phone, or were hearing impaired. 

NOTE: Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. FTB = first-time beginner. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 2004 National Postsecondary 

Student Aid Study (NPSAS:04). 

As was described in chapter 2, data collection notifications were sent to all sample 

members, inviting them to participate by completing the web-based self-administered interview. 

Sample members were given 4 weeks to complete the interview, during which time e-mail 

reminders were sent to cases for whom we had an e-mail address. After the 4-week period, 

outbound telephone interviewing began. However, sample members were always encouraged to 

complete the self-administered interview at their convenience. 
Chapter 3. Data Collection Outcomes 

65 

Completion mode for student interviews is presented in table 22. Among the 62,220 

completed student interviews, 28 percent (weighted) were completed via self-administration 

during the first 4 weeks after notification. Fifty-three percent of completed student interviews 

were conducted with telephone interviewers, and the remaining 19 percent were completed via 

self-administration after the early incentive period had expired. 

Table 22. Student interview completion mode: 2004 

Completed interviews 

Number Unweighted percent Weighted percent 

Total 62,220 100.0 100.0 

 

Self-administered 28,710 46.1 46.7 

Self-administered: early response period 17,100 27.5 27.5 

Self-administered: with prompting 11,610 18.7 19.2 

Interviewer-administered 33,510 53.9 53.3 

NOTE: Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 2004 National Postsecondary 

Student Aid Study (NPSAS:04). 

3.3.5 Conversion of Nonrespondents 

As described earlier, all sample members were invited to participate in the student 

interview. Those who did so within the first 4 weeks were offered an incentive. Following the 

initial 4-week period, data collection continued with telephone prompting, and no offer of 

incentive. Once cases were identified as nonrespondents, additional mailings and e-mail prompts 

were used in conjunction with incentives to encourage participation in NPSAS:04. Letters for 

each mailing contained the same general information but were tailored to the type of 

nonrespondent (e.g., refusal, hard to reach cases, etc.). (See appendix C for materials sent to the 

sample members.) Letters, e-mails, and subsequent telephone prompts offered respondents a 

monetary incentive for completing the interview. 

Refusal conversion letters were sent on a flow basis to sample members who initially 

refused to participate in the study. These letters were tailored to address the typical concerns 

expressed by those refusing to participate. In all, 11,840 students were sent a refusal letter and 

9,320 students were sent an e-mail message containing the same information as the letter. Of the 

22,620 eligible students identified as refusals (either by the sample member or someone else), 

8,270 were interviewed (37 percent). 

Another letter was tailored for use with nonrespondents who did not actively refuse to 

participate, e.g., those for whom 20 or more call attempts had been made, but an interview had 

not been completed. In all, 52,930 students were sent a nonresponse letter and 38,060 students 

were sent an e-mail. Of the 50,070 eligible students identified as nonrespondents, 19,480 were 

interviewed (39 percent). 

Approximately 2 weeks before the end of the data collection period, all nonrespondents 

(refusals and nonrefusals alike) were sent a final mailing and/or e-mail asking for their 

participation. Of the 40,950 eligible students that were sent the end-of-study letter or e-mail, 

9,070 (22 percent) were ultimately interviewed. A smaller group of respondents (6,890) were 

sent a final request for participation via a postcard. Of the 6,670 eligible students that were sent 

the end-of-study postcard, 2,720 (41 percent) were ultimately interviewed. 
Chapter 3. Data Collection Outcomes 

66 

3.4 Completeness of Data Records among Study Respondents 

As discussed in section 3.2, a study respondent is defined as any eligible student for 

whom sufficient data were obtained from one or more sources. The sources used to define study 

response status include institutional records, student interview, and the Department of 

Education’s CPS. The completeness of data records across sources among study respondents is 

presented in table 23. In addition to the three sources used to determine the study respondents, 

NSLDS loan and Federal Pell Grant data are also included in the table. Like CPS, these sources 

are used to supplement the institutional record and student interview data. 

In total, 92 percent (weighted) of the study respondents have student record data from the 

NPSAS institution (CADE data). The percentage of study respondents who have student 

interview data is 70 percent. Additionally, 52 percent of study respondents had a federal aid 

application for the 2003–04 academic year in the CPS database. The percentage of study 

respondents who matched to the NSLDS loan database for the 2003–04 academic year is 34 

percent. Those that matched to the NSLDS Federal Pell Grant database for the same year is 23 

percent. 
67 

Table 23. Percent of student respondents with data, by institutional characteristics, student type, and source: 

Student record percent1 Interview percent2 CPS percent3

NSLDS loans 

Percent7

Institutional characteristics and student type5

Number of 

responding 

students6

Unweighted Weighted Un- weighted Weighted Un- weighted Weighted Un- weighted Weigh

Total 90,750 90.2 91.7 68.5 69.7 62.7 52.4 37.7 3

Institutional level 

Less-than-2-year 9,690 87.6 87.8 49.8 49.6 83.3 69.9 44.5 4

2-year 31,260 87.4 88.9 66.3 68.5 59.1 43.1 24.3 14-year non-doctorate-granting 19,400 91.7 94.4 71.3 70.0 71.2 63.0 51.5 44-year doctorate-granting 30,400 92.8 93.7 74.8 72.8 54.4 55.0 40.4 4

Institutional control 

Public 56,990 91.3 91.6 71.1 70.5 55.5 46.8 28.2 2Private not-for-profit 20,630 89.2 93.2 70.8 70.8 67.7 62.5 49.0 5Private for-profit 13,120 86.9 89.2 53.1 59.8 86.0 82.5 61.2 7

Type of institution 

Public less than-2-year 1,930 94.6 95.9 62.1 60.6 71.1 34.1 14.9 1Public 2-year 26,320 90.5 89.6 68.2 69.0 53.9 40.5 17.3 1Public 4-year nondoctorategranting 8,160 90.8 94.8 72.2 71.1 63.2 55.8 40.0 3Public 4-year doctorate-granting 20,600 92.2 93.2 75.4 72.9 53.0 53.2 38.6 4Private not-for-profit 2-year or 

less 2,570 64.9 70.8 52.5 55.6 83.1 77.4 41.0 4

Private not-for-profit 4-year nondoctorate granting 8,550 91.2 93.1 73.0 69.8 74.8 65.6 56.7 5Private not-for-profit 4-year 

doctorate granting 9,510 93.9 94.7 73.8 72.7 57.1 58.1 44.2 4

Private for-profit less than-2-

year 7,150 87.3 87.0 47.9 48.1 86.8 76.1 54.9 5

Private for profit 2-year or more 5,970 86.3 90.2 59.3 65.0 85.2 85.4 68.6 7

Student type 

Total undergraduate 79,850 90.0 91.5 67.1 69.0 66.4 53.8 38.7 3

Potential FTB 35,510 89.7 90.5 70.4 76.6 72.1 59.0 38.9 3Other undergraduates 44,340 90.2 92.0 64.5 65.4 61.9 51.3 38.5 3

Graduate/first professional 10,890 91.6 93.0 78.3 74.5 35.5 43.0 30.2 3

1 Percent of study respondents who met the criteria for qualification as a computer-assisted data entry (CADE) completion. 2 Percent of study respondents who met the criteria for qualification as a student interview completion. 3 Percent of study respondents who matched to CPS, which contains federal aid application (FAFSA) data. 4 Percent of study respondents who matched to the National Student Loan Data System (NSLDS) for loans and Pell Grants during the 2003–04 academic year. 5 Both institutional characteristics and student classifications were verified (where possible) to correct classification errors on the sample frame. 6 A responding student is defined as any eligible student for whom sufficient data were obtained from one or more sources, including: student interview, institutional 

Education's Central Processing System (CPS). 

7 The small percentage of matched graduate and first-professional study respondents were undergraduates at some time during the year and as such were eligible 

year. NOTE: Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. FTB = first-time beginner. SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 2004 National Postsecondary Student Aid Study (NPSAS:04). 
Chapter 3. Data Collection Outcomes 

68 

This page left intentionally blank. 
69 

Chapter 4 

Evaluation of Field Operations and Data Quality 

Evaluation of study methodology and procedures, as well as of study outcomes, were 

planned and conducted throughout the course of the 2004 National Postsecondary Student Aid 

Study (NPSAS:04). The results of these quantitative and qualitative analyses provide information 

pertaining to the efficacy of study data and are also useful in planning for subsequent waves of 

NPSAS. 

4.1 Enrollment List Collection 

4.1.1 Early Contacting Activities 

Making early contact with institutions was an important part of the design of NPSAS:04. 

The scheduled release of data required an accelerated data collection schedule, which required 

that enrollment lists were received in time to allow for sampling, student interviewing, and data 

processing to be completed by December 2004. As such, much focus was devoted to the 

activities of institutional early contacting. 

Table 24 presents the flow of enrollment list receipt in NPSAS:9633 and NPSAS:04. The 

1,360 lists received by July 2004 provided a sufficiently large and representative student sample 

to allow list collection to end. The flow of list receipt was very similar for both studies. 

Table 24. Cumulative flow of enrollment list receipt: 1996 and 2004 

Cumulative percentage of lists received 

Month NPSAS:96 NPSAS:04 

1 17.7 12.5 

2 42.2 38.4 

3 63.6 58.8 

4 85.1 75.4 

5 95.9 88.7 

6 98.8 98.2 

7 100.0 100.0 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics,1996 National Postsecondary Student Aid Study 

(NPSAS:96), and 2004 National Postsecondary Student Aid Study (NPSAS:04). 

4.1.2 Institutional Participation 

Institutional participation was evaluated for potential effects of prior NPSAS 

participation. Summary results of these analyses are shown in table 25. Among eligible 

institutions, the NPSAS:04 enrollment list provision rate among the 980 institutions that had 

previously participated in NPSAS was 84 percent, which is not statistically different than the rate 

among institutions that had not previously participated (83 percent; χ2 = 0.18, p > 0.05). 

 

33 NPSAS:96 is used for this comparison because it was the most recent study from which the BPS cohort identified. 
Chapter 4. Evaluation of Field Operations and Data Quality 

70 

Table 25. Institutional NPSAS:04 enrollment list participation, by prior NPSAS participation 

No prior NPSAS participation Participated at least once 

Provided lists Provided lists 

Institutional characteristics1 Eligible 

institutions Number Number Percent2 Number Number Percent3 

All institutions 1,630 650 540 83.1 980 830 83.8 

 

Institution level 

Less-than-2-year 240 170 150 85.9 70 50 77.9 

2-year 480 240 200 83.9 240 200 86.0 

4-year non-doctorate-granting 460 180 150 81.0 270 230 84.6 

4-year doctorate-granting 460 50 40 77.4 410 340 83.1 

 

Institutional control 

Public 800 240 200 85.0 560 480 84.9 

Private not-for-profit 560 210 170 80.3 350 280 81.8 

Private for-profit 270 200 160 83.7 80 70 85.5 

 

Type of institution 

Public less than-2-year 70 40 30 85.0 30 20 74.1 

Public 2-year 370 170 140 85.7 200 170 84.1 

Public 4-year non-doctorategranting 

140 20 20 79.2 110 100 85.6 

Public 4-year doctorategranting 

230 10 10 87.5 220 190 86.5 

Private not-for-profit 2-year or 

less 

70 40 40 85.7 30 30 96.4 

Private not-for-profit 4-year 

non-doctorate-granting 

260 130 100 79.7 140 110 83.1 

Private not-for-profit 4-year 

doctorate-granting 

230 40 30 76.7 180 140 78.6 

Private for-profit less than-2-

year 

150 120 100 86.4 30 30 79.4 

Private for profit 2-year or 

more 

120 80 60 79.5 40 40 90.5 

1

 Institutional classifications were verified by the institutions to correct classification errors on the sampling frame. 2

 Percents are based on the count of eligible institutions with no prior NPSAS participation within the row under 

consideration. 

3

 Percents are based on the count of eligible institutions with prior NPSAS participation within the row under 

consideration. 

NOTE: Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 2004 National Postsecondary 

Student Aid Study (NPSAS:04). 

Institutional participation was also examined in terms of the 2000 Carnegie classification 

categories, as shown in table 26. Table 27 shows the number of historically Black colleges and 

universities (HBCUs) participating in the current and prior NPSAS rounds. 
Chapter 4. Evaluation of Field Operations and Data Quality 

71 

Table 26. Distribution of participating NPSAS:04 institutions, by 2000 Carnegie classification 

Carnegie institutional classification (2000) Number Percent 

All institutions 1,360 100.0 

Doctorate-granting/research extensive 130 9.5 

Doctorate-granting/research intensive 90 6.9 

Master’s I 180 13.0 

Master’s II 20 1.7 

Bachelor’s I 60 4.1 

Bachelor’s II 80 6.0 

Bachelor/associate’s colleges 10 0.8 

Associate’s colleges 360 26.4 

Theological 30 2.2 

Medical 40 2.6 

Other health 10 0.7 

Engineering and technology 20 1.2 

Business and management 10 0.7 

Other1 40 2.6 

Not classified 300 21.6 

1 Includes art/music/design, law, teaching, other specialized, and tribal colleges and universities. 

NOTE: Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 2004 National Postsecondary 

Student Aid Study (NPSAS:04).

Table 27. NPSAS participation of historically Black colleges and universities (HBCUs): 1987–

2004 

NPSAS participation Number of HBCUs participating 

HBCUs as a percent of total number of 

participating institutions 

NPSAS:87 20 1.9 

NPSAS:90 20 1.5 

NPSAS:93 30 2.6 

NPSAS:96 20 1.9 

NPSAS:2000 20 2.3 

NPSAS:04 30 2.1 

NOTE: Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 2004 National Postsecondary 

Student Aid Study (NPSAS:04). 

4.1.3 Quality of Enrollment Lists 

Although an electronic list was preferred, institutions were informed that they could 

provide lists in their preferred format. Of all participating institutions, about 98 percent of 

institutions provided some type of electronic list, and the remaining 2 percent sent paper lists. 

Once lists were received, they were evaluated in terms of appropriateness of format and 

documentation (relative to instructions provided), as well as for the accuracy of student counts 

(see chapter 2 for a description of quality control procedures). Table 28 presents the major types 

of discrepancies encountered. About 44 percent of the institutions provided lists with one or 

more such problems. The most common problem was that enrollment counts were out of bounds 

when compared with the Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System (IPEDS) (about 35 

percent). The check was not suspended or relaxed (unlike some prior rounds of NPSAS) because 
Chapter 4. Evaluation of Field Operations and Data Quality 

72 

many of the institutions that were called about the discrepancy indicated that the sampling list 

counts were, in fact, incorrect. 

In the event that an enrollment list failed the quality control check, RTI staff contacted 

the institution to resolve the problem or obtain a new list. After any necessary revisions, all but 

two lists34 submitted were usable for selecting the student sample. 

Table 28. Types of discrepancies encountered with student lists, by highest level of offering: 

2004 

Type of institution 

Number of 

institutions Type of discrepancy encountered1 Number Percent2 

All institutions 1,360 None 760 55.9 

 Count out of bounds 470 34.8 

 Unreadable file/list # 0.3 

 Could not identify strata 40 2.6 

 Insufficient documentation 20 1.6 

 Multiple problems 70 4.8 

Less-than-2-year 200 None 110 56.8 

 Count out of bounds 60 31.2 

 Unreadable file/list # 0.5 

 Could not identify strata 10 5.0 

 Insufficient documentation # 1.5 

 Multiple problems 10 5.0 

2-year 400 None 210 51.6 

 Count out of bounds 170 42.5 

 Unreadable file/list # 0.2 

 Could not identify strata 10 1.2 

 Insufficient documentation # 1.0 

 Multiple problems 10 3.5 

4-year non-doctorate-granting 380 None 240 61.8 

 Count out of bounds 110 29.2 

 Unreadable file/list # 0.3 

 Could not identify strata 10 2.6 

 Insufficient documentation 10 1.3 

 Multiple problems 20 4.7 

4-year doctorate-granting 380 None 210 54.2 

 Count out of bounds 130 33.9 

 Unreadable file/list # 0.3 

 Could not identify strata 10 2.6 

 Insufficient documentation 10 2.6 

 Multiple problems 20 6.3 

# Rounds to zero. 

1 Categories are mutually exclusive, with an institution being included in only one category within highest level of 

offering. 

2 Percents are based on the number of institutions within each institution type. 

NOTE: Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 2004 National Postsecondary 

Student Aid Study (NPSAS:04). 

 

34 These institutions were classified as nonparticipants. 
Chapter 4. Evaluation of Field Operations and Data Quality 

73 

4.2 Student Record Abstraction 

Procedures to abstract information from institutional student records (computer-assisted 

data entry [CADE]) were first implemented in NPSAS:93. Over the years, the procedures have 

improved for each round of the study to enhance the effectiveness and user-friendliness of the 

approach, particularly for institutional staff. Most notably, these include the web-based CADE 

system (web-CADE) used for self-administration by institutional staff and by field interviewers, 

and the option of submitting data via electronic files (data-CADE). 

Other CADE procedures were used to facilitate the timeliness of CADE completion. 

These included (1) maintaining a help desk to resolve operational or interpretational problems, 

(2) scheduling calls to prompt self-CADE and data-CADE institutions to complete data 

abstraction and to answer questions that may have arisen, (3) prescheduling institutions for field 

staff, and (4) scheduling weekly conferences with field staff to assess their progress. 

4.2.1 Preloading Data into CADE 

To reduce the data entry effort associated with institutional student record abstraction, 

certain elements were preloaded into CADE records prior to collection at the institution. Table 

29 summarizes the nature and source of preloaded data elements. This included customizing the 

financial aid award section of CADE to include nonfederal aid that was common to a particular 

institution. Such customization proved highly successful during NPSAS:96 and NPSAS:2000, 

and was continued for NPSAS:04. 

Table 29. Nature and source of elements preloaded into computer-assisted data entry (CADE): 

2004 

CADE data element set Data source 

Institution name/ID IPEDS 

Names of most common state financial aid awards NASSGAP report 

Names of most common institution financial aid awards Institutional coordinator 

Institution clock/credit hour indicator Institutional coordinator 

Institution term names and dates Institutional coordinator 

GPA scale Institutional coordinator 

Student name, SSN from institutional records Enrollment list 

Student type indicator (undergraduate/graduate/first-professional) Enrollment list 

Student local and permanent addresses Enrollment list 

Student date of birth, veteran status, and citizenship CPS record 

Student address, phone number, driver’s license number and state CPS record 

Student dependency and expected family contribution CPS record 

Flag indicating whether or not student matched to CPS CPS record 

NOTE: IPEDS = Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System; GPA = grade-point average; SSN = Social 

Security number; CPS = Central Processing System. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 2004 National Postsecondary 

Student Aid Study (NPSAS:04). 

Data were preloaded from a variety of sources. These sources include IPEDS and the 

National Association of State Student Grant and Aid Programs (NASSGAP) state aid report, in 

addition to data collected from contact with the institutional coordinator and from enrollment 

lists. The most extensive set of preloaded data were obtained from the Central Processing System 

(CPS) for federal financial aid applicants. The data from the CPS were used in two different 

ways. Some items were prefilled with the data from the CPS and users could simply leave it 
Chapter 4. Evaluation of Field Operations and Data Quality 

74 

there if it was correct. These data elements included the student’s address, phone number, 

driver’s license number, driver’s license state, dependency status, and expected family 

contribution to postsecondary education costs. Other items were preloaded to validate the data 

entered by users. If users entered something different from what was preloaded from CPS, they 

would get a warning indicating the difference and could choose to accept the data from CPS or to 

keep the data originally entered. These variables included citizenship status, veteran status, and 

student date of birth. 

4.2.2 Timeliness of Record Abstraction 

CADE systems were prepared on an institution-by-institution basis as enrollment lists 

were received, samples selected, and matching to CPS was completed. Institutions that opted to 

provide data via self-CADE began receiving notification that their systems had been initialized 

in mid-February 2004. An e-mail was also sent to the institutional coordinator informing them 

that a packet had been mailed and providing them with their username and password to begin 

accessing the secured website. The first set of field-CADE data collectors began record abstraction activities in April 2004. Final data-CADE specifications and systems for uploading files 

were also available to institutions in April, with the first successful loading of data files 

occurring in May. Initialization of CADE systems continued through July 2004. 

Figure 10 shows the flow of CADE completions, comparing NPSAS:96 and NPSAS:04. 

Although NPSAS:04 CADE data collection was more condensed than NPSAS:96 CADE data 

collection, data were collected on many more cases in a shorter time period. The success of early 

institutional contacting enabled an earlier initialization of CADE data collection. Figure 10 also 

shows that NPSAS:04 experienced an increase in the number of CADE completions cases in late 

summer. This increase was primarily due to the large number institutions completing via dataCADE, which can be seen in figure 11. Data-CADE was used largely by institutional systems 

that provided data files for multiple institutions. Both self-CADE and field-CADE experienced a 

relatively steady flow of completed cases.
Chapter 4. Evaluation of Field Operations and Data Quality 

75 

Figure 10. Cumulative flow of computer-assisted data entry (CADE) completions: 1996 and 2004 

0

20,000

40,000

60,000

80,000

100,000

Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec

NPSAS:96

NPSAS:04

Number of CADE 

completions

 Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec

Month

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 2004 National Postsecondary 

Student Aid Study (NPSAS:04). 

Figure 11. Computer-assisted data entry (CADE) completions, by abstraction mode: 2004 

0

10,000

20,000

30,000

40,000

50,000

Feb March April May June July Aug Sept

Number of CADE 

completions

self-CADE

field-CADE

data-CADE

 Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep 

Month

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 2004 National Postsecondary 

Student Aid Study (NPSAS:04). 
Chapter 4. Evaluation of Field Operations and Data Quality 

76 

4.2.3 CADE Data Completeness 

As discussed in section 3.3.2, a student-level CADE completion required nonmissing data 

for any one or more of the following critical items: 

• receipt of financial aid; 

• enrollment; 

• tuition; 

• degree program; or 

• race. 

Under this definition, 92 percent (weighted) of the eligible sample students were 

classified as CADE completes (see table 17). Of the 88,920 CADE completes, 81,810 (92 

percent) were determined to be study respondents. The following evaluation presents results for 

study respondents only. 

Table 30 presents item-level completion rates for key data elements among CADE 

completes overall and by mode of abstraction. It is not surprising that item-level response rates 

differ among data elements, since institutional record-keeping systems vary dramatically. Not all 

data elements are available at every institution. However, most of the key data elements showed 

a high percentage of item-level completeness. 

Overall, item-level response rates were very high. Two items had high rates of missing 

data: marital status and additional phone numbers. Student records frequently lack these items. 

Response rates varied somewhat by mode of abstraction; in general, data-CADE showed the 

highest rates of missing data. With the exception of veteran status and phone numbers, selfCADE had higher item-level completion rates than those completed in field-CADE. Data-CADE 

experienced the lowest item-level completion rates for all but three items (Hispanic status, 

student class level, and financial aid.) Both self-CADE and field-CADE utilized online edit 

checks and verifications. This feature is not available for data-CADE, which may have 

contributed to the higher rate of missing data for this mode. 
Chapter 4. Evaluation of Field Operations and Data Quality 

77 

Table 30. Comparison of NPSAS:04 student record data element completion rates, by method 

of abstraction: 2004 

Item response rates1

Data element Number Total Self-CADE Field-CADE Data-CADE 

Total student record respondents 81,810 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 

Student characteristics 

Date of birth 75, 460 92.2 98.1 97.5 79.9 

Gender 75,930 92.8 98.8 98.0 80.0 

Marital status 38,400 46.9 57.4 49.0 29.7 

Citizenship 69,120 84.5 94.0 90.0 66.3 

Veteran status 59,270 72.5 73.8 74.4 68.9 

High school completion type 55,840 76.8 82.9 78.0 67.4 

Race 63,850 78.1 86.4 78.7 64.7 

Hispanic status 63,830 78.0 84.4 64.1 77.5 

At least one phone number 76,570 93.6 94.0 94.2 92.3 

At least two phone numbers 34,320 42.0 42.9 44.7 38.6 

Enrollment 

Type of degree program 77,850 95.2 97.7 92.9 92.5 

Student class level 72,900 89.1 92.5 85.4 86.1 

Tuition jurisdiction classification 76,880 94.0 99.4 95.8 84.3 

Total tuition amount 75,940 92.8 97.2 91.4 86.9 

Financial aid2 

Any aid received (Y/N) 81,600 99.8 99.6 99.2 99.9 

Federal aid received (Y/N) 81,600 99.8 99.6 99.2 99.9 

State aid received (Y/N) 81,600 99.8 99.6 99.2 99.9 

Undergraduate aid received (Y/N) 81,600 99.8 99.6 99.2 99.9 

Graduate aid received (Y/N) 81,600 99.8 99.6 99.2 99.9 

Other aid received (Y/N) 81,600 99.8 99.6 99.2 99.9 

Total financial aid amount3

 81,570 99.7 99.6 99.2 99.9 

Expected family contribution (EFC) amount 52,220 90.2 98.7 97.8 75.5 1 Response rate is based on the number of students to whom the item applied. 2

 All financial aid gate items were logically coded for data-CADE students, based on the presence or absence of 

amounts in the nested items. 

3

 Total financial aid amount was computed by summing the amounts entered for each specific aid program. If the 

financial aid gate item was missing, then the financial aid amount item was also missing. 

NOTE: Mode differences were detected for every item presented in this table. All are significant at the 0.05 level. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 2004 National Postsecondary 

Student Aid Study (NPSAS:04). 

4.3 Student Interviewing 

4.3.1 Identification of First Time Beginners (FTBs) 

NPSAS:04 serves as the base year of a longitudinal study of students beginning their 

postsecondary education experience during one of the terms of the NPSAS sample year. An FTB 

student is one who enrolled in postsecondary education for the first time after high school at 

some time during the NPSAS year (July 1, 2003–June 30, 2004). Also considered “effective 

FTBs” are those who had previously enrolled, but had not completed a postsecondary course for 

credit prior to July 1, 2003. Those determined to be FTBs will be followed at periodic intervals 
Chapter 4. Evaluation of Field Operations and Data Quality 

78 

as part of the Beginning Postsecondary Students Longitudinal Study follow-up surveys 

(BPS:04/06, BPS:04/09), with the data collected during NPSAS:04 serving as the base year for 

the subsequent longitudinal studies. 

NPSAS:04 is the third NPSAS to “spin off” a cohort of beginning students; NPSAS:90 

was the first and NPSAS:96 was the second. Based on past experiences, sampling and screening 

procedures were implemented that were targeted to yield an adequate number of students that 

are accurately identified as FTBs for the BPS:04 cohort. Procedures specific to this purpose 

were implemented at almost every step of full-scale study operations (e.g., detailed instructions 

for institutional identification of FTBs when providing enrollment lists; sample selection 

procedures; wording of CADE items asked specifically about potential FTBs; comprehensive 

FTB-eligibility questions in the student instrument to make the final FTB determination; and 

extra locating/interviewing efforts applied to the sample from the student stratum of potential 

FTBs). FTB sampling rates were based primarily on NPSAS:96 results. The two major 

challenges in achieving adequate FTB yields are (1) proper identification of a sufficient base 

from which to obtain FTBs and (2) locating, identifying, and interviewing FTBs from that base 

in sufficient numbers. 

Locating and interviewing potential FTBs is particularly important, since final FTB 

determination rests on student responses to specific questions.35 Student records maintained at 

most postsecondary institutions do not contain all information necessary to make accurate FTB

determinations. Insufficiency of institution-level information is quite obvious when considering

students who transfer between institutions and may or may not have transfer credits (or other 

records of such prior education). 

Nonetheless, institutions can identify FTBs stochastically; however, instructions to

institutions regarding preliminary identification of potential FTBs must also be sufficiently clear

and viable that the institution can implement them correctly.36 Sampling procedures implemented 

during NPSAS:04 accounted for potential definitional difficulties. As a firstscreening, 

institutions were asked to identify potential FTBs according to the following conditions. 

Potential FTBs must 

• be undergraduate students between July 1, 2003 and April 30, 2004;

• have enrolled at the institution for the first time between July 1, 2003 and April 30, 

2004; 

• be classified by the institution as freshman, or first-year student at the time of that 

first enrollment; and 

• have no transfer credits from another postsecondary institution. 

Based on prior experience, it was anticipated that two types of errors would still exist in 

lists provided by the schools; specifically, (1) students listed as potential FTBs would not be 

 

35 A number of questions were contained in the student interview to screen for first-time beginner (FTB) status, 

including when the student first attended a postsecondary institution, whether the student received any prior 

postsecondary degrees or certificates, and whether the student completed the first class toward a postsecondary 

degree or certificate after high school at a postsecondary institution. 36 Simply asking the institution to identify students who enrolled in the institution for the first time is insufficient, since it 

can result in identification of undergraduate transfer students as well as first-time enrolling graduate and firstprofessional students. 
Chapter 4. Evaluation of Field Operations and Data Quality 

79 

actual FTBs (a false positive group) and (2) students not identified as potential FTBs would, in 

fact, prove to be FTBs (a false negative group). The actual BPS:04 cohort would, thus, consist of 

those in the potential FTB group minus the identified false positives in that group plus any false 

negatives identified in other student strata. Because experience with NPSAS:96 indicated that the 

false positive rate would exceed (considerably) the false negative rate (Riccobono et al. 1997), 

the potential FTB stratum was oversampled (see chapter 2). Information to determine FTB status 

was also collected during CPS matching and record abstraction (CADE). 

The student interview FTB screening was accomplished very early in the interview 

(immediately following NPSAS study eligibility determination).37 The FTB screening questions 

were asked of all interviewed undergraduate students so that false positives from the potential

FTB stratum could be eliminated from the BPS cohort and so false negatives from the other 

studentstrata could be identified and included in the BPS cohort. 

The final FTB determination was made based on the student interview. However, there 

are students who were not interviewed but are potential FTBs based on data obtained from 

institutional records and/or CPS data. Table 31 provides the results of interview-based FTB 

determination by initial student classification. Overall, 40 percent of the students interviewed 

(25,000 students) were determined to be FTBs. Among those initially sampled as potential FTBs 

based on the list acquisition process, 69 percent were confirmed as FTBs, yielding a 31 percent 

false positive rate. Among students sampled as “other undergraduates,” 25 percent were also 

determined to be FTBs (false negatives.) The false positive and false negative rates reveal the 

difficulties that many schools experienced in accurately identifying FTBs. 

Table 31. First-time beginner (FTB) determination, by student type: 2004 

Confirmed FTBs 

Sampled student type Students interviewed1 Number Percent2

All students 62,130 24,930 40.1 

Total undergraduate 53,590 24,900 46.5 

Potential FTB 26,040 18,030 69.2 

Other undergraduate 27,540 6,870 24.9 

Graduate/first-professional 8,540 30 0.4 

1 Includes study respondents who completed the student interview, since confirmation of FTB eligibility status 

required contact with the sample members. 

2

 Percent is based on the number of students within the row under consideration. 

NOTE: Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 2004 National Postsecondary 

Student Aid Study (NPSAS:04). 

4.3.2 Data Collection Evaluations 

Help desk 

As described in chapter 2, a help desk was available to assist respondents in completing 

the student interview. Help desk staff were trained to answer any calls received from the help 

desk hotline, as well as conduct telephone interviews as needed. Help desk staff assisted sample 

members with questions about the Web instrument and provided technical assistance to sample 

 

37 First-time beginner (FTB) status was determined at the start of the student interview because many subsequent 

questions were to be asked only of the actual Beginning Postsecondary Students Longitudinal Study (BPS) cohort. 
Chapter 4. Evaluation of Field Operations and Data Quality 

80 

members who experienced problems while completing the self-administered Web interview. 

Help desk agents also responded to voice-mail messages left by respondents when the call center 

was closed. To gain a better understanding of the problems encountered by students attempting 

to complete the interview, a software program was developed to record each help desk incident 

that occurred during data collection. For each occurrence, help desk staff confirmed contact 

information for the sample member, recorded the type of problem, a description of the problem 

and resolution, incident status (pending or resolved), and the approximate time it took to assist 

the caller. 

Table 32 summarizes help desk incidents encountered during student data collection. Of 

all calls to the help desk, about 93 percent called the help desk only once, while 6 percent called 

twice, and 1 percent called three or more times. Of the students who called the help desk, 86 

percent completed either a full, Spanish, abbreviated, or partial interview either on their own or 

with the telephone agent who took their call. The remaining 14 percent did not complete the 

interview. 

Table 32. Help desk incidents, by type: 2004 

Type of incident Total incidents recorded Percent of total incidents 

Total 1,849 100.0 

Study ID/password 1,199 61.0 

Called in to complete the interview 203 10.3 

Questions about the study 195 9.9 

Browser settings/computer 171 8.7 

Website down/unavailable 45 2.3 

Questionnaire content 21 1.1 

Program error call-in 14 0.7 

Routing/skip problems 1 0.1 

Other 118 6.0 

NOTE: Details may not sum due to rounding. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 2004 National Postsecondary 

Student Aid Study (NPSAS:04). 

The majority of the help desk contacts were requests for study ID and/or password (61 

percent). Ten percent of calls to the help desk were to complete a telephone interview. Other 

calls to the help desk regarded general questions about the study (10 percent), problems with 

browser settings and computer or both (9 percent), and calls to report the website being down or 

unavailable (2 percent). 

Response burden and effort 

Time to complete the student interview. The time burden associated with completion of 

the NPSAS:04 interview was calculated separately for each mode of data collection: selfadministered and computer-assisted telephone interview (CATI). 

Figure 12 provides a visual representation of how the on-screen and transit times were 

determined. Two time stamp variables were associated with each interview question. The first, 

the start timer, was set to the clock time on the respondent’s or interviewer’s computer at the 

time that a particular Web page was displayed on the screen. The second time stamp variable, the 

end timer, was set to the clock time on the respondent’s or interviewer’s computer at the moment 
Chapter 4. Evaluation of Field Operations and Data Quality 

81 

the respondent or interviewer clicked the “Continue” button to submit the answers from that 

page. 

From the two time stamp variables, an on-screen time and transit time were calculated. 

The on-screen time was calculated by subtracting the start time from the end time for each Web 

page that the respondent received. The transit time was calculated by subtracting the end time of 

the preceding page from the start time of the current page; it includes the time required for the 

previous page’s data to be transmitted to the server, for the server to store the data and assemble 

and serve the current page, and for the current page to be transmitted to and loaded on the 

respondent’s or interviewer’s computer. 

A total on-screen time was then calculated for all respondents by summing the on-screen 

times for each Web page that the respondent received. For each respondent, a total transit time 

was calculated by summing all the transit times. The total on-screen and total transit times were 

then summed to determine the total instrument time. 
82 

Figure 12. Visual representation of on-screen and transit times: 2004 

End time 1

Continue button

clicked

On-screen time 1

end time 1 - start time1

Start

time 1

Screen

 loaded

Start

time 2

Screen

 loaded

Transit time

start time2 - end time1

On-screen time 2

end time2 - start time2

Total On-screen time = On-screen time 1 + On-screen time 2 +...+ On-screen time N 

Total Transit time = Transit time 1 + Transit time 2 +...+ Transit time N Total Instrument time = Total On-screen time + Total transit time 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 2004 National Postsecondary Student Aid Study (NP
Chapter 4. Evaluation of Field Operations and Data Quality 

83 

Table 33 presents the average times for the full interview overall and by student type. 

The average time to complete the entire interview was about 27 minutes. The interview was 

longest for FTBs (31 minutes,) largely because they received additional questions not applicable 

to other students. Total interview time took about 25 minutes for other undergraduates and 20 

minutes for graduate and first-professional students (t = 57.59, p < .0001). 

Table 33. Average time to complete full-scale student interview, by student type: 2004 

Interview section Number of cases Average time 

All students 52,560 26.5 

FTB student 20,770 31.1 

Other undergraduate 24,320 24.6 

Graduate/first-professional student 7,470 20.0 

† Not applicable. 

NOTE: Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. FTB = first-time beginner. Outliers were excluded from this analysis. 

Outliers were identified separately for each section and for the total interview; therefore, individual section times do not sum to the 

total interview times. An outlier was defined as any case whose completion time exceeded two standard deviations above or below

the average time for a given section. Interview times are presented only for completed interviews (partial interviews were excluded). 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 2004 National Postsecondary Student Aid Study 

(NPSAS:04). 

Table 34. Average time to complete full-scale student interview, by interview section and 

student type: 2004 

All respondents FTB student 

Other 

undergraduate 

Graduate/firstprofessional student

Interview section 

Number 

of cases 

Average 

time

Number 

of cases

Average 

time

Number 

of cases

Average 

time 

Number 

of cases

Average 

time

Section A—Enrollment 55,790 7.8 22,030 7.8 25,850 8.2 7,910 6.6

Section B—Financial aid 55,950 3.9 22,070 4.0 25,940 3.9 7,950 3.9

Section C—Employment 56,070 4.7 22,130 4.7 26,020 5.0 7,920 3.2

Section D—Education experiences 56,220 2.7 22,150 5.4 26,120 1.1 7,960 0.5

Section E—Background 55,870 4.7 22,040 4.9 25,880 4.8 7,950 4.1

Section F—Locating 22,080 3.8 22,080 3.8 † † † †

† Not applicable. 

NOTE: Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. FTB = first-time beginner. Outliers were excluded from this analysis. 

Outliers were identified separately for each section and for the total interview; therefore, individual section times do not sum to the 

total interview times. An outlier was defined as any case whose completion time exceeded two standard deviations above or below

the average time for a given section. Interview times are presented only for completed interviews (partial interviews were excluded). 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 2004 National Postsecondary Student Aid Study 

(NPSAS:04). 

Table 34 presents the average times for each section overall and by student type. The first 

section on enrollment collected key information necessary for eligibility determination and FTB 

identification, as well as information about enrollment, degree program, and field of study38. 

Much of the critical information needed to assess student status and other characteristics 

necessary for routing to the appropriate questions in the remainder of the interview was collected 

in this initial section. This was the longest section, taking just under 8 minutes to complete. 

The second section focused on financial aid. It contained items about school-related jobs 

such as work-study and assistantships, as well as questions about other forms of financial aid 

such as grants, loans, and scholarships. Additional items asked about parental support and the 

 

38 See the student interview facsimile in Appendix E for more detail about the content of the interview sections. 
Chapter 4. Evaluation of Field Operations and Data Quality 

84 

use of educational tax credits. Overall, respondents took an average of 4 minutes to complete this 

section. 

The employment section collected information on jobs held while enrolled, balancing 

school and work, and assets and debts. This section took approximately 5 minutes to complete. 

The section on education experiences contained a few items applicable to all respondents, 

such as the items about distance education. However, many items were administered only to 

FTBs, such as those focusing on undergraduate experiences, transfers, and factors related to 

choice of postsecondary institution. This section averaged about 3 minutes overall, but took 5 

minutes for FTBs, 1 minute for other undergraduates, and less than 1 minute for graduate and 

first-professional students. 

The background section focused on basic demographics about the students and their 

families. Citizenship status, community service, and education-related disabilities were also 

topics of interest in the background section. Overall, the average time to complete this section 

was about 5 minutes. 

The final section applied only to FTBs for the purpose of collecting locating information 

for future follow-up studies with this cohort. FTBs took an average of 4 minutes to complete this 

section. 

Interview times were also evaluated by mode of administration. Table 35 shows the total 

interview time. The difference in total interview completion by mode was small but significant; 

approximately 26 minutes for self-administered respondents and 27 minutes for intervieweradministered respondents (t = 8.92, p < .0001). 

Table 35. Average time to complete full-scale student interview, by interview section and mode 

of administration: 2004 

All respondents 

Self-administered 

respondents 

Interviewer-administered 

respondents 

Interview section 

Number 

of cases 

Average 

time 

Number 

of cases 

Average 

time 

Number 

of cases 

Average 

time 

Section A—Enrollment 55,790 7.8 25,280 7.9 30,520 7.7 

Section B—Financial aid 55,950 3.9 25,330 4.3 30,630 3.7 

Section C—Employment 56,070 4.7 25,490 4.4 30,580 4.8 

Section D—Education experiences 56,220 2.7 25,820 2.4 30,400 3.0 

Section E—Background 55,870 4.7 25,190 5.0 30,680 4.5 

Section F—Locating 22,080 3.8 8,980 3.8 13,100 3.7 

NOTE: Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. Outliers were excluded from this analysis. Outliers were identified 

separately for each section and for the total interview; therefore, individual section times do not sum to the total interview times. An 

outlier was defined as any case whose completion time exceeded two standard deviations above or below the average time for a 

given section. Interview times are presented only for completed interviews (partial interviews were excluded). 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 2004 National Postsecondary Student Aid Study 

(NPSAS:04). 

Table 36 presents the average time on-screen and in transit by response mode. Average 

transit times were twice as long for self-administered respondents than for intervieweradministered respondents (6 minutes and 3 minutes, respectively; t = 90.03, p < .0001). Onscreen times were significantly less for self-administered respondents than for intervieweradministered respondents (20 minutes and 24 minutes, respectively; t = –53.95, p < .0001.) 
Chapter 4. Evaluation of Field Operations and Data Quality 

85 

It is likely that interviewer-administered respondents took slightly longer to complete the 

interview sections because respondents and interviewers were engaged in a conversation, and 

respondents had to wait for interviewers to read the entire question and response options 

(depending on the nature of the screen and the interviewer instructions39). Self-administered 

respondents, however, could read and respond to interview questions more quickly because they 

were able to read the entire screen at once. 

Table 36. Average on-screen and transit time, by response mode: 2004 

Response mode 

Number of 

cases 

Average total 

interview time 

Average onscreen time Average 

transit time 

All respondents 52,560 26.5 22.3 4.2 

Self-administered respondents 22,100 26.1 20.4 5.8 

Interviewer-administered respondents 30,460 26.8 23.7 3.1 

NOTE: Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. Outliers were excluded from this analysis. Outliers were 

identified separately for each section and for the total interview; therefore, individual section times do not sum to the 

total interview times. An outlier was defined as any case whose completion time exceeded two standard deviations 

above or below the average time for a given section. Interview times are presented only for completed interviews 

(partial interviews were excluded).

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 2004 National Postsecondary 

Student Aid Study (NPSAS:04).

At the end of the survey, a short debriefing section asked questions about users’ 

experiences in completing the Web survey. As part of the debriefing section, self-administered 

respondents were asked which type of internet connection they used to access the survey. Table 

37 presents the average total interview times and transit times by type of internet connection. 

Among self-administered respondents, about 6 percent completed the interview through a 

dial-up modem, and about 41 percent completed with a fast connection (i.e., cable modem, DSL, 

ISDN, LAN). Total interview time for dial-up modem connections was nearly 35 minutes, 

compared to 24 minutes for those using a fast connection (t = –49.24, p < .0001 ). This large 

variation can be attributed to transit times, which were also much higher for the dial-up 

connection versus the fast connections (13 minutes compared with 5 minutes; t = –85.82, 

p < .0001). 

 

39 To minimize mode differences and ensure that all respondents were exposed to the same information, interviewer 

instructions were included on every form of the questionnaire for computer-assisted telephone interviews (CATIs). 

These instructions indicated to interviewers how to handle response options (e.g., whether the response options 

should be read aloud or not). 
Chapter 4. Evaluation of Field Operations and Data Quality 

86 

Table 37. Average time to complete self-administered student interview, by internet 

connection type: 2004 

Internet connection type 

Average total 

interview time Transit time 

Percent of 

time in transit 

Dial-up modem 34.6 13.3 38.5 

Fast connection 24.4 4.6 18.7 

Cable modem 24.7 4.4 18.0 

Digital subscriber line (DSL) 24.8 4.8 19.3 

Integrated services digital network (ISDN) 23.4 4.9 20.9 

Corporate local area network (LAN; T1 or T3) 23.7 4.5 19.0 

Do not know connection type 27.7 6.1 22.2 

Other 27.8 6.6 23.6 

NOTE: At the end of the interview, a debriefing section was included that asked questions about self-administered 

respondents experiences in completing the Web survey. Data presented here are based on the self-administered 

respondents who answered the debriefing questions. Fast connection is the average interview time of respondents 

with a Cable Modem, Digital Subscriber Line, ISDN, or Corporate LAN. Average total time is sum of on-screen and 

transit times. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 2004 National Postsecondary 

Student Aid Study (NPSAS:04). 

Number of calls 

A total of 94,503 telephone interviewer hours (exclusive of training, supervision, 

monitoring, and administration) were expended to obtain completed interviews from 62,130 

sample members. Since the time to administer the interview was, on average, under 30 minutes, 

the large majority of interviewer time was spent on other case-related activities. A small 

percentage of this time was required to bring up a case, review its history, and close the case 

(with appropriate reschedule, comment, and disposition entry) when completed. The bulk of the 

time, however, was devoted to locating and contacting sample members. 

Table 38 shows the average number of calls per case, by interview status and 

administration mode. The overall average was about 14 calls per case. Among all completed 

cases, an average of 10 call attempts was required, while the average for nonrespondents was 

about 21 calls. 

Table 38. Average calls per case, by interview status: 2004 

Interview status Number of cases Number of calls Mean calls per case 

Total 101,010 1,394,948 13.8 

Interviewed 62,220 598,556 9.6 

Not interviewed 38,800 796,564 20.5 

By mode 

Self administered—no telephone follow-up 17,040 † † 

Self administered—with telephone follow-up 11,670 195,589 16.8 

Interviewer administered 33,510 402,790 12.0 

† Not applicable. 

NOTE: Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. Excludes 8,200 cases determined to be ineligible for the 

study. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 2004 National Postsecondary 

Student Aid Study (NPSAS:04). 
Chapter 4. Evaluation of Field Operations and Data Quality 

87 

The average call count varied by mode of data collection. Of the 62,220 completed cases, 

approximately 27 percent were completed via self-administration and required no telephone 

prompting. However, an average of 17 calls was made to the remaining 11,670 self-administered 

cases to encourage interview completion. Finally, approximately one-half of the completions (54 

percent) were obtained by a telephone interviewer and required an average of 12 call attempts. 

As seen in table 39, the number of calls per case varied by type of students and type of 

institution. On average, potential FTB students and other types of undergraduates required more 

calls (14 calls) than graduate and first-professional students (11 calls) (F = 314.6, p < 0.001). 

Additionally, those from less than 2-year institutions and 2-year institutions required more calls 

on average (16 calls and 14 calls, respectively) than those from either 4-year doctorate-granting 

or 4-year non-doctorate-granting institutions (13 calls and 14 calls, respectively) (F = 111.5, 

p < 0.001). 

Table 39. Average calls per case, by institutional characteristics and student type: 2004 

Institutional characteristics and student type1 Number of 

cases 

Number of 

calls 

Mean calls per 

case 

Total 101,010 1,394,948 13.8 

Institutional level 

Less than 2-year 10,330 166,830 16.2 

2 Year 37,750 529,633 14.0 

4-year non-doctorate-granting 20,630 283,250 13.7 

4-year doctorate-granting 32,310 415,507 12.9 

Institutional control 

Public 65,540 889,378 13.6 

Private not-for-profit 21,660 289,161 13.4 

Private for-profit 13,820 216,421 15.7 

Type of institution 

Public less than 2-year 2,150 33,841 15.7 

Public 2-year 32,540 453,282 13.9 

Public 4-year non-doctorate-granting 8,890 120,548 13.6 

Public 4-year doctorate-granting 21,960 281,966 12.8 

Private not-for-profit 2-year or less 2,730 37,046 13.6 

Private not-for-profit 4-year non-doctorate-granting 8,880 122,189 13.8 

Private not-for-profit 4-year doctorate-granting 10,050 129,746 12.9 

Private for-profit less-than-2-year 7,550 124,802 16.5 

Private for-profit 2-year or more 6,260 91,396 14.6 

Student type 

Total undergraduate 89,460 1,275,252 14.3 

FTB student 39,440 558,470 14.2 

Other undergraduate 50,020 717,787 14.4 

Graduate/first-professional 11,560 118,837 10.3 1

 Both institutional and student classifications were verified to correct classification errors on the sampling frame. 

NOTE: Detail may not sum to total due to rounding. Excludes 8,200 cases determined to be ineligible for the study. 

FTB = first-time beginner. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 2004 National Postsecondary 

Student Aid Study (NPSAS:04). 
Chapter 4. Evaluation of Field Operations and Data Quality 

88 

4.3.3 Instrument Usability 

Coding 

The NPSAS:04 student interview obtained students’ field of study by first collecting a 

verbatim string and then providing a list of options from which the appropriate category could be 

selected. To assess the accuracy of coding procedures, a random sample of 10 percent was 

selected from all strings provided. Expert coders evaluated the verbatim strings for completeness 

and for the appropriateness of the assigned codes, determining whether a different code should 

have been assigned or if a string was too vague to code. 

Table 40 provides the results of the coding analyses. Of all the strings analyzed, 79 

percent were coded correctly. The coding results for major field of study were similar between 

modes of data collection, indicating that expert coders agreed with self-administered respondent 

coding at about the same rate as they agreed with interviewer-administered interview coding 

(χ2 = 0.79, p > 0.05). The quality of the text strings was high, with only 2 percent of text strings 

too vague to be coded. 

Table 40. Summary of coding results for major field of study, by respondent type: 2004 

Respondent type 

Coding attempts 

sampled 

Percent original

code correct 

Percent text string

too vague to code 

Total 4,598 78.8 2.0 

Self-administered 2,361 79.3 1.9 

Interviewer-administered 2,237 78.3 2.1 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 2004 National Postsecondary 

Student Aid Study (NPSAS:04). 

Help text usage 

Each Web screen in the NPSAS:04 instrument was equipped with help text to aid 

respondents with general and screen-specific instrument inquires. The instrument provided 

general help text which outlined basic information on internet browsers and response types (i.e., 

how to use a check box, drop-down, or radio button). Each help text screen provided a toll-free 

number to the NPSAS:04 help desk for further questions. The screen-specific help text defined 

instrument vocabulary, instructed respondents on how to enter responses, and explained the type 

of information requested for each form. 

Counters placed within the instrument calculated the number of times help text for each 

screen was accessed. These were analyzed overall and by administration mode to determine 

which screens may have been problematic for users. 

The screen-level rate of help text access was below 2 percent for most of the screens in 

the NPSAS:04 interview. Help text access rates were analyzed overall and by administration 

mode. Across all interview forms, cases completed with an interviewer accessed help text more 

often than did self-administered cases (1.3 percent compared with 0.3 percent, respectively; 

t = 6.43, p < 0.0001). Table 41 presents the interview screens40 for which help text was accessed 

at a rate of 5 percent or more, based on the number of cases to whom the form was administered. 

Differences by administration mode are all significantly different (p < 0.0001) with interviewer-

 

40 See appendix E for a facsimile of the student interview questionnaire. 
Chapter 4. Evaluation of Field Operations and Data Quality 

89 

administered cases accessing help text more frequently than self-administered respondents. It 

should be noted that interviewers were trained to use help text, whereas self-administered 

respondents may have forgotten it was available. 

Table 41. Rates of help text usage for items accessed by 5 percent or more of respondents, by 

interview screen and administration mode: 2004 

Percent 

Screen 

name Description 

Number 

administered 

to 

Number of 

help text 

accesses 

All 

modes 

Selfadministered Intervieweradministered 

N4ASSOC Type of associate's degree 12,770 1,300 10.2 2.8 14.2 

N4CLSLV Class level for non-degree students 6,990 570 8.2 1.9 11.8 

N4SCHJOB School-related job 52,490 3,540 6.7 1.9 10.4 

N4VOCREC Received vocational rehabilitation 

services 

5,900 390 6.6 1.1 10.7 

N4GRAID Graduate assistantships 9,290 480 5.2 1.9 10.6 

N4EMPTYP Type of employer 39,680 2,000 5.0 0.5 8.7 

N4OTAID Other aid received 13,920 660 4.7 1.3 9.3 

N4CMPCLS Completed postsecondary class 

before 7/1/2003 

21,400 1,010 4.7 1.9 6.4 

NOTE: Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 2004 National Postsecondary Student 

Aid Study (NPSAS:04). 

N4ASSOC had the highest rate of help text accesses. Among students who were 

administered this form, 10 percent used help text. This form was asked of students who reported 

that they were working on an associate’s degree. It was a follow-up question to differentiate 

between Associate of Arts (AA) and Associate of Science (AS) degrees. Self-administered 

respondents (3 percent) were less likely than interviewer-administered respondents (14 percent) 

to seek help text for this form (Z = -20.50, p < 0.0001). This result is likely due to the way the 

question was asked; “What type of associate’s degree were you working on at [NPSAS 

institution]?” While self-administered respondents could read the response options and 

immediately understand the intent of the question, those who completed a telephone interview 

did not receive the same visual cues. This item will be revised in future studies to minimize the 

mode difference observed here. 

N4CLSLV asked non-degree students to classify themselves as primarily undergraduate, 

graduate, or an equal mix of both. The overall help text rate was about 8 percent but was 

primarily used by CATI respondents (12 percent compared with 2 percent for self-administered 

respondents; Z = -14.54, p < 0.0001). 

N4SCHJOB asked respondents if they participated in a work study or paid assistantship 

through their institution. The help text usage rate for this screen was about 7 percent. CATI 

yielded the most help text hits for N4SCHJOB with an average of 10 percent, compared to 2 

percent for self-administered respondents (Z = -38.33, p < 0.0001). 

Respondents who had indicated having some type of disability were asked to report 

whether or not they had received Vocational Rehabilitation in N4VOCREC. Valid response 

options for this screen consisted of only yes or no answers. The help text rate was about 7 

percent overall. 

N4GRAID was a form that contained several check-box items that asked graduate 

students about graduate assistantships and aid amounts. It asked about teaching and research 
Chapter 4. Evaluation of Field Operations and Data Quality 

90 

assistantships, as well as other less common types (traineeships). Help text provided definitions 

of each type of graduate aid listed. It is likely that respondents were seeking the definitions for 

the less common types of aid on this form. Of all graduate students who were administered this 

form, 5 percent used help text. 

The help text rate for N4EMPTYP was about 5 percent. N4EMPTYP asked respondents 

to categorize their employer type among six options (the NPSAS institution, a for-profit 

company, nonprofit organization, military, self employed, or local, state, or federal government). 

Response options were read to interviewer-administered respondents to ensure that they would 

know what the choices were, as did self-administered respondents. However, the help text rate 

was still 5 percent overall (1 percent for self-administered and 9 percent for intervieweradministered respondents; Z = -37.07, p < 0.0001). 

N4OTAID was a screen that asked respondents about alternative sources of financial aid 

not administered through institutional financial aid offices. Items focused on employer aid (both 

the student’s and parents’ employers), aid from private organizations, and veteran’s benefits. 

This is information that has traditionally been very hard to collect from students because many 

do not know, which likely explains the high rate of help text access (5 percent). 

N4CMPCLS was a critical item used in the final determination of FTB eligibility status. 

It was asked of any undergraduate who appeared to be an FTB but who had possibly enrolled in 

postsecondary education prior to the beginning of the NPSAS year. It asked whether students 

had ever completed a postsecondary course for credit prior to enrolling at the NPSAS institution. 

Among students who were asked this question, 5 percent used the help text as a reference prior to 

providing an answer. 

4.3.4 Item Nonresponse 

Critical item conversion 

As noted earlier, NPSAS:04 is the first cycle to provide the option for self-administration 

of the student instrument. To minimize item-level nonresponse for certain key items, conversion 

text was displayed to emphasize the confidential nature of the study and reiterate the importance 

of individual responses. These items focused on enrollment status and dates, the employment 

history of the respondent, and parent income. 

If a respondent did not answer one of the six items (i.e., left the item blank and hit the 

continue button), the item screen was reloaded with additional text emphasizing the importance 

of the item. For some items, a “don’t know” option was added to determine if the initial 

nonresponse was for that reason. The intent was to encourage respondents to provide an answer 

to the item and to discern the reason for leaving the item blank originally (e.g., refusal or did not 

know the answer). 

Overall, conversion text was moderately successful in converting blank responses either 

to a valid response or to a don’t know response. Results are presented in table 42. The percent of 

initially blank responses subsequently converted to a valid response ranged from 21 percent for 

parents’ income to 87 percent for student status. There were no differences between selfadministered and telephone interviews in rates of conversion, with one exception. Critical item 

text conversion was more successful for self-administered interviews than telephone interviews 

for obtaining valid responses to the number of jobs held (t = 42.80, p < 0.05). 
Chapter 4. Evaluation of Field Operations and Data Quality 

91 

Table 42. Conversion rates for critical items: 2004 

Variable 

Cases viewing 

conversion text 

Percent converted by 

subsequently 

providing a valid 

response 

Percent converted 

by subsequently 

providing a “don't 

know” response 

Total percent 

converted 

Student status at NPSAS 180 87.4 † 87.4 

NPSAS enrollment by month1 400 57.3 34.3 91.6 

Date first began NPSAS1 390 65.1 0.0 65.1 

Date first attended school 360 47.0 † 47.0 

Number of jobs during NPSAS year 440 65.8 † 65.8 

Parents' income 20021 7,260 21.1 69.7 90.8 

† Not applicable. 

1 For these items, a “don't know" response option was added when the screen reloaded, in addition to text emphasizing the 

importance of the item. 

NOTE: Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 2004 National Postsecondary Student 

Aid Study (NPSAS:04). 

Three of the items that presented conversion text also displayed a “don’t know” response 

option when the screen was shown for a second time: NPSAS enrollment by month, date of first 

attendance at the NPSAS school, and parents’ income. 

For NPSAS enrollment by month, 34 percent of the cases who initially provided no 

response reported “don’t know” when the conversion text was displayed, resulting in a total 

conversion of 92 percent of all initially blank responses to either a valid response or a “don’t 

know.” 

The “don’t know” option was selected by 70 percent of all respondents who did not 

provide an initial response to the question about parents’ income, yielding a total conversion rate 

of 91 percent to either a valid or don’t know response. 

While the “don’t know” option was presented when the question about date of first 

enrollment at the NPSAS school, it was not selected by any respondents who saw the conversion 

text. This result is likely due to the format of the response options. Respondents were instructed 

to select their answers from two drop-boxes: one for month and one for year. The “don’t know” 

option was embedded within the drop-boxes, and it is likely that respondents did not see the new 

options when the screen was re-displayed. In future studies, this format will be revised so that the 

“don’t know” option is more visible to respondents. 

Item-level nonresponse 

All respondents to the student interview were provided the option to decline to answer 

any item. In previous rounds of the NPSAS survey, interviewers were provided with one of two 

options for this purpose: “don’t know” and “refused.” In NPSAS:04, the don’t know response 

was only available for key items and provided only as a follow-up option when the screen was 

initially left blank. Respondents may have given a don’t know response for a number of reasons. 

The most obvious is that the answer is truly unknown or in some way inappropriate for the 

respondent. Don’t know responses may also be evoked when the question wording is not 

understood by the respondent or when the respondent hesitates to provide a “best guess” 

response. If respondents failed to give a valid answer or to respond “don’t know,” their response 

was considered “blank.” There was no explicit “refusal” option in NPSAS:04. This section 
Chapter 4. Evaluation of Field Operations and Data Quality 

92 

presents the results of an analysis of missing data among student interview respondents to better 

understand which items may be sensitive or difficult to answer.41 

Item nonresponse rates were calculated for items asked of at least 100 respondents. Item 

nonresponse rates in the NPSAS:04 interview were low, with 24 items of approximately 210 

items containing over 10 percent missing data. These items are shown in table 43 and grouped by 

interview section. Most nonresponse resulted from respondents leaving the item blank. Five of 

these 24 items were missing values due to respondents reporting that they did not know the 

answer. 

Table 43. NPSAS:04 interview item nonresponse for items with more than 10 percent missing 

Interview 

section Variable name Description 

Number 

asked 

Percent 

“don’t know” 

Percent 

blank 

Total percent 

nonresponse1 

N4PRBA Earned bachelor’s while a firstprofessional student Section A: 1,510 † 13.0 13.0 

Eligibility and 

Enrollment N4MAJ2A Major-secondary string 1,420 † 10.8 10.8 

 N4MAJ2B Major-secondary category 1,420 † 9.8 9.8 

 N4LT30 Age: less than 30 390 † 17.7 17.7 

 N4SCH2 School 2 name 540 0.0 13.9 13.9 

 N4CT2 School 2 city 540 0.0 11.3 11.3 

 N4LEVL2 School 2 level 540 0.2 15.0 15.2 

 N4CTRL2 School 2 control 540 0.0 15.4 15.4 

Section B: N4TASSM Teaching assistantship amount 1,240 † 9.6 9.6 

Financial Aid N4RASSM Research assistantship amount 1,240 † 9.6 9.6 

 N4TRNSM Traineeship amount 130 † 21.3 21.3 

 N4GASSM Other graduate assistantship amount 340 † 13.1 13.1 

 N4STAMT State grant/scholarship amount 8,310 † 13.0 13.0 

 N4AMNEMP Amount of employer aid 3,960 † 11.2 11.2 

 N4AMNVET Amount of veteran’s benefits 1,610 † 18.5 18.5 

 N4AMNPMP Amount of parents’ employer aid 1,080 † 16.6 16.6 

Section C: N4HOPE Claim Federal Hope scholarship 59,220 31.9 5.4 37.3 

Expenses N4DEDUCT Claim tuition tax deduction 59,250 33.6 3.7 37.3 

 N4LFLNG Claim lifetime learning tax credit 59,070 33.0 4.9 37.8 

 N4PARNC Parents income in 2003 40,210 12.6 1.7 14.3 

Section E: N4TRIBE State/federally recognized tribe 1,380 † 13.1 13.1 

Background N4RACES Race: other specify 6,870 † 17.6 17.6 

 N4SERCS Service: other specify 440 † 20.3 20.3 

 N4NEEDS Needs: other specify 510 † 32.9 32.9 

† Not applicable.

1 Item nonresponse rates were calculated based on the number of student interview respondents for whom the item 

was applicable and asked. 

NOTE: Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 2004 National Postsecondary Student Aid Study 

(NPSAS:04). 

The item with the highest rate of nonresponse in the student eligibility and enrollment 

section pertained to date of birth. Respondents who did not provide a date of birth were asked to 

provide a categorical age range (N4LT30). Of the respondents who did not provide a date of 

birth, about 18 percent also failed to provide a categorical age range. Students in firstprofessional programs were asked whether they had completed a baccalaureate degree in order to 

determine student status (N4PRBA). About 13 percent of students to whom this item was 

 

41 See chapter 6 and appendix K for analyses of nonresponse bias among all study respondents. 
Chapter 4. Evaluation of Field Operations and Data Quality 

93 

administered failed to provide a response. Two related items collected information about the 

second major (N4MAJ2A, N4MAJ2B; a verbatim string and categorical major code) for students 

working on a double major, which was missing for approximately 10 percent of cases. For 

students who attended other institutions in addition to the NPSAS school between July 1, 2003, 

and June 30, 2004, information was collected on the other institutions attended (N4LEVL2, 

N4CTRL2). The items pertaining to the level and control of the other institution were both 

collected for schools not codeable within the online IPEDS coding system. These items were 

missing for about 15 percent of respondents to whom these items applied. 

The financial aid section contained several forms that collected information about 

different types of financial aid received. In one series of items, graduate students were asked 

whether they had different types of assistantships or a traineeship, and then those who indicated 

having such aid were asked to provide a dollar amount (N4TASSM, N4RASSM, N4TRNSM, 

N4GASSM). About 10 percent of cases with either a graduate teaching or research assistantship 

did not provide a dollar amount. About 13 percent of those reporting another graduate 

assistantship did not provide a dollar amount, and 21 percent of students with a traineeship also 

left the dollar amount blank. In another series of items regarding financial aid, students were 

asked whether they had received certain types of aid not administered through the institutional 

financial aid office, including employer aid and veteran’s benefits (N4AMNEMP, N4AMNVET, 

N4AMNPMP). Rates of missing data ranged from 11 to 19 percent for the dollar amount items 

associated with these types of financial aid. Finally, about 13 percent of students who reported 

receiving a state grant or scholarship did not provide a dollar amount (N4STAMT). 

Items with the highest rates of nonresponse were from the section on expenses and 

pertained to tax deductions. The following three items were collected on one screen. Students 

were asked “whether or not they claimed a lifetime learning tax credit” (N4LFLNG), and only 62 

percent provided a valid response. Additionally, 37 percent of respondents had missing 

information on “whether or not they claimed a tax deduction for receipt of the Federal Hope 

scholarship” (N4HOPE) and “whether or not they claimed a tax deduction for tuition” 

(N4DEDUCT). The majority of nonresponse for these items was “don’t know” rather than 

“blank.” A substantial portion of respondents failed to provide information about their parents’ 

financial situation. Despite the use of conversion text (described in the previous section), about 

14 percent of respondents contain missing data on their parents’ income (N4PARNC). This is 

mostly because they do not know this information: about 13 percent do not know their parents’ 

income, while 2 percent left the item blank. 

Among the student background variables, items with the highest rates of nonresponse 

were those asked to respondents who reported having a disability. Of these, 33 percent had 

missing information on “other disability-related services and accommodations needed to assist 

with schooling that was not received” (N4NEEDS), and 20 percent had missing information on 

“other disability services or accommodations received to assist with schooling in the last 12 

months” (N4SERCS). 

In the telephone interview, attempts to convert item-level nonresponse are from a trained 

interviewer, while in the self-administered interview prompts to obtain answers for nonresponse 

are read by the respondent from a computer screen. It is important to understand which items, if 

any, are difficult for self-administered respondents to understand because they do not have the 

additional assistance of a trained interviewer while completing the interview. Therefore, in 
Chapter 4. Evaluation of Field Operations and Data Quality 

94 

addition to the overall analysis, item-level nonresponse was analyzed by administration mode. 

Items with 10 percent or more missing data in either mode are presented in table 44. 

Table 44. NPSAS:04 interview item nonresponse for items with more than 10 percent "don't 

know," by mode of administration 

Interview section Variable name Variable label 

Percent missing in 

self-administered 

interview 

Percent missing in 

interviewer-administered 

interview 

N4PRBA Earned bachelor’s while a firstprofessional student Section A: Eligibility 6.3 24.8* 

and Enrollment 

N4MAJ2A Major-secondary string 8.1 17.2* 

 N4MAJ2B Major-secondary category 6.6 17.2* 

 N4GPAEST Estimate of grade-point average (GPA) 13.4 6.6* 

 N4CMPDGN Completed requirements for degree 1.9 13.1* 

 N4LT30 Age: less than 30 17.8 17.7 

 N4SCH2 School 2 name 18.5 8.3* 

 N4CT2 School 2 city 13.5 8.7 

 N4ST2 School 2 state 10.1 6.6 

 N4LEVL2 School 2 level 19.9 9.5* 

 N4CTRL2 School 2 control 20.5 9.1* 

Section B: N4TASSM Teaching assistantship amount 9.7 9.5 

Financial Aid N4RASSM Research assistantship amount 9.5 9.8 

 N4GASSM Other graduate assistantship amount 14.5 9.8 

 N4STAMT State grant/scholarship amount 8.4 17.9* 

 N4INAMT School grant/scholarship amount 4.8 11.3* 

 N4AMNEMP Amount of employer aid 9.6 12.7* 

 N4AMNVET Amount of veteran’s benefits 19.1 18.0 

 N4AMNPMP Amount of parents’ employer aid 10.1 21.3* 

Section C: N4DEP03 Claimed as a dependent 11.3 7.4* 

Expenses N4HOPE Claim Federal Hope scholarship 48.7 27.1* 

 N4DEDUCT Claim tuition tax deduction 49.1 26.7* 

 N4LFLNG Claim lifetime learning tax credit 49.6 27.2* 

 N4INCSP Spouse’s earnings in 2003 2.3 13.0* 

 N4PARNC Parents’ income in 2003 5.6 21.4* 

Section E: N4TRIBE State/federally recognized tribe 6.1 17.9* 

Background N4DADED Father’s education 6.9 10.9* 

 N4RACES Race: other specify 20.4 16.3* 

 N4SERCS Service: other specify 15.6 23.0 

 N4NEEDS Needs: other specify 47.0 26.0* 

* Indicates a significant difference at the 0.05 level. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 2004 National Postsecondary Student Aid Study 

(NPSAS:04). 

Twenty items had rates of nonresponse higher than 10 percent among self-administered 

respondents. Of these, six were unique to those completing the survey online. Four of these items 

(N4ST2, N4CTRL2, N4SCH2, and N4CT2) were administered to respondents who attended 

another school in addition to their NPSAS school during the 2003–04 school year. It is possible 

that respondents were unsure whether and/or how to provide information about multiple 

postsecondary attendance without the assistance of a trained interviewer. The other two items 

were self-estimated grade-point average (GPA, N4GPAEST) and whether or not they were 

claimed as a dependent on their 2003 taxes (N4DEP03). 

Twenty-four items had rates of nonresponse higher than 10 percent from respondents 

who completed a telephone interview. Of these, 10 were unique to CATI respondents. Most of 
Chapter 4. Evaluation of Field Operations and Data Quality 

95 

these were items that inquired about information that could be deemed sensitive, such as 

personal information and family finances. For example, two were about grants/scholarships 

(N4STAMT; N4INAMT), two were about income (N4INCSP; N4PARNC), and one was about 

enrollment in a state or federally recognized tribe (N4TRIBE). It might be the case that 

respondents felt uncomfortable providing this information to an interviewer. 

To discern if there were systematic differences in item nonresponse between interviewerand self-administered interviews, all items administered to at least 100 respondents and that had 

at least 10 percent total missing in either self-administration or CATI administration mode were 

analyzed. The variables meeting this criterion are shown in table 43. For 12 of the 30 items, 

telephone interviews were more likely than self-administered interviews to have missing 

information (p < 0.05). For another 10 items, self-administered interviews were more likely than 

telephone interviews to have missing information (p < 0.05). There were no significant 

differences between telephone and Web interviews on 8 items. Items pertaining to sensitive 

information such as family finances tend to be missing in telephone interviews while items that 

might require further explanation such as multiple institutional attendance and tax deductions 

tend to be missing in self-administered interviews. 

4.3.5 CATI Monitoring and Quality Assurance 

Regular monitoring of telephone interviews leads to better interviewing and data quality 

as well as improvements in data collection costs and in the efficiency of the telephone facilities. 

To ensure that sufficient monitoring occurred for the full-scale NPSAS:04, monitoring sessions 

were conducted during day, evening, and weekend shifts. Monitors listened to and 

simultaneously viewed the progress of interviews using remote monitoring telephone and 

computer equipment. Monitors listened to up to 20 questions during an ongoing interview and, 

for each question, evaluated two aspects of interviewer performance: (1) correct delivery of 

questions (error in question delivery) and (2) accurate keying of the response (error in data 

entry). 

Measures of question delivery and data entry were developed and daily, weekly, and 

cumulative reports were produced. Monitoring took place throughout data collection, with a total 

of 14,775 items monitored. During the initial weeks of data collection, the number of 

observations was lower because telephone interviews were slow to start. Likewise, monitoring 

efforts were scaled back during the final weeks of data collection due to lighter caseloads. 

Among the 14,775 items observed, 77 delivery errors and 25 data entry errors were observed.

Error rates in delivery and data entry, by week of data collection are shown in figures 13 and 14, 

respectively. Overall error rates were low (typically below 2 percent) and within control limits.42

The peaks in error rates can be attributed to the assignment of new monitors who were learning 

how to monitor and count errors, and new interviewers who were becoming familiar with the 

student instrument.43

 

42 The upper and lower control limits were defined by three times the standard error of the proportion of errors to the 

number of questions observed for the period (+3 times the standard error for the upper limit; -3 times the standard 

error for the lower limit). Peaks in control limits can be attributed to variation in the number of observations across 

weeks. 

43 The number of student interviews to be completed required a large interviewing staff. There were several training 

sessions for new interviewers throughout data collection. 
Chapter 4. Evaluation of Field Operations and Data Quality 

96 

Figure 13. The 2004 National Postsecondary Student Aid Study (NPSAS:04) error rate: question 

delivery 

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2 21 2 2 2 25 2 27

Upper 

limit rate

M onitored

rate

Lower 

limit rate

Error rate

Week

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 2004 National Postsecondary Student Aid Study 

(NPSAS:04). 

Figure 14. The 2004 National Postsecondary Student Aid Study (NPSAS:04) error rate: data 

entry

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27

Upper 

limit rate

M onitored

rate

Lower 

limit rate

Error rate

Week

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 2004 National Postsecondary Student Aid Study 

(NPSAS:04). 
Chapter 4. Evaluation of Field Operations and Data Quality 

97 

Quality circle meetings 

Quality circle meetings provided an opportunity for NPSAS:04 interviewers to discuss 

data collection issues with project staff. Topics discussed during these meetings covered all 

aspects of data collection, including help desk, tracing and locating, and interviewing. Meetings 

were scheduled weekly during the day and evening shifts to ensure that all telephone 

interviewers had an opportunity to attend. Summaries of the discussions and decisions addressed 

during these meetings were compiled and distributed to all interviewers in the form of a 

newsletter. Issues covered in quality circle meetings included problem sheets, coding strategies, 

achieving gatekeeper cooperation, interview logic, and clarification of the intent of questions and 

help text. 
Chapter 4. Evaluation of Field Operations and Data Quality 

98 

This page left intentionally blank. 
99 

Chapter 5 

Variable Construction and File Development 

The data files for the 2004 National Postsecondary Student Aid Study (NPSAS:04) 

contain student-level and institution-level data collected from institution records, government 

databases, and student interviews. These files are available as a set of restricted research files, 

fully documented by an electronic codebook (ECB), and as a public release Data Analysis 

System (DAS), which also contains full documentation.44 This chapter describes each file and 

details the editing and documentation process. 

5.1 Overview of the NPSAS:04 Data Files 

The primary analysis file, from which the study DASs were constructed, contains data for 

approximately 90,700 study respondents. The primary analysis file contains over 500 variables, 

developed from multiple sources (see table 23 for information on the completeness of data 

available for study respondents). Throughout the data collection period, data were processed and 

examined for quality control purposes. Editing of student data began shortly after the start of 

self-administered Web data collection, when procedures and programs for this purpose were first 

developed. Similarly, editing of the institution record data began shortly after computer-assisted 

data entry (CADE) data collection was initialized. Anomalous values were investigated and 

resolved, where appropriate, through the use of data corrections and logical recodes. Interim files 

were delivered to the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) for review throughout the 

data collection period. 

Following completion of all study data collection, separate DAS files were created for 

undergraduate and graduate/first-professional students. The first DASs, both undergraduate and 

graduate/first-professional, were adjudicated and approved for public release in February 2005. 

Complete data for NPSAS:04 are located on the restricted access files and are 

documented by the ECB. The restricted files and the ECB are available to researchers who have 

applied for and received authorization from NCES to access restricted research files. 

Authorization may be obtained by contacting the NCES Data Security Office. The restricted use 

NPSAS:04 ECB contains information about the following files: 

• NPSAS Analysis File—Contains analytic variables derived from all NPSAS data 

sources as well as selected direct student interview variables. 

• Student Base Data File—Contains raw data collected from institutional records and 

the student interview for the study respondents. 

• Student Interview School Data File—Contains institution data obtained from the 

student interview for all study respondents. It is a student-level file; however, a 

student can have more than one record in the file. There is a separate record for each 

 

44 The electronic codebook (ECB) and Data Analysis System (DAS) are both fully documented software products 

available from the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES). The DAS is available online at 

http://nces.ed.gov/das. 
Chapter 5. Variable Construction and File Development 

100 

student for each postsecondary institution the student attended during the study year 

(up to six institutions). 

• Institution File—Contains selected institution-level variables for the sampled 

institutions. This file can be linked to the Student Base Data File by the Integrated 

Postsecondary Education Data System (IPEDS) UNITID number. 

• CPS 2003–04 Data File—Contains data received from the Central Processing System 

(CPS) for the study respondents who matched to the 2003–04 financial aid 

application files. 

• CPS 2004–05 Data File—Contains data received from CPS for the study respondents 

who matched to the 2004–05 financial aid application files. 

• NSLDS Federal Pell Data File—Contains raw grant-level data received from the 

National Student Loan Data System (NSLDS) for the study respondents who received 

Pell Grants during the NPSAS year or prior years. This is a history file with separate 

records for each transaction in the Pell system. 

• NSLDS Federal Loans Data File—Contains raw loan-level data received from 

NSLDS for the study respondents who received loans during the NPSAS year or prior 

years. This is a history file with separate records for each transaction. 

• Weights File—Contains all the sampling and analysis weights created for NPSAS:04. 

There is a separate record for each study respondent. 

• Weight History File—Contains all intermediate weight adjustment factors, as well as 

the final institution and student weights created for NPSAS:04. There is a separate 

record for each study respondent. 

5.2 Online Coding and Verification 

5.2.1 Online Coding 

The web-based student interview included an online coding system used to obtain IPEDS 

information for postsecondary institutions (other than the NPSAS institution from which they 

were sampled) that the student attended during the study year. After providing the state and city 

in which the institution is located, the online coding system displayed the list of all 

postsecondary institutions in that location, and the respondent or interviewer could select the 

appropriate institution. Upon selection, the name of the institution, as well as selected IPEDS 

variables (institutional level, control) were inserted into the database. This online coding system 

greatly reduced the IPEDS coding effort and amount of IPEDS file merging necessary after data 

collection was over. 

5.2.2 Range and Consistency Checks 

NPSAS:04 included two major web-based data collection systems: student record 

abstraction and the student interview. Both systems included edit checks to ensure data collected 

were within valid ranges. To the extent feasible, both systems incorporated across-item 

consistency edits. Whereas more extensive consistency checks would have been technically 

possible, use of such edits was limited to prevent excessive respondent burden. Below is a 
Chapter 5. Variable Construction and File Development 

101 

description of the online range and consistency checks incorporated into the two Web 

instruments. 

General verifications 

• Range checks were applied to all numerical entries, such that only valid numeric 

responses could be entered. 

• If, in response to a “check all that apply” question, a valid answer and the “none of 

the above” option were both checked, respondents and interviewers were notified to 

uncheck other options before checking the “none of the above” option. 

• Pop-up messages confirmed responses that fell outside prespecified ranges for 

selected numeric values such as income and hours worked per week. Some checks 

were soft, allowing the respondent to keep the out-of-range response, and some 

checks were hard, requiring that the respondent update the response to one that fell 

within the valid range. 

• Consistency checks identified conflicting responses (e.g., if the highest degree 

expected to earn was lower than the current degree) and allowed respondents the 

opportunity to change answers as appropriate. 

5.3 Data Editing 

The NPSAS:04 data were edited using procedures developed and implemented for 

previous NCES-sponsored studies, including NPSAS:2000. Edit checks were performed on the 

NPSAS:04 student interview data and CADE data, both during and upon completion of data 

collection, to confirm that the intended skip patterns were implemented in both instruments. At 

the conclusion of data collection, special codes were added as needed to indicate the reason for 

missing data. Missing data within individual data elements can occur for a variety of reasons. 

Table 45 lists each missing value code and its associated meaning in the NPSAS:04 data files. 

Table 45. Description of missing data codes: 2004 

Missing data code Description 

–1 

Don’t know (student interview) 

Data not available (computer-assisted data entry [CADE]) 

–3 Not applicable 

–6 Value out of range 

–71

 Item was not reached (either partial interviews or student interview nonrespondents) 

–8 Item was not reached due to an error 

–9 Data missing, reason unknown 

1

 This code was only applicable for student interview data items. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 2004 National Postsecondary 

Student Aid Study (NPSAS:04). 

Skip-pattern relationships in the database were examined by methodically running crosstabulations between gate items and their associated nested items. In many instances, gate-nest 

relationships had multiple levels within the CADE or student instrument. That is, items nested 

within a gate question may themselves have been gate items for additional items. Therefore, 

validating the gate-nest relationships often required much iteration and many multiway crosstabulations. 
Chapter 5. Variable Construction and File Development 

102 

The data cleaning and editing process for the NPSAS:04 CADE and student interview 

data involved a multistage process that consisted of the following steps: 

Step 1. Blank or missing data were replaced with -9 for all variables in the instrument 

database. A one-way frequency distribution of every variable was reviewed to 

confirm that no missing or blank values remained. These same one-way 

frequencies revealed any out-of-range or outlier values, which were 

investigated and checked for reasonableness against other data values. 

Example: hourly wages of $0.10, rather than $10.00. Creating SAS formats 

from expected values and the associated value labels also revealed any 

categorical outliers. 

Descriptive statistics were produced for all continuous variables. All values 

less than zero were temporarily recoded to missing. Minimum, median, 

maximum, and mean values were examined to assess reasonableness of 

responses and anomalous data patterns were investigated and corrected as 

necessary. 

Step 2. Legitimate skips were identified using instrument source code. Gate-nest 

relationships were defined to replace -9’s (missing for unknown reason) with 

-3’s (not applicable) as appropriate. Two-way cross-tabulations between each 

gate-nest combination were evaluated, and high numbers of nonreplaced -9 

codes were investigated to ensure skip-pattern integrity. 

Nested values were further quality checked to reveal instances in which the 

legitimate skip code overwrote valid data which typically occurred if a 

respondent answered a gate question and the appropriate nested item(s), but 

then backed up and changed the value of the gate, following an alternate path 

of nested item(s). Responses to the first nested item(s) remained in the database 

and, therefore, required editing. 

In cases where it could not be determined whether nested items had been 

legitimately skipped because the response to the gate item was indeterminate 

(either blank, -9, or don’t know, -1), the edit code replaced -9’s in nested items 

with the same value as the gate item. In this way, the value of the gate item was 

carried through to the nested items. 

Step 3. Variable formatting (e.g., formatting dates as YYYYMM) and standardization 

of time units, for items which collected amount of time in multiple units, were 

performed during this step. In addition, any new codes assigned by expert 

coders reviewing IPEDS codes from the student interview (including those 

institutions that were unable to be coded during the interview) were merged 

back with the interview data files. 

Also at this step, logical recodes were performed when the value of missing 

items could be determined from answers to previous questions or preloaded 

values. For instance, if the student did not work while enrolled, then the 

amount earned should have been coded to $0 rather than -3 or -9. If a student 

indicated he or she was not disabled, then the “nested” disability items under 

the gate question were logically recoded to “no.” 
Chapter 5. Variable Construction and File Development 

103 

Step 4. At this step,45 special codes of -3 and -9 in the student interview file were 

replaced with -7 (item not administered) based on the section completion 

indicators. The -7 code allows analysts to easily distinguish items that were 

either skipped or simply left blank from items not administered (cases where 

the respondent broke off during the Web interview, or for study respondents 

who were nonrespondents to the student interview.) 

Step 5. One-way frequency distributions for all categorical variables and descriptive 

statistics for all continuous variables were examined. Out-of-range or outlier 

values were either replaced with the value of -6 (bad data, out of range) or 

recoded to a more reasonable value. For example, in CADE, if a user reported 

a Pell Grant amount for a student of more than $4,050 (the maximum amount 

allowed) that value was set to $4,050. 

Step 6. One-way frequencies on all categorical variables were regenerated and 

examined. Variables with high counts of -9 values were investigated. Because 

self-administered Web respondents could skip over most items without 

providing an answer, -9’s did remain a valid value, especially for sensitive 

items, such as those asking for financial information. 

Concurrent with the data cleaning process, detailed documentation was developed to 

describe question text, response options, logical recodes, and the “applies to” text for each 

delivered variable. 

5.4 Data Perturbation 

To protect the confidentiality of NCES data that contain information about specific 

individuals, NPSAS:04 data were subject to perturbation procedures to minimize disclosure risk. 

Perturbation procedures, which have been approved by the NCES Disclosure Review Board, 

preserve the central tendency estimates but may result in slight increases in non-sampling errors. 

In a study like NPSAS, there are multiple sources of data for some variables (CPS, 

CADE, student interview, etc.) and reporting differences can occur in each. Data swapping and 

other forms of perturbation, implemented to protect respondent confidentiality, can lead to 

inconsistencies as well. 

5.5 Statistical Imputations 

All variables with missing data were imputed, following procedures46 described by Ault 

et al. (2003). The imputation procedures employed a two-step process. In the first step, the 

matching criteria and imputation classes that were used to stratify the dataset were identified 

such that all imputation was processed independently within each class. In the second step, the 

weighted sequential hot deck process was implemented,47 whereby missing data were replaced 

with valid data from donor records that match the recipients with respect to the matching criteria. 

 

45 This step was not applicable for student record (computer-assisted data entry [CADE]) data. 46 The methodology described by Ault et al. (2003), was followed with the exception that variances resulting from 

imputing variable values were not calculated. 

47 The term “hot deck” refers to the fact that the set of potential donors changes for each recipient. In contrast, cold 

deck imputation defines one static set of donors for all recipients. In all such imputation schemes, the selection of the 

donor from the entire deck is a random process. 
Chapter 5. Variable Construction and File Development 

104 

Variables requiring imputation were not imputed simultaneously. However, some 

variables that were related substantively were grouped together into blocks, and the variables 

within a block were imputed simultaneously. Basic demographic variables were imputed first 

using variables with full information to determine the matching criteria. The order in which 

variables were imputed was also determined to some extent by the substantive nature of the 

variables. For example, basic demographics (such as age) were imputed first and these were used 

to process education variables (such as student level and enrollment intensity) which in turn were 

used to impute the financial aid variables (such as aid receipt and loan amounts). 

For variables with less than 5 percent missing data, the variables used for matching 

criteria were selected based on prior knowledge about the dataset and the known relationships 

between variables. For example, in almost all cases student’s age and enrollment intensity (fulltime/part-time status) were used as matching variables in the imputation process. 

For variables with more than 5 percent missing data, a statistical process called ChiSquare Automatic Interaction Detection (CHAID) was used to identify the matching criteria that 

were most closely related to the variable being imputed (Kass 1980). This step produced a 

number of imputation classes which contained sets of donors that were used to impute recipients 

belonging to that class. Imputation classes were formed based on a CHAID analysis of likely 

candidates for variables related to those being imputed. Efficiency was improved by introducing 

a common set of related variables as input into the CHAID process (see Ault et al. 2003). The 

resulting imputation classes varied for each variable or blocks of variables input to CHAID. In 

the case of the analytically less important variables that were imputed later in the process, such 

as the raw student interview variables, one common set of imputation classes was used. Efforts 

were made to define groups of imputation variables for which a common set of imputation 

classes would be optimal. 

Next, the imputation classes were input to a SAS macro that implemented the weighted 

sequential hot deck procedure. Data were sorted within each imputation class to increase the 

chance of obtaining a close match between donor and recipient. The hot deck process searches 

for donors sequentially, starting with the recipient and progressing up and down the sorted file to 

find the set of eligible donors from which a random selection of one was made. The process is 

weighted since it incorporates the sample weight of each record in the search and selection 

routine (Cox 1980; Iannacchione 1982). 

In some cases, further intervention was needed to ensure accuracy and consistency of 

imputation as determined by preexisting edit rules. For example, to impute the level of parents’ 

education, when it is known that the parents have some college but not the parents’ specific 

education level, the potential pool of donors was limited to those with at least some college 

education, to prevent imputing parents’ education level as less than college. 

Finally, given the number of variables and the complexity of the relationships among 

them, it was virtually impossible to identify and eliminate all inconsistencies. The objective was 

to reduce inconsistencies as much as possible, especially for key analytic variables. The 

objective of the imputation program was to efficiently impute for all missing data such that the 

process could be completed within a very short timeframe after the end of data collection. The 

aim was to replace missing data with data that were valid in all cases, with only a few relatively 

minor and unimportant exceptions. 
Chapter 5. Variable Construction and File Development 

105 

Imputation diagnostics consisted of three checks: overall imputation checks, imputation 

checks by class variables, and multivariate consistency checks. The overall imputation checks 

compared the sum of the weights and unweighted counts for each level of the imputed variable 

before and after imputation. The imputation checks by class variables evaluated the number of 

times a given observation was used as a donor, and compared the sum of the weights and 

unweighted counts for each level of the imputed variable in the defined imputation classes before 

and after the imputation. Differences of 5 percent or more flagged the imputation class for 

further review. Finally, multivariate consistency checks ensured that relationships between 

variables were maintained and that any special instructions for the imputation were implemented 

properly. 

In any of the three aforementioned checks, if there was any evidence of substantial 

deviation from the weighted sums or any identified inconsistencies, the imputation process was 

revised and rerun. For a few variables, the inconsistencies were corrected without rerunning the 

imputation. In these cases, the inconsistencies were corrected after the imputation. 

Some results of the imputation process are provided in appendix H which presents the 

percentage missing for each variable subject to imputation, both for the total sample and for 

undergraduate students, as well as pre- and post-imputation distributions for eight key variables. 

5.6 Composite and Derived Variable Construction 

Analytic variables were created by examining the data available for each student from the 

various data sources, establishing relative priorities of the data sources—on an item-by-item 

basis—and reconciling discrepancies within and between sources. In some cases, the derived or 

composite variables were created by simply assigning a value from the available source of 

information given the highest priority. In other cases, raw interview items were recoded or 

otherwise summarized to create a derived variable. A listing of the set of analysis variables 

derived for NPSAS:04 appears in appendix I. Specific details regarding the creation of each 

variable appear in the variable descriptions contained in the ECB and DAS. 
Chapter 5. Variable Construction and File Development 

106 

This page left intentionally blank. 
107 

Chapter 6 

Unit Nonresponse Bias Analyses, 

Weighting, and Variance Estimation 

Statistical analysis weights were computed for study respondents (defined in section 3.2), 

so that the study respondents represent the target population described in section 2.1. The 

statistical analysis weights compensated for the unequal probability of selection of institutions 

and students in the 2004 National Postsecondary Student Aid Study (NPSAS) sample. The 

weights also adjusted for multiplicity at the institution and student levels, unknown student 

eligibility, nonresponse, and poststratification. The institution weight was computed and then 

used as a component of the student weight. Weights were computed for study respondents as the 

product of the following 13 weight components: 

(1) institution sampling weight (WT1); 

(2) institution multiplicity adjustment (WT2); 

(3) institution poststratification adjustment (WT3); 

(4) institution nonresponse adjustment (WT4); 

(5) student sampling weight (WT5); 

(6) student subsampling weight (WT6); 

(7) first student multiplicity adjustment (WT7); 

(8) student unknown eligibility adjustment (WT8); 

(9) student not located adjustment (WT9); 

(10) student refusal adjustment (WT10); 

(11) student other nonresponse adjustment (WT11); 

(12) second student multiplicity adjustment (WT12); and 

(13) student poststratification adjustment (WT13). 

Each weight component, described in the following sections, represents either a 

probability of selection or a weight adjustment. All nonresponse, extreme weight, and 

poststratification adjustments were computed using RTI’s proprietary generalized exponential 

models (GEM) (Folsom and Singh 2000), which are similar to logistic models using bounds for 

adjustment factors and bounds on variance inflation. The GEM approach is a general version of 

weighting adjustments based on Deville and Särndal’s logit model (1992). GEM is not a 

competing method to weighting class adjustment, rather it is a method utilized to do weight 

adjustments with a choice of optional features to employ. GEM controls at the margins as 

opposed to controlling at the cell level, as with weighting class adjustments. This allows 

consideration of greater numbers of variables. GEM is designed so that the sum of the unadjusted 

weights for all eligible units equals the sum of the adjusted weights for the respondents. GEM 

also constrains the nonresponse adjustment factors to be greater than or equal to one. 
Chapter 6. Unit Nonresponse Bias Analyses, Weighting and Variance Estimation 

108 

To prevent the variance from becoming too large, the bounds on adjustment factors were 

loosened, where necessary. The unequal weighting effects (UWEs) and maximum adjustment 

factors were monitored to ensure reasonable values. 

A key feature and advantage of the GEM software is that the nonresponse adjustment and 

weight trimming and smoothing are all accomplished in one step. Lower and upper bounds are 

set on the weight adjustment factors. The bounds on the weight adjustment factors can vary, 

depending on whether the weight falls inside or outside a range, such as the one defined by the 

bounds used to identify extreme weights (median weight ± 3 times the interquartile range). This 

allows different bounds to be set for adjustments for weights that are considered high extreme 

(weight = median +3 times the interquartile range), low extreme (weight = median -3 times the 

interquartile range), or non-extreme. In this way, the extreme weights can be controlled and the 

design effect due to unequal weighting can be reduced. See appendix J for details of the GEM 

procedure. 

The bias in an estimated mean based on respondents, y

–R, is the difference between this 

mean and the target parameter, π, i.e., the mean that would be estimated if a complete census of 

the target population was conducted and everyone responded. This bias can be expressed as 

follows: 

B(yR ) = yR −π

The estimated mean based on nonrespondents, y

–NR, can be computed if data for the 

particular variable are available for most of the nonrespondents. The true target parameter, π, can 

be estimated for these variables as follows: 

ˆ (1 ) R NR π ηη =− + y y

where η is the weighted unit (or item) nonresponse rate. For the variables that are from the 

frame, rather than from the sample, π can be estimated without sampling error. The bias can then 

be estimated as follows: 

( ) ˆ ˆ By y R R = −π

or equivalently 

( ) ( ) ˆ

B R R NR y yy = − η . 

This formula shows that the estimate of the nonresponse bias is the difference between 

the mean for respondents and nonrespondents multiplied by the weighted nonresponse rate. 

Nonresponse bias analysis was conducted when the response rate at any level 

(institutions, students, items) was below 85 percent.48 Institution and student nonresponse bias 

analyses were performed and are described in sections 6.1 and 6.2, respectively. An item 

nonresponse bias analysis was also performed and is described in section 6.3. Section 6.4 

discusses variance estimation, including Taylor series, bootstrap replicate weights, and variance 

approximation using design effects. 

 

48 See National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) statistical standards for a discussion of nonresponse bias 

analysis (U.S. Department of Education 2003). 
Chapter 6. Unit Nonrepsonse Bias Analyses, Weighting and Variance Estimation 

109 

6.1 Institution Nonresponse Bias Analysis and Weighting 

6.1.1 Initial Institution Weight Components 

There were two initial institution weight components, described below. 

(1) Institution Sampling Weight (WT1) 

The sampling weight for each sample institution was the reciprocal of its probability of 

selection. As described in appendix B, the probability of selection for institution i was 

( ) for noncertainty selections ( ) ( )

1 for certainty selections. 

r r

r r

nS i

π i S

⎧

⎪ = ⎨ +

⎪

⎩

where 

nr = the sample size in stratum r, 

Sr(i) = the measure of size for the i-th school in stratum r, and 

Sr(+) = the total measure of size for all schools in stratum r. 

Therefore, the institution sampling weight was assigned as follows: 

WT1 = 1 / πr (i) . 

(2) Institution Multiplicity Adjustment (WT2) 

Each institution on the sampling frame initially had one chance of selection. However, 

the lists for some sample institutions came from a system office or a main campus. Such lists 

contained students from more than one institution. Some of these lists clearly identified the 

campus that each student attended, and each campus was treated as a separate institution. 

If a student attended more than one institution or campus, then the student had multiple 

chances of selection. Student multiplicity adjustments are described below. In NPSAS:04, about 

10 enrollment lists were provided that represented more than one institution without clearly 

identifying which institution or campus each student attended. Therefore, the sample of students 

was selected from the one list. These institutions were treated as having multiple chances of 

being selected into the sample because each institution was sampled individually but also was 

brought into the sample by another institution or campus. 

When an institution had two chances of selection, a multiplicity adjustment was 

performed by first estimating, as if the selections were independent, the probability that either 

record could be selected: 

P(A or B) = P(A) + P(B) - P(A)P(B). 

Then, the new sampling weight was calculated as the reciprocal of this probability: 

NEW_WT1 = 1 / P(A or B). 

When an institution had three chances of selection, a multiplicity adjustment was 

performed by first estimating the probability that any record could be selected: 
Chapter 6. Unit Nonresponse Bias Analyses, Weighting and Variance Estimation 

110 

P(A or B or C) = (P(A) + P(B) +P(C)) - (P(A)P(B) + P(A)P(C) +P(B)P(C)) + 

P(A)P(B)P(C). 

Then, the new sampling weight was calculated as the reciprocal of this probability: 

NEW_WT1 = 1 / P(A or B or C). 

When an institution had four or more chances of selection, a multiplicity adjustment was 

performed by first estimating the probability that any record could be selected: 

P(A or B or C or D...) ≈ 1 - (1-P(A)) * (1-P(B)) * (1-P(C)) * (1-P(D)) * .... 

Then, the new sampling weight was calculated as the reciprocal of this probability: 

NEW_WT1 = 1 / P(A or B or C or D...). 

Finally, the multiplicity adjustment factor was derived by dividing the new sampling 

weight by the old sampling weight, 

WT2 = NEW_WT1 / WT1, 

for the institutions with positive multiplicity, and setting it to unity (1.00) for all other 

institutions. Hence, the product of WT1 and WT2 equals NEW_WT1 for the institutions with 

positive multiplicity and equals WT1 for all other institutions. 

6.1.2 Assessing Institution Nonresponse Bias 

As shown in chapter 3 (table 8), the institution weighted response rate was below 85 

percent for all institutions and for six of the nine types of institutions. Therefore, a nonresponse 

bias analysis was conducted for all institutions and for the six types of institutions with a 

weighted response rate below 85 percent. A nonresponse bias analysis was also conducted for 

eight state-level sectors with a weighted response rate less than 85 percent. The nonresponse bias 

was estimated for variables known, i.e., nonmissing, for most respondents and nonrespondents. 

There are extensive data available for all institutions from the Integrated Postsecondary 

Education Data System (IPEDS), and the following variables were used:49

• type of institution;50

• Carnegie classification; 

• degree of urbanization; 

• Office of Business Economics (OBE) region; 

• historically Black college or university indicator; 

• percent of students receiving federal grant aid; 

• percent of students receiving state/local grant aid; 

• percent of students receiving institutional grant aid; 

• percent of students receiving student loan aid; 

• percent of students enrolled: Hispanic; 

 

49 For the continuous variables, categories were formed based on medians, quartiles, or logical breaks. 50 Type of institution was only used in the nonresponse bias analysis for all institutions. 
Chapter 6. Unit Nonrepsonse Bias Analyses, Weighting and Variance Estimation 

111 

• percent of students enrolled: Asian or Pacific Islander; 

• percent of students enrolled: Black, non-Hispanic; 

• total undergraduate enrollment; 

• male undergraduate enrollment; 

• female undergraduate enrollment; 

• total graduate/first-professional enrollment; 

• male graduate/first-professional enrollment; and 

• female graduate/first-professional enrollment. 

For the institution-level variables listed above, the nonresponse bias was estimated and 

tested (adjusting for multiple comparisons) to determine if the bias was significant at the 5 

percent level. Table 46 shows that about 6 percent of the variable categories are significantly 

biased for all institutions before nonresponse weight adjustments. When nonresponse bias was 

evaluated by institution type, the percent of the variable categories with significant bias before 

nonresponse weight adjustments ranged from 0 to 11 percent. Results of nonresponse bias 

analysis after weight adjustments are discussed in section 6.1.4. 

Table 46. Summary of institution nonresponse bias analysis for all institutions, by type of 

institution: 2004 

Nonresponse bias statistics 

All 

institutions 

Public 

less-than2-year 

Public 

2-year 

Public 4-

year nondoctorate 

Private not-forprofit 4-year 

non-doctorate 

Private notfor-profit 4-

year doctorate 

Private forprofit lessthan-2-year 

Before weight adjustments 

 Mean estimated bias 0.10 0.24 0.14 0.2 0.10 0.19 0.12 

 Median estimated bias 0.05 0.17 0.08 0.14 0.06 0.06 0.07 

 Percent significant bias 5.61 6.35 6.85 10.84 2.22 # 4.48 

After weight adjustments 

 Mean estimated bias 0.13 0.32 0.24 0.25 0.18 0.22 0.22 

 Median estimated bias 0.05 0.29 0.12 0.23 0.09 0.1 0.19 

 Percent significant bias # # # 2.41 1.11 # 1.49 

# Rounds to zero. 

NOTE: Nonresponse bias analysis was conducted for all institutions and the six types of institutions with a weighted response rate 

less than 85 percent. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 2004 National Postsecondary Student Aid Study 

(NPSAS:04). 

6.1.3 Adjusting Institution Weights 

There were two additional institution weight components, described below. 

(3) Institution Poststratification Adjustment (WT3) 

To ensure population coverage, the institution sampling weight adjusted for multiplicity 

was adjusted to control totals for enrollment by institution type and size using GEM. The 

enrollment totals came from the 2003 IPEDS fall enrollment file. 

Table 47 presents the variables associated with the control totals and the average weight 

adjustment factors by these variables. The weight adjustment factors from GEM met the 

following constraints: 
Chapter 6. Unit Nonresponse Bias Analyses, Weighting and Variance Estimation 

112 

• minimum: 0.72; 

• median: 1.02; and 

• maximum: 1.21. 

Table 47. Weight adjustment factors for institution poststratification: 2004 

Model predictor variables1 Control total2

Average weight adjustment factor 

(WT3) 

 Total 17,610,549 † 

 

Public less-than-2-year, small 23,644 1.11 

Public less-than-2-year, large 54,708 0.96 

Public 2-year, small 1,590,649 1.13 

Public 2-year, large 4,668,436 0.94 

Public 4-year non-doctorate-granting, small 775,807 0.72 

Public 4-year non-doctorate-granting, large 1,291,391 1.04 

Public 4-year doctorate-granting, small 1,395,624 1.12 

Public 4-year doctorate-granting, large 3,235,188 0.98 

Private not-for-profit 2-year or less, small 37,930 1.21 

Private not-for-profit 2-year or less, large 60,212 0.95 

Private not-for-profit 4-year, non-doctorate-granting, small 442,161 1.03 

Private not-for-profit 4-year, non-doctorate-granting, large 1,161,689 0.96 

Private not-for-profit 4-year doctorate-granting, small 422,843 1.08 

Private not-for-profit 4-year doctorate-granting, large 1,406,581 1.02 

Private for-profit less-than-2-year, small 101,034 0.95 

†Not applicable. 

1 Size for poststratification weighting classes was based on the median enrollment within sector for the institutions on the 

sampling frame. 

2 Control totals are the sum of enrollment across institutions based on Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System 

(IPEDS) 2003 enrollment data. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 2004 National Postsecondary Student 

Aid Study (NPSAS:04). 

(4) Institution Nonresponse Adjustment (WT4) 

The institutional respondent definition is provided in section 3.1.1. A weighting 

adjustment using GEM was performed to compensate for nonresponding institutions. The 

nonresponse adjustments were designed to significantly reduce or eliminate nonresponse bias for 

variables included in the models. Predictor variables were chosen that were thought to be 

predictive of response status and were nonmissing for most respondents and nonrespondents. 

The candidate predictor variables are those used in the nonresponse bias analysis described 

above with the addition of state. 

Predictors used in the nonresponse modeling included all the candidate predictor 

variables identified as well as certain potentially important interactions. To identify these 

interactions, the Chi-square automatic interaction detection (CHAID) algorithm (Kass 1980) was 

used. CHAID is a hierarchical clustering algorithm that successively partitions individuals 

according to categorical predictors for a categorical dependent variable. The algorithm begins 

with all study individuals as a whole and cycles over each predictor, finding for each predictor an 

optimal partition of the individuals according to its levels. The most significant optimal partition 

is then retained, and the CHAID algorithm is again applied to the members of that partition to 
Chapter 6. Unit Nonrepsonse Bias Analyses, Weighting and Variance Estimation 

113 

find further partitions using the remaining predictors. The algorithm is stopped after a specified 

number of partitioning steps or if none of the partitions at a given step is found to be significant. 

Application of the CHAID algorithm provided interaction terms for the nonresponse 

adjustment models. CHAID was run for up to three segments, resulting in identification of twoway and three-way interactions. 

Some of the predictor variables (Carnegie classification, female undergraduate 

enrollment, and graduate/first-professional enrollment) were dropped from the adjustment model 

due to singularity, which prevents the model from running properly. Singularity occurs when a 

combination of variables can be used to determine the values of another variable, e.g., total 

enrollment and male enrollment can be used to determine female enrollment. 

Table 48 presents the response rates and the resulting adjustment factors by the model 

variables. The weight adjustment factors from GEM met the following constraints: 

• minimum: 1.00; 

• median: 1.08; and 

• maximum: 5.10. 

Table 48. Weight adjustment factors for institution nonresponse adjustment: 2004 

Model predictor variables 

Number of 

respondents 

Weighted 

response 

rate 

Average weight 

adjustment 

factor (WT4) 

Total 1,360 80.0 † 

Institution strata 

Public less-than-2-year 50 74.3 1.32 

Public 2-year 320 77.6 1.19 

Public 4-year non-doctorate-granting 110 70.3 1.32 

Public 4-year doctorate-granting 200 87.1 1.15 

Private not-for-profit 2-year or less 70 92.6 1.10 

Private not-for-profit 4-year non-doctorate-granting 220 78.1 1.21 

Private not-for-profit 4-year doctorate-granting 170 80.8 1.24 

Private for-profit less-than-2-year 140 82.3 1.25 

Private for-profit 2-year or more 90 88.2 1.14 

State 

California 130 65.4 1.46 

Connecticut 40 95.8 1.15 

Delaware 10 100.0 1.19 

Georgia 90 98.6 1.02 

Illinois 70 86.8 1.19 

Indiana 60 98.3 1.02 

Minnesota 70 97.7 1.03 

Nebraska 20 81.0 1.37 

New York 120 88.7 1.10 

Oregon 50 91.9 1.13 

Tennessee 70 96.4 1.02 

Texas 100 88.9 1.23 

Other 540 77.9 1.27 

See notes at end of table. 
Chapter 6. Unit Nonresponse Bias Analyses, Weighting and Variance Estimation 

114 

Table 48. Weight adjustment factors for institution nonresponse adjustment: 2004—Continued 

Model predictor variables 

Number of 

respondents 

Weighted 

response 

rate 

Average weight 

adjustment 

factor (WT4) 

Total male graduate/first-professional enrollment1 

<= 727 330 75.3 1.24 

> 727 310 84.0 1.22 

Total Enrollment = 0 730 78.6 1.19 

Total graduate/first-professional enrollment1 

<= 1,820.5 320 72.6 1.26 

> 1,820.5 320 84.9 1.20 

Total enrollment = 0 730 78.6 1.19 

Total male undergraduate enrollment2 

<=281 340 81.8 1.19 

>281, <=1251 340 75.7 1.24 

>1,251, <=4,208.5 340 77.2 1.21 

>4,208.5 350 82.1 1.18 

Total undergraduate enrollment2 

<= 825.5 330 79.2 1.21 

>825.5, <=2,938 340 75.5 1.23 

>2,938, <=9,799.5 350 77.8 1.21 

>9,799.5 350 82.0 1.18 

Percent receiving federal grant aid 

<=25 400 82.3 1.17 

>25, <=50 490 77.0 1.19 

>50, <=75 230 82.2 1.16 

>75 120 79.4 1.36 

Unavailable or unknown 120 79.6 1.32 

Percent receiving institutional grant aid 

<=25 710 78.7 1.20 

>25, <=50 210 83.1 1.17 

>50, <=75 130 78.1 1.30 

>75 200 82.5 1.16 

Unavailable or unknown 120 79.6 1.32 

Percent receiving student loan aid 

<=25 430 79.7 1.15 

>25, <=50 330 82.9 1.17 

>50, <=75 320 82.2 1.17 

>75 180 64.0 1.40 

Unavailable or unknown 120 79.6 1.32 

Percent enrolled: Black, non-Hispanic 

<=25 1,150 80.8 1.22 

>25, <=50 130 85.6 1.14 

>50, <=75 30 76.8 1.32 

>75 50 89.8 1.07 

Unavailable or unknown 10 12.7 1.16 

See notes at end of table. 
Chapter 6. Unit Nonrepsonse Bias Analyses, Weighting and Variance Estimation 

115 

Table 48. Weight adjustment factors for institution nonresponse adjustment: 2004—Continued 

Model predictor variables 

Number of 

respondents 

Weighted 

response 

rate 

Average weight 

adjustment 

factor (WT4) 

Percent enrolled: Hispanic 

<=25 1,180 81.6 1.20 

>25, <=50 100 76.9 1.22 

>50, <=75 30 76.1 1.47 

>75 40 88.4 1.24 

Unavailable or unknown 10 12.7 1.16 

Percent receiving state/local grant aid 

<=25 620 79.2 1.23 

>25, <=50 360 76.8 1.21 

>50, <=75 180 87.7 1.11 

>75 90 86.8 1.10 

Unavailable or unknown 120 79.6 1.32 

Historically Black college or university 

Yes 30 89.9 1.04 

No 1,340 79.8 1.21 

Degree of urbanization 

Large city 360 80.6 1.24 

Mid-size city 370 81.1 1.18 

Urban fringe of large city 260 75.2 1.30 

Urban fringe of mid-size city 80 80.7 1.14 

Large town 50 85.7 1.15 

Small town 170 78.7 1.19 

Rural 40 90.0 1.05 

Not assigned 30 94.1 1.05 

Bureau of Economic Analysis Code (Office of Business Economics 

[OBE]) Region3 

New England 90 67.8 1.32 

Mid East 200 74.6 1.32 

Great Lakes 210 84.5 1.14 

Plains 140 86.6 1.13 

Southeast 320 87.3 1.09 

Southwest 130 86.0 1.22 

Rocky Mountains 40 73.1 1.31 

Far West 200 70.3 1.35 

Outlying areas 30 99.6 1.00 

CHAID segments 

In California 130 65.4 1.46 

In one of the 12 states other than California; public, private notfor-profit less-than-4-year or private not-for-profit 4-year nondoctorate-granting; percent receiving institutional grant aid <= 

50 percent 

380 94.6 1.05 

In one of the 12 states other than California; private not-for-profit 

4-year doctorate-granting or private for-profit; percent receiving 

institutional grant aid <= 50 percent 

70 82.8 1.22 

In one of the 12 states other than California; percent receiving 

institutional grant aid > 50 and <= 75 

70 79.2 1.30 

See notes at end of table. 
Chapter 6. Unit Nonresponse Bias Analyses, Weighting and Variance Estimation 

116 

Table 48. Weight adjustment factors for institution nonresponse adjustment: 2004—Continued 

Model predictor variables 

Number of 

respondents 

Weighted 

response 

rate 

Average weight 

adjustment 

factor (WT4) 

In one of the 12 states other than California; percent receiving 

institutional grant aid > 75 

130 90.6 1.09 

In one of the 12 states other than California; percent receiving 

institutional grant aid unavailable or unknown 

50 81.4 1.22 

Not in one of the 12 states; in New England or Mid East; percent 

receiving student loan aid <= 75 

80 71.4 1.29 

Not in one of the 12 states; in New England or Mid East; percent 

receiving student loan aid > 75 or unavailable or unknown 

40 39.9 2.18 

Not in one of the 12 states; in region other than New England or 

Mid East; female graduate/first-professional enrollment > 

1,073.54 

190 86.6 1.13 

Not in one of the 12 states; in region other than New England or 

Mid East; female graduate/first-professional enrollment = 04 230 77.5 1.21 

†Not applicable. 

1

 Graduate/first-professional enrollment categories were defined by the median. 

2

 Undergraduate enrollment categories were defined by quartiles. 3 New England = Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Rhode Island, Vermont; Mid East = Delaware, 

District of Columbia, Maryland, New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania; Great Lakes = Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Ohio, 

Wisconsin; Plains = Iowa, Kansas, Minnesota, Missouri, Nebraska, North Dakota, South Dakota; 

Southeast = Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, North Carolina, South Carolina, 

Tennessee, Virginia, West Virginia; Southwest = Arizona, New Mexico, Oklahoma, Texas; Rocky Mountains = 

Colorado, Idaho, Montana, Utah, Wyoming; Far West = Alaska, California, Hawaii, Nevada, Oregon, Washington 

Outlying Areas = American Samoa, Federated States of Micronesia, Guam, Marshall Islands, Northern Mariana, 

Puerto Rico, Palau, Virgin Islands. 

4

 Female enrollment variables were used in Chi-square automatic interaction detection (CHAID) to determine 

segments but were later excluded from the nonresponse adjustment due to singularities in the model. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 2004 National Postsecondary 

Student Aid Study (NPSAS:04). 

6.1.4 Institution Weighting Adjustment Performance 

As shown in table 46, the institution weighting adjustments eliminated some, but not all, 

significant bias. However, for all institutions, public less-than-2-year institutions, and public 2-

year institutions, no significant bias remains after weighting for the variables analyzed. For the 

other types of institutions, the percent of variable categories with significant bias decreased after 

weight adjustments. Significant bias was reduced for the variables known for most respondents 

and nonrespondents, which are considered to be some of the more analytically important 

variables and are correlated with many of the other variables. Appendix K contains detailed 

tables showing the estimated bias before and after weight adjustments for each domain for which 

nonresponse bias analysis was conducted. 

Table 49 summarizes the institution weight distributions and the variance inflation due to 

unequal weighting, i.e., UWE, by institutional type. The median institution weights range from 

1.1 for public 4-year non-doctorate-granting institutions to 5.0 for private for-profit less-than-2-

year institutions. The mean institution weight ranges from 1.5 for public 4-year doctorategranting institutions to 11.2 for private for-profit 2-year or more institutions. The UWE is 5.7 

overall and ranges from 1.8 for public 4-year doctorate-granting institutions to 6.5 for public 

less-than-2-year institutions. 
Chapter 6. Unit Nonrepsonse Bias Analyses, Weighting and Variance Estimation 

117 

Table 49. Institution weight distribution and unequal weighting effects (UWEs): 2004 

Analysis domain Minimum 

First 

quartile Median 

Third 

quartile Maximum Mean UWE1 

Total 0.7 1.1 1.5 4.1 152.1 4.6 5.7 

Type of institution 

Public less-than-2-year 1.1 1.3 1.8 6.0 123.1 7.7 6.5 

Public 2-year 0.9 1.1 1.3 3.1 73.5 3.8 4.5 

Public 4-year non-doctorate-granting 0.7 0.9 1.1 2.7 49.9 3.2 4.8 

Public 4-year doctorate-granting 1.0 1.0 1.2 1.3 10.7 1.5 1.8 

Private not-for-profit 2-year or less 1.0 1.6 2.7 5.6 54.8 5.3 3.1 

Private not-for-profit 4-year, nondoctorate-granting 

1.0 1.0 1.4 4.6 71.8 4.8 4.2 

Private not-for-profit 4-year doctorategranting 

1.0 1.1 1.3 1.8 67.2 2.8 6.4 

Private for-profit less-than-2-year 1.1 2.8 5.0 9.1 152.1 8.6 3.8 

Private for-profit 2-year or more 1.0 2.4 4.6 10.6 125.8 11.2 4.1 1 UWE calculated as n S(Wt)2 / (S Wt)2

. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 2004 National Postsecondary 

Student Aid Study (NPSAS:04). 

To assess the overall predictive ability of the nonresponse model, a Receiver Operating 

Characteristics (ROC) curve was used (Hanley and McNeil 1982). The ROC provided a measure 

of how well the model correctly classified individuals of known response type.51 The ROC curve 

was developed in the following manner. For any specified probability, c, two proportions were 

calculated: 

• the proportion of respondents with a predicted probability of response greater than c, 

and

• the proportion of nonrespondents with a predicted probability of response greater than 

c. 

The plot of the first probability against the second, for c from 0 to 1, resulted in the ROC 

curve shown in figure 15. The area under the curve equals the probability that the fitted model 

correctly classifies two randomly chosen individuals—one of which is a true respondent and the 

other a true nonrespondent—where the individual with the higher predicted probability of 

response is classified as the respondent. An area of 0.5 under an ROC curve indicates that a 

correct classification is made 50 percent of the time, with the model providing no predictive 

benefit. An area of 1 indicates that the true respondent always has the higher predicted 

probability of response, and so the model always classifies the two individuals correctly. Figure 

15 shows that the area under the ROC curve is 0.64, so the predicted probabilities give the 

correct classification 64 percent of the time (about two of every three pairings). Predictive 

probabilities from ROC curves can also be interpreted in terms of the nonparametric Wilcoxon 

test statistic, where the ROC area of 0.64 equals the value of the Wilcoxon test statistic. Viewed 

in this way, the Wilcoxon test provides a significant rejection of the null hypothesis of no 

predictive ability (p < 0.05). This result can be interpreted to mean that the variables used in the 

model are highly informative but not definitive predictors of a sample institution’s overall 

response propensity. 

 

51 For a more detailed example of the Receiver Operating Characteristics (ROC) curve use in nonresponse modeling 

see Iannacchione (2003). 
Chapter 6. Unit Nonresponse Bias Analyses, Weighting and Variance Estimation 

118 

Figure 15. Receiver Operating Characteristics (ROC) curve for overall institution response 

propensity: 2004 

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1

P(response|nonrespondent)

P(response|respondent)

Observed ROC

 area under the curve = 0.64262

50% predictive ROC

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 2004 National Postsecondary Student Aid Study 

(NPSAS:04). 

6.2 Student Nonresponse Bias Analysis and Weighting 

6.2.1 Initial Student Weight Components 

There were four initial student weight components, described below. 

(5) Student Sampling Weight (WT5) 

The overall student sampling strata were defined by crossing the institution sampling 

strata with the student strata within institutions. The overall sampling rates for these sampling 

strata can be found in appendix B. The sample students were systematically selected from the 

enrollment lists at institution-specific rates that were inversely proportional to the institution’s 

probability of selection. Specifically, the overall stratum sampling rate divided by the 

institution’s probability of selection or 

, ( ) | i

f f

r

s

s i

π =

where sf = the overall student sampling rate, and 

(i) π r = the institution’s probability of selection. 
Chapter 6. Unit Nonrepsonse Bias Analyses, Weighting and Variance Estimation 

119 

As discussed in appendix B, the institution-specific rates were designed to obtain the 

desired sample sizes and achieve nearly equal weights within the overall student strata. 

If the institution’s enrollment list was larger than expected based on the IPEDS data, the 

preloaded student sampling rates would yield larger-than-expected sample sizes. Likewise, if the 

enrollment list was smaller than expected, the sampling rates would yield smaller-than-expected 

sample sizes. To maintain control on the sample sizes, the sampling rates were adjusted, when 

necessary, so that the number of students selected did not exceed by more than 50 students the 

expected sample size of the institution based on the IPEDS data. A minimum sample size 

constraint of 10 students also was imposed so that there would be at least four respondents from 

each participating institution for variance estimation. 

The student sampling weight was calculated as the reciprocal of the institution-specific 

student sampling rates, or 

WT5=1/ s i f | . 

(6) Student Subsampling Weight (WT6) 

For paper lists, samples were selected manually, and then the list of sample students was 

entered into an electronic file. When students from different strata, e.g., first-time beginners 

(FTBs) and other undergraduates, were combined on a list, the sampling rate from the stratum 

with the higher rate was used. Then after the sample was entered into an electronic file, the 

students from the other stratum (or strata) were subsampled. 

The student subsampling weight adjustment factor, WT6, was the reciprocal of this 

subsampling rate. This weight factor was unity (1.00) for most students because this subsampling 

was not necessary for most institutions. 

(7) First Student Multiplicity Adjustment (WT7) 

Students who attended more than one eligible institution during the 2003–04 academic 

year had multiple chances of being selected. That is, they could have been selected from any of 

the institutions they attended. Therefore, these students had a higher probability of being selected 

than was represented in their sampling weight. 

This multiplicity was adjusted by dividing their sampling weight by the number of 

institutions attended that were eligible for sample selection. Specifically, the student multiplicity 

weight adjustment factor was defined as 

WT7 = 1 / M, 

where M is the multiplicity, or number of institutions attended. The multiplicity was determined 

from the computer-assisted telephone interview (CATI), the Pell Grant payment file, and the 

National Student Loan Data System (NSLDS). If student multiplicity was missing, the average 

number of institutions attended based on students with known number of institutions attended 

was used. Averages were computed based on type of institution and federal aid receipt. 

The weight adjustment factors met the following constraints: 

• minimum: 0.03; 

• median: 1.02; and 
Chapter 6. Unit Nonresponse Bias Analyses, Weighting and Variance Estimation 

120 

• maximum: 8.32. 

(8) Student Unknown Eligibility Adjustment (WT8) 

Final eligibility status could not be determined for nonresponding students who were 

never contacted. These students were treated as eligible, and their weights were adjusted to 

compensate for the small portion of students who were actually ineligible (as described below). 

Weighting classes were defined by the intersection of institution type with the students’ 

matching status to financial aid files (Central Processing System [CPS], Pell, and loan). Table 50 

presents the weight adjustment factors applied to the students with unknown eligibility. These 

weight adjustment factors were based on the estimated rate of eligibility among students with 

known eligibility status. For the known-eligible students, the weight adjustment factor was set 

equal to one. 

Table 50. Weight adjustment factors for unknown student eligibility status: 2004 

Weighting class (institution type, by student type, by matching status to financial aid files) 

Number 

adjusted for 

unknown 

eligibility 

Weight 

adjustment 

factor (WT8) 

 Total 6,530 † 

Public less-than-2-year Matched Pell or Stafford file # 1.00 

 Matched CPS file only # 1.00 

 No matches 260 0.70 

Public 2-year Matched Pell or Stafford file 180 1.00 

 Matched CPS file only # 1.00 

 No matches 3,690 0.81 

Public 4-year non-doctorate-granting, undergraduate Matched Pell or Stafford file 50 1.00 

 Matched CPS file only # 1.00 

 No matches 360 0.93 

Public 4-year non-doctorate-granting, graduate Matched Pell or Stafford file # 1.00 

 Matched CPS file only # 1.00 

 No matches 30 0.87 

Public 4-year non-doctorate-granting, undergraduate Matched Pell or Stafford file 30 1.00 

 Matched CPS file only # 1.00 

 No matches 570 0.93 

Public 4-year non-doctorate-granting, graduate Matched Pell or Stafford file 10 1.00 

 Matched CPS file only # 1.00 

 No matches 210 0.93 

Private not-for-profit less-than-4-year Matched Pell or Stafford file 20 1.00 

 Matched CPS file only # 1.00 

 No matches 80 0.66 

Private not-for-profit 4-year non-doctorate-granting, Matched Pell or Stafford file 10 1.00 

undergraduate Matched CPS file only # 1.00 

 No matches 200 0.87 

Private not-for-profit 4-year non-doctorate-granting, graduate Matched Pell or Stafford file # 1.00 

 Matched CPS file only # 1.00 

 No matches # 0.88 

Private not-for-profit 4-year doctorate-granting, undergraduate Matched Pell or Stafford file # 1.00 

 Matched CPS file only # 1.00 

 No matches 190 0.91 

Private not-for-profit 4-year doctorate-granting, graduate Matched Pell or Stafford file # 1.00 

 Matched CPS file only # 1.00 

 No matches 120 0.91 

See notes at end of table. 
Chapter 6. Unit Nonrepsonse Bias Analyses, Weighting and Variance Estimation 

121 

Table 50. Weight adjustment factors for unknown student eligibility status: 2004—Continued 

Weighting class (institution type, by student type, by matching status to financial aid files) 

Number 

adjusted for 

unknown 

eligibility 

Weight 

adjustment 

factor (WT8) 

Private for-profit, less-than-2-year Matched Pell or Stafford file 110 1.00 

 Matched CPS file only # 1.00 

 No matches 200 0.46 

Private for-profit 2-year Matched Pell or Stafford file 50 1.00 

 Matched CPS file only # 1.00 

 No matches 40 0.63 

Private for-profit 4-year, undergraduate Matched Pell or Stafford file 10 1.00 

 Matched CPS file only # 1.00 

 No matches 110 0.83 

Private for-profit 4-year, graduate Matched Pell or Stafford file # 1.00 

 Matched CPS file only/no 

matches combined 

# 0.93 

† Not applicable. 

# Rounds to zero. 

NOTE: CPS = Central Processing System. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 2004 National Postsecondary Student Aid Study 

(NPSAS:04) 

6.2.2 Assessing Student Nonresponse Bias 

As described in section 3.2, a study respondent is defined as any sample member who is 

determined to be eligible for the study and has valid data from any source for a selected set of 

key analytical variables. These are minimal data requirements and the vast majority of study 

respondents were characterized by considerably more complete data. 

As shown in table 10, of the 101,010 eligible sample students the unweighted response 

rate was about 90 percent, and the weighted response rate was 91 percent. The student weighted 

response rate is also above 85 percent for all types of institutions with the exception of public 2-

year institutions. The weighted response rates by type of institution range from about 84 percent 

for public 2-year institutions to about 97 percent for private not-for-profit 4-year non-doctorategranting institutions. 

Therefore, a nonresponse bias analysis was conducted only for students from public 2-

year institutions. A nonresponse bias analysis was also conducted for six state-level sectors with 

a weighted response rate less than 85 percent. The nonresponse bias was estimated for seven 

variables known for both respondents and nonrespondents. Five of these variables were known 

for most sample members, and the remaining two variables were only known for federally aided 

students. These variables are listed below. 

For all sample members: 

• region; 

• institution total enrollment; 

• CPS match (yes/no); 

• Pell Grant recipient (yes/no); and 

• Stafford Loan recipient (yes/no). 
Chapter 6. Unit Nonresponse Bias Analyses, Weighting and Variance Estimation 

122 

For federally aided students: 

• Pell Grant amount; and 

• Stafford Loan amount. 

Additionally, it was determined that percent part-time fall enrollment and in-state tuition 

are important variables to include in the nonresponse bias analysis for students in public 2-year 

institutions. These variables are not known for both respondents and nonrespondents; however, 

institution-level data available from IPEDS were used to conduct the analyses. 

The nonresponse bias was estimated and tested (adjusting for multiple comparisons) for 

the above variables to determine if the bias was significant at the 5 percent level. Table 51 shows 

that about 35 percent of the variable categories are significantly biased for students from public 

2-year institutions before weight adjustments. Results of the nonresponse bias analysis after 

weight adjustments will be discussed in section 6.2.4. 

Table 51. Summary of student nonresponse bias analysis for all students, in public 2-year 

institutions: 2004 

Nonresponse bias statistics Public 2-year 

Before weight adjustments 

 Mean estimated bias 0.11 

 Median estimated bias 0.04 

 Percent significant bias 35.42 

After weight adjustments 

 Mean estimated bias 0.15 

 Median estimated bias 0.05 

 Percent significant bias 29.17 

NOTE: Nonresponse bias analysis was conducted only for the one type of institution with a weighted response rate 

less than 85 percent. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 2004 National Postsecondary 

Student Aid Study (NPSAS:04).

6.2.3 Adjusting Student Weights 

There were five additional student weight components, described below. The student 

weights were further adjusted for nonresponse. The adjustments for nonresponse was performed 

in three stages because the predictors of response propensity were potentially different at each 

stage: 

• inability to locate the student; 

• refusal to be interviewed; and 

• other nonresponse. 

Using these three stages of nonresponse adjustment achieved greater reduction in 

nonresponse bias to the extent that different variables were significant predictors of response 

propensity at each stage. 
Chapter 6. Unit Nonrepsonse Bias Analyses, Weighting and Variance Estimation 

123 

(9) Student Not Located Adjustment (WT9) 

The first type of adjustment for student nonresponse was an adjustment for the inability 

to locate the student. These weight adjustments were made to compensate for the potential study 

nonresponse bias. 

Predictor variables were chosen that were thought to be predictive of response status and 

were nonmissing for both study respondents and nonrespondents. The candidate predictor 

variables included 

• institution type; 

• in 1 of 12 states with state- representative sample of undergraduates (yes/no); 

• region; 

• institution enrollment from IPEDS file (categorical); 

• student type; 

• FTB status; 

• Pell Grant receipt (yes/no); 

• Pell Grant amount (categorical); 

• Stafford Loan receipt (yes/no); 

• Stafford Loan amount (categorical); 

• Plus Loan amount (categorical); 

• federal aid receipt (yes/no); 

• CPS record indicator (yes/no); 

• Social Security number indicator (yes/no); 

• phone number count; 

• e-mail address count; and 

• mailing address count. 

Predictors used in the nonresponse modeling included all the candidate predictor 

variables identified as well as certain potentially important interactions. CHAID was used to 

identify these interactions (see description in section 6.1.3). Application of the CHAID algorithm 

provided interaction terms for each of the nonresponse adjustment models. For each model, 

CHAID was run for up to three segments, resulting in identification of two-way and three-way 

interactions. Segments were retained if they were both statistically and practically significant. 

The weight adjustments were computed using GEM. The initial model included all of the 

predictor variables listed above and the interaction segments identified by the CHAID analysis. 

The model failed to converge with all the variables included, i.e., there was no solution to satisfy 

all model equations simultaneously. Therefore, a stepwise approach was taken to reduce the 

variables in the model. In the same step, high-extreme weights were adjusted, truncated, and 

smoothed by GEM, while the other weights were adjusted for nonresponse. 
Chapter 6. Unit Nonresponse Bias Analyses, Weighting and Variance Estimation 

124 

Table 52 presents the final predictor variables used in GEM to adjust the weights and the 

average weight adjustment factors resulting from these variables.52 The weight adjustment factors 

met the following constraints: 

• minimum: 0.20; 

• median: 1.00; and 

• maximum: 1.00.

Table 52. Weight adjustment factors for student location nonresponse adjustment: 2004 

Model predictor variables 

Number of 

located 

respondents 

Weighted 

response rate 

Average weight 

adjustment factor 

(WT9) 

 Total 95,170 95.4 1.07 

Type of institution 

 Public less-than-2-year 2,340 95.8 1.70 

 Public 2-year 29,030 91.7 1.10 

 Public 4-year non-doctorate-granting 8,490 96.7 1.03 

 Public 4-year doctorate-granting 20,880 97.0 1.03 

 Private not-for-profit less-than-4-year 2,680 97.4 1.03 

 Private not-for-profit 4-year non-doctorate-granting 9,120 98.7 1.03 

 Private not-for-profit 4-year doctorate-granting 9,310 97.7 1.04 

 Private for-profit less-than-2-year 7,740 96.1 1.07 

 Private for-profit 2-year or more 5,590 97.8 1.04 

Representative state institution 

 No 56,880 96.8 1.07 

 Yes 38,290 93.1 1.08 

Bureau of Economic Analysis Code (Office of Business 

Economics [OBE]) Region1

 

 New England 5,520 96.7 1.05 

 Mid East 14,630 96.2 1.10 

 Great Lakes 14,350 96.4 1.05 

 Plains 7,440 95.1 1.07 

 Southeast 22,570 96.8 1.05 

 Southwest 10,410 97.3 1.04 

 Rocky Mountains 3,760 98.1 1.13 

 Far West 14,260 89.4 1.13 

 Outlying Areas, including Alaska and Hawaii 2,230 94.6 1.06 

Institution enrollment size2

 

 0 < enrollment total <=1,596 23,550 97.8 1.10 

 1,596 < enrollment total <=6,567 24,240 96.5 1.05 

 6,567< enrollment total <=15,397 22,950 94.0 1.09 

 Enrollment total >15397 24,430 94.9 1.05 

Education level 

 Undergraduate 83,940 94.9 1.08 

 Graduate 9,530 97.8 1.03 

 First-professional 1,700 98.9 1.02 

First-time beginner (FTB) status 

 FTB 40,370 95.4 1.08 

 Not FTB 52,210 95.4 1.07 

 FTB status unknown 2,590 94.9 1.06 

See notes at end of table. 

 

52 See description of the generalized exponential model (GEM) procedure at the beginning of chapter 6. 
Chapter 6. Unit Nonrepsonse Bias Analyses, Weighting and Variance Estimation 

125 

Table 52. Weight adjustment factors for student location nonresponse adjustment: 2004—

Continued 

Model predictor variables 

Number of 

located 

respondents 

Weighted 

response rate 

Average weight 

adjustment factor 

(WT9) 

Pell Grant recipient 

 No 65,640 94.2 1.10 

 Yes 29,530 99.2 1.02 

Stafford Loan recipient 

 No 60,870 93.5 1.10 

 Yes 34,300 99.4 1.02 

Federal aid recipient 

 No 45,940 92.2 1.13 

 Yes 49,230 99.3 1.02 

In Central Processing System (CPS) 

 No 38,280 90.4 1.16 

 Yes 56,890 100.0 1.01 

Count of phone numbers 

 0 1,670 60.4 1.68 

 1 46,020 95.3 1.09 

 2 34,410 97.2 1.04 

 More than 2 13,080 97.9 1.03 

Count of e-mail addresses 

 0 31,960 90.0 1.15 

 1 36,700 96.0 1.05 

 2 18,460 99.5 1.01 

 More than 2 8,050 100.0 1.01 

Count of mailing addresses 

 0 or 1 38,800 92.4 1.12 

 2 36,000 97.1 1.05 

 More than 2 20,360 98.7 1.03 

Chi-square automatic interaction detection (CHAID) 

segments 

 

 In CPS 56,890 100.0 1.01 

 Not in CPS, no preloaded Social Security number 

(SSN), undergraduate student 

7,570 82.0 1.28 

 Not in CPS, no preloaded SSN, graduate student 1,730 93.5 1.08 

 Not in CPS, preloaded SSN, undergraduate student 23,400 90.9 1.16 

 Not in CPS, preloaded SSN, graduate student 5,580 97.4 1.03 1 New England = Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Rhode Island, Vermont; Mid East = Delaware, 

District of Columbia, Maryland, New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania; Great Lakes = Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Ohio, 

Wisconsin; Plains = Iowa, Kansas, Minnesota, Missouri, Nebraska, North Dakota, South Dakota; 

Southeast = Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, North Carolina, South Carolina, 

Tennessee, Virginia, West Virginia; Southwest = Arizona, New Mexico, Oklahoma, Texas; Rocky Mountains = Colorado, 

Idaho, Montana, Utah, Wyoming; Far West = Alaska, California, Hawaii, Nevada, Oregon, Washington 

Outlying Areas = American Samoa, Federated States of Micronesia, Guam, Marshall Islands, Northern Mariana, Puerto 

Rico, Palau, Virgin Islands. 

2

 Enrollment categories were defined by quartiles. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 2004 National Postsecondary Student 

Aid Study (NPSAS:04).

(10) Student Refusal Adjustment (WT10) 

The second stage of the student nonresponse adjustment was an adjustment for refusal, 

given that the student was located. This additional type of nonresponse adjustment was made to 
Chapter 6. Unit Nonresponse Bias Analyses, Weighting and Variance Estimation 

126 

further compensate for the potential student nonresponse bias. The same GEM procedure was 

used as in the adjustment for not locating students (WT9). Once again, high-extreme weights 

were adjusted, truncated, and smoothed by GEM. Candidate predictor variables were the same as 

those used in the location nonresponse adjustment. As in the location nonresponse adjustment, a 

CHAID analysis was performed on the predictor variables to detect important interactions. 

Table 53 presents the final predictor variables used in GEM to adjust the student weights 

and the average weight adjustment factor resulting from these variables. The weight adjustment 

factors met the following constraints: 

• minimum: 0.03; 

• median: 1.01; and 

• maximum: 1.44. 

Table 53. Weight adjustment factors for student refusal nonresponse adjustment: 2004 

Model predictor variables 

Number of 

nonrefusal 

respondents 

Weighted 

response rate 

Average weight 

adjustment factor 

(WT10) 

 Total 92,690 97.1 1.03 

Type of institution 

 Public less than 2-year 2,250 94.9 1.12 

 Public 2-year 27,500 94.7 1.06 

 Public 4-year non-doctorate-granting 8,310 97.8 1.02 

 Public 4-year doctorate-granting 20,540 98.3 1.02 

 Private not-for-profit less-than-4-year 2,650 98.7 1.01 

 Private not-for-profit 4-year non-doctorate-granting 9,030 98.9 1.01 

 Private not-for-profit 4-year doctorate-granting 9,170 98.5 1.02 

 Private for-profit less-than-2-year 7,700 99.2 1.02 

 Private for-profit 2-year or more 5,540 99.4 1.01 

Representative state institution 

 No 55,790 97.8 1.03 

 Yes 36,900 96.1 1.04 

Bureau of Economic Analysis Code (Office of Business 

Economics [OBE]) Region1

 

 New England 5,360 97.4 1.03 

 Mid East 14,180 97.2 1.04 

 Great Lakes 14,000 97.5 1.03 

 Plains 7,180 96.7 1.03 

 Southeast 22,150 97.9 1.03 

 Southwest 10,260 98.4 1.02 

 Rocky Mountains 3,700 98.9 1.01 

 Far West 13,660 94.2 1.05 

 Outlying Areas, including Alaska and Hawaii 2,220 99.3 1.01 

Institution enrollment size2

 

 0 < enrollment total <=1,596 23,300 98.7 1.03 

 1,596 < enrollment total <=6,567 23,590 97.5 1.03 

 6,567< enrollment total <=15,397 22,060 96.5 1.04 

 Enrollment total >15,397 23,750 96.8 1.03 

Education level 

 Undergraduate 81,650 97.0 1.03 

 Graduate 9,360 98.0 1.02 

 First-professional 1,680 99.3 1.01 

See notes at end of table. 
Chapter 6. Unit Nonrepsonse Bias Analyses, Weighting and Variance Estimation 

127 

Table 53. Weight adjustment factors for student refusal nonresponse adjustment: 2004—

Continued 

Model predictor variables 

Number of 

nonrefusal 

respondents 

Weighted 

response rate 

Average weight 

adjustment factor 

(WT10) 

First-time beginner (FTB) status 

 FTB 39,500 97.5 1.03 

 Not FTB 50,700 97.1 1.03 

 FTB status unknown 2,490 96.5 1.05 

Pell Grant recipient 

 No 63,230 96.3 1.04 

 Yes 29,460 99.8 1.01 

Stafford Loan recipient 

 No 58,460 95.9 1.05 

 Yes 34,230 99.8 1.01 

Federal aid recipient 

 No 43,580 95.0 1.06 

 Yes 49,110 99.8 1.01 

In Central Processing System (CPS) 

 No 35,800 94.0 1.07 

 Yes 56,890 100.0 1.00 

Count of phone numbers 

 0 1,660 99.4 1.00 

 1 44,410 96.1 1.04 

 2 33,690 97.7 1.02 

 More than 2 12,930 98.7 1.02 

Count of e-mail addresses 

 0 30,550 94.4 1.05 

 1 35,720 97.1 1.03 

 2 18,370 99.5 1.01 

 More than 2 8,050 100.0 1.00 

Count of mailing addresses 

 0 or 1 36,890 95.0 1.06 

 2 35,520 98.5 1.02 

 More than 2 20,280 99.5 1.01 

Chi-square automatic interaction detection (CHAID) segments 

 In CPS 56,890 100.0 1.00 

 Not in CPS, no preloaded Social Security number (SSN), no 

phone number 440 99.1 1.00 

 Not in CPS, no preloaded SSN, phone number 7,960 90.3 1.12 

 Not in CPS, preloaded SSN, undergraduate student 21,940 94.2 1.07 

 Not in CPS, preloaded SSN, graduate student 5,460 97.5 1.02 1 New England = Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Rhode Island, Vermont; Mid East = Delaware, 

District of Columbia, Maryland, New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania; Great Lakes = Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Ohio, 

Wisconsin; Plains = Iowa, Kansas, Minnesota, Missouri, Nebraska, North Dakota, South Dakota; 

Southeast = Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, North Carolina, South Carolina, 

Tennessee, Virginia, West Virginia; Southwest = Arizona, New Mexico, Oklahoma, Texas; Rocky Mountains = Colorado, 

Idaho, Montana, Utah, Wyoming; Far West = Alaska, California, Hawaii, Nevada, Oregon, Washington 

Outlying Areas = American Samoa, Federated States of Micronesia, Guam, Marshall Islands, Northern Mariana, Puerto 

Rico, Palau, Virgin Islands. 

2

 Enrollment categories were defined by quartiles. 

NOTE: FTB = First-Time Beginner, SSN = Social Security number, CPS = Central Processing System. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 2004 National Postsecondary Student 

Aid Study (NPSAS:04). 
Chapter 6. Unit Nonresponse Bias Analyses, Weighting and Variance Estimation 

128 

(11) Student Other Nonresponse Adjustment (WT11) 

The third, and final, stage of adjustment for student nonresponse was an adjustment for 

other study nonresponse, given that the student was located and did not refuse. This additional 

type of student nonresponse adjustment was made to further compensate for the potential student 

nonresponse bias. The same GEM procedure was used as in the adjustment for not locating 

students and student refusals (WT9 and WT10). Candidate predictor variables were the same as 

those used in the student location and refusal nonresponse adjustments, using a representative 

state by school-type variable instead of the representative state indicator. The representative state 

variable was able to be “expanded” for this model without encountering convergence problems, 

i.e., the model was able to produce adjustment factors with these variables included. As in the 

other two nonresponse adjustments, a CHAID analysis was performed on the predictor variables 

to detect important interactions. The resulting segment interactions and all the main effect 

variables were then included in GEM. High-extreme weights were adjusted, truncated, and 

smoothed by GEM as in the previous two adjustments. 

Table 54 presents the final predictor variables used in GEM to adjust the student weights 

and the average weight adjustment factor resulting from these variables. The weight adjustment 

factors met the following constraints: 

• minimum: 0.03; 

• median: 1.01; and 

• maximum: 1.48. 

Table 54. Weight adjustment factors for student other nonresponse adjustment: 2004 

Model predictor variables 

Number of 

respondents 

Weighted 

response rate 

Average weight 

adjustment 

factor (WT11) 

Total 90,750 97.5 1.02 

Type of institution 

Public 4-year or above 2,170 93.1 1.01 

Private not-for-profit 4-year or above 26,400 95.3 1.04 

Private for-profit 4-year or above 8,160 98.3 1.01 

Public 2 year 20,260 98.6 1.01 

Private not-for-profit 2-year 2,610 98.0 1.02 

Private for-profit 2-year 8,960 99.1 1.01 

Public less–than-2-year 9,060 98.9 1.01 

Private not-for-profit less than 2-year 7,620 98.2 1.02 

Private for-profit less than 2-year 5,500 99.3 1.01 

Representative state institution 

All non-representative state institutions 54,950 98.4 1.02 

California, public 2-year 2,860 88.3 1.11 

California, public 4-year 1,750 97.6 1.02 

California, private not-for-profit 4-year 1,230 97.2 1.03 

Connecticut, public 2-year 420 94.0 1.05 

Connecticut, public 4-year 580 99.9 1.00 

Connecticut, private not-for-profit 4-year 540 99.0 1.01 

Delaware, public 2-year 460 87.0 1.14 

Delaware, public 4-year 570 99.7 1.00 

Delaware, private not-for-profit 4-year 480 99.0 1.01 

See notes at end of table. 
Chapter 6. Unit Nonrepsonse Bias Analyses, Weighting and Variance Estimation 

129 

Table 54. Weight adjustment factors for student other nonresponse adjustment: 2004—

Continued 

Model predictor variables 

Number of 

respondents 

Weighted 

response rate 

Average weight 

adjustment 

factor (WT11) 

Georgia, public 2-year 1,740 98.9 1.02 

Georgia, public 4-year 1,100 98.5 1.01 

Georgia, private not-for-profit 4-year 520 100.0 1.00 

Illinois, public 2-year 1,430 96.8 1.03 

Illinois, public 4-year 1,020 98.9 1.01 

Illinois, private not-for-profit 4-year 990 98.7 1.01 

Indiana, public 2-year 350 99.9 1.00 

Indiana, public 4-year 1,080 99.3 1.01 

Indiana, private not-for-profit,4-year 660 99.5 1.00 

Minnesota, public 2-year 790 87.6 1.12 

Minnesota, public 4-year 620 94.3 1.05 

Minnesota, private not-for-profit 4-year 580 99.2 1.01 

Nebraska, public 2-year 380 99.5 1.03 

Nebraska, public 4-year 540 99.4 1.00 

Nebraska, private not-for-profit 4-year 340 100.0 1.00 

New York, public 2-year 1,700 96.3 1.03 

New York, public 4-year 1,550 96.0 1.03 

New York, private not-for-profit, 4-year 2,220 99.2 1.01 

Oregon, public 2-year 830 98.9 1.01 

Oregon, public 4-year 690 98.9 1.01 

Oregon, private not-for-profit 4-year 390 99.8 1.00 

Tennessee, public 2-year 850 97.0 1.03 

Tennessee, public 4-year 800 98.5 1.01 

Tennessee, private not-for-profit 4-year 450 98.8 1.01 

Texas, public 2-year 2,470 97.3 1.03 

Texas, public 4-year 2,060 98.9 1.01 

Texas, private not-for-profit 4-year 780 99.7 1.00 

Bureau of Economic Analysis Code (Office of Business 

Economics [OBE]) Region1

 

New England 5,230 97.8 1.02 

Mid East 13,850 97.8 1.02 

Great Lakes 13,760 98.2 1.02 

Plains 7,000 97.4 1.03 

Southeast 21,880 98.5 1.02 

Southwest 10,130 98.8 1.01 

Rocky Mountains 3,650 98.9 0.99 

Far West 13,070 93.7 1.04 

Outlying areas, including Alaska and Hawaii 2,180 98.0 1.02 

Institution enrollment size2

 

0 < enrollment total <=1,596 23,050 98.8 1.01 

1,596 < enrollment total <=6,567 23,120 98.1 1.02 

6,567< enrollment total <=15,397 21,390 96.9 1.03 

Enrollment total >15,397 23,180 97.0 1.02 

Education level 

Undergraduate 79,840 97.2 1.02 

Graduate 9,240 98.9 1.01 

First-professional 1,660 99.0 1.01 

See notes at end of table. 
Chapter 6. Unit Nonresponse Bias Analyses, Weighting and Variance Estimation 

130 

Table 54. Weight adjustment factors for student other nonresponse adjustment: 2004—

Continued 

Model predictor variables 

Number of 

respondents 

Weighted 

response rate 

Average weight 

adjustment 

factor (WT11) 

First-time beginner (FTB) status 

FTB 38,800 97.5 1.02 

Not FTB 49,520 97.5 1.02 

FTB status unknown 2,430 96.7 1.02 

Pell Grant recipient 

No 61,360 96.8 1.03 

Yes 29,390 99.8 1.00 

Pell Grant amount3 (in dollars) 

Pell Grant amount=0 61,520 96.8 1.03 

0 < Pell Grant amount <=1,487 7,310 99.8 1.00 

1,487 < Pell Grant amount <=2,500 7,340 99.8 1.00 

2,500 < Pell Grant amount <=4,000 7,360 99.9 1.00 

Pell Grant amount > 4,000 7,220 99.8 1.00 

Stafford Loan recipient 

No 56,600 96.4 1.03 

Yes 34,150 99.8 1.00 

Federal aid recipient 

No 41,750 95.6 1.04 

Yes 48,990 99.8 1.00 

Plus amount4 (in dollars) 

Plus amount=0 86,750 97.4 1.02 

0 < Plus amount <=4,764 990 99.3 1.01 

4,764 < Plus amount <=7,775 1,010 100.0 1.00 

7,775 < Plus amount <=11,700 1,000 100.0 1.00 

Plus amount >11,700 1,000 99.5 1.00 

In Central Processing System (CPS) 

No 33,860 94.8 1.05 

Yes 56,890 100.0 1.00 

Count of phone numbers 

0 1,630 97.4 1.01 

1 43,170 96.8 1.03 

2 33,120 97.9 1.02 

More than 2 

Count of e-mail addresses 12,830 99.0 1.01 

0 29,430 94.7 1.04 

1 34,950 97.7 1.02 

2 18,310 99.7 1.00 

More than 2 8,050 100.0 1.00 

Count of mailing addresses 

0 or 1 35,450 95.7 1.04 

2 35,100 98.6 1.01 

More than 2 20,200 99.5 1.01 

Social Security number (SSN) preloaded 

No 12,860 94.4 1.05 

Yes 77,890 98.1 1.02 

See notes at end of table. 
Chapter 6. Unit Nonrepsonse Bias Analyses, Weighting and Variance Estimation 

131 

Table 54. Weight adjustment factors for student other nonresponse adjustment: 2004—

Continued 

Model predictor variables 

Number of 

respondents 

Weighted 

response rate 

Average weight 

adjustment 

factor (WT11) 

Chi-square automatic interaction detection (CHAID) segments 

In CPS 56,890 100.0 1.00 

Not in CPS; undergraduate or first-professional student; 

public 4-year or private not-for-profit 14,250 91.6 1.09 

Not in CPS; undergraduate or first-professional student; 

Public 2-year or less, private for-profit 13,040 96.5 1.04 

Not in CPS; graduate student; private for-profit 2-year or 

more, public 4-year in Georgia, Indiana, Oregon, or 

Texas, or private not-for profit 4-year in New York 4,830 98.9 1.01 

Not in CPS; graduate student; public 2-year in IL, public 4-

year in California, Connecticut, Delaware, or Nebraska, or 

private not-for-profit 4-year in Connecticut, Delaware, 

Georgia, Indiana, Minnesota, Nebraska, Oregon, 

Tennessee, or Texas 770 99.8 1.00 

Not in CPS; graduate student; public 4-year in Minnesota or 

New York, or private not-for-profit 4-year in California 510 93.2 1.07 

Not in CPS; graduate student; public 4-year in Illinois or 

Tennessee, or private not-for-profit 4-year in Illinois 450 96.9 1.03 

†Not applicable. 

1 New England = Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Rhode Island, Vermont; Mid East = Delaware, 

District of Columbia, Maryland, New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania; Great Lakes = Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Ohio, 

Wisconsin; Plains; = Iowa, Kansas, Minnesota, Missouri, Nebraska, North Dakota, South Dakota; 

Southeast = Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, North Carolina, South Carolina, 

Tennessee, Virginia, West Virginia; Southwest = Arizona, New Mexico, Oklahoma, Texas; Rocky Mountains = 

Colorado, Idaho, Montana, Utah, Wyoming; Far West = Alaska, California, Hawaii, Nevada, Oregon, Washington; 

Outlying Areas = American Samoa, Federated States of Micronesia, Guam, Marshall Islands, Northern Mariana, 

Puerto Rico, Palau, Virgin Islands. 

2

 Enrollment categories were defined by quartiles. 

3

 Pell Grant amounts were defined by quartiles. 

4 Plus amounts were defined by quartiles. 

NOTE: FTB = First-Time Beginner, SSN = Social Security number, CPS = Central Processing System. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 2004 National Postsecondary 

Student Aid Study (NPSAS:04). 

(12) Second Student Multiplicity Adjustment (WT12) 

An additional adjustment was made to adjust for student multiplicity. This multiplicity 

adjustment was calculated by dividing the number of institutions attended that were eligible for 

sample selection (used in the first multiplicity adjustment) by the imputed value for the number 

of institutions. Specifically, the second student multiplicity weight adjustment factor was defined 

as 

WT12 = M / M_i, 

where M is the multiplicity, or number of institutions attended, and M_i is the imputed value for 

multiplicity (see appendix H). M was used in calculating WT7 (the first adjustment for student 

multiplicity described above), and if the student multiplicity was missing, an average number of 

students was used. This second adjustment for student multiplicity (WT12) helps correct for 

underestimating the number of students that only attended one institution. 
Chapter 6. Unit Nonresponse Bias Analyses, Weighting and Variance Estimation 

132 

The weight adjustment factors met the following constraints: 

• minimum: 0.23; 

• median: 1.00; and 

• maximum: 2.00. 

(13) Student Postratification Adjustment (WT13) 

To ensure population coverage, the student weights were further adjusted to control totals 

using GEM. Control totals were established for 

• amount of Stafford Loans awarded by institution type; 

• amount of Stafford Loans awarded by state (for the 12 representative states); 

• amount of Pell Grants awarded by institution type; 

• amount of Pell Grants awarded by institution type and state (for the 12 representative 

states); 

• non-fall undergraduate enrollment by institution type; 

• fall enrollment by institution type; and 

• fall enrollment by student type. 

The Stafford Loan and Pell Grant control totals were obtained from the Department of 

Education. The fall enrollment counts were obtained from the 2003 IPEDS Fall Enrollment 

Survey, and the non-fall enrollment counts were derived from the 2003 IPEDS Fall Enrollment 

Survey. There were no separate adjustments for extreme weights. 

Table 55 presents the variables associated with the control totals and the average weight 

adjustment factors by these variables. The weight adjustment factors from GEM are summarized 

below and met the following constraints: 

• minimum: 0.51; 

• median: 1.16; and 

• maximum: 26.83. 

After this last weight adjustment was performed, the final student weight (STUDYWT) 

was computed as the product of the 13 weight components described in this section and in 

section 6.2.1. 
Chapter 6. Unit Nonrepsonse Bias Analyses, Weighting and Variance Estimation 

133 

Table 55. Weight adjustment factors for student poststratification: 2004

Model predictor variables Control total 

Average weight 

adjustment 

factor (WT13) 

Amount of Stafford Loans awarded, by institution type (in dollars) 

Undergraduate students, public less than 2-year 13,026,697,545 1.18 

Undergraduate students, public 2-year 7,717,008,637 1.26 

Undergraduate students, public 4-year non-doctorate-granting 3,717,049,121 1.76 

Undergraduate students, public 4-year doctorate-granting 2,974,409,702 1.30 

Undergraduate students, private not-for-profit less-than-4-year 211,125,017 1.28 

Undergraduate students, private not-for-profit 4-year non-doctorate-granting 1,888,975,153 1.95 

Undergraduate students, private not-for-profit 4-year doctorate-granting 52,213,325 1.14 

Undergraduate students, private for-profit less-than-2-year 34,520,490 2.78 

Undergraduate students, private for-profit 2-year or more 1,245,598,300 1.87 

Graduate/first-professional students, public 4-year non-doctorate-granting 1,172,917,964 2.11 

Graduate/first-professional students, public 4-year doctorate-granting 5,580,695,587 1.23 

Graduate/first-professional students, private not-for-profit 4-year non-doctorategranting 2,415,321,110 1.33 

Graduate/first-professional students, private not-for-profit 4-year doctorategranting 6,571,005,610 1.26 

Graduate/first-professional students, private for-profit 4-year non-doctorategranting 1,058,971,758 2.43 

Graduate/first-professional students, private for-profit, 4-year doctorate-granting 433,411,394 9.11 

Amount of Stafford Loans awarded, by state (in dollars) 

Undergraduate students, California 1,561,080,368 1.23 

Undergraduate students, Connecticut 218,611,394 1.06 

Undergraduate students, Delaware 65,525,884 1.28 

Undergraduate students, Georgia 599,920,776 1.37 

Undergraduate students, Illinois 838,754,263 1.22 

Undergraduate students, Indiana 612,784,996 1.10 

Undergraduate students, Minnesota 582,912,983 1.29 

Undergraduate students, Nebraska 197,239,618 1.16 

Undergraduate students, New York 1,659,110,944 1.24 

Undergraduate students, Oregon 365,006,653 1.23 

Undergraduate students, Tennessee 466,198,839 1.24 

Undergraduate students, Texas 1,554,631,434 1.23 

Amount of Pell Grants awarded, by institution type (in dollars) 

Public less than 2-year 4,307,638,429 1.12 

Public 2-year 1,976,176,806 1.16 

Public 4-year non-doctorate-granting 683,716,100 1.56 

Public 4-year doctorate-granting 4,130,067,523 1.22 

Private not-for-profit less-than-4-year 94,928,580 1.07 

Private not-for-profit 4-year non-doctorate-granting 780,702,835 1.84 

Private not-for-profit 4-year doctorate-granting 40,841,511 0.82 

Private for-profit less-than-2-year 39,523,616 1.33 

Private for-profit 2-year or more 628,452,073 1.53 

Amount of Pell Grants awarded, by institution type for certainty states (in dollars) 

California public 4-year 471,246,772 1.23 

California private not-for-profit 4-year 88,579,366 0.91 

California public 2-year 574,590,087 1.38 

Connecticut public 4-year 19,614,100 1.13 

Connecticut private not-for-profit 4-year 15,555,559 0.87 

Connecticut public 2-year 20,677,198 1.00 

Delaware public 4-year 7,915,051 0.87 

Delaware private not-for-profit 4-year 3,709,571 0.81 

Delaware public 2-year 6,714,056 4.57 

Georgia public 4-year 117,048,105 1.20 

See notes at end of table. 
Chapter 6. Unit Nonresponse Bias Analyses, Weighting and Variance Estimation 

134 

Table 55. Weight adjustment factors for student poststratification: 2004—Continued

Model predictor variables Control total 

Average weight 

adjustment 

factor (WT13) 

Georgia private not-for-profit 4-year 39,698,418 1.11 

Georgia public 2-year 109,081,382 1.26 

Illinois public 4-year 110,436,966 1.20 

Illinois private not-for-profit 4-year 92,229,899 1.05 

Illinois public 2-year 168,401,116 1.16 

Indiana public 4-year 95,438,161 1.14 

Indiana private not-for-profit 4-year 33,005,264 1.12 

Indiana public 2-year 65,763,811 1.22 

Minnesota public 4-year 53,324,870 1.18 

Minnesota private not-for-profit 4-year 25,408,515 1.13 

Minnesota public 2-year 76,570,615 1.49 

Nebraska public 4-year 26,816,294 1.12 

Nebraska private not-for-profit 4-year 13,641,551 1.28 

Nebraska public 2-year 22,416,262 1.47 

New York public 4-year 293,940,117 1.27 

New York private not-for-profit 4-year 254,594,891 1.13 

New York public 2-year 247,361,323 1.15 

Oregon public 4-year 52,356,782 1.12 

Oregon private not-for-profit 4-year 12,010,633 0.84 

Oregon public 2-year 64,850,335 1.45 

Tennessee public 4-year 84,713,432 1.04 

Tennessee private not-for-profit 4-year 38,955,880 1.49 

Tennessee public 2-year 79,352,937 1.28 

Texas public 4-year 344,812,406 1.14 

Texas private not-for-profit 4-year 66,922,625 1.02 

Texas public 2-year 422,479,836 1.21 

Non-fall enrollment, by institution type 

Public less than 2-year 26,615 0.96 

Public 2-year 2,203,978 1.95 

Public 4-year non-doctorate-granting 268,489 1.62 

Public 4-year doctorate-granting 407,302 1.84 

Private not-for-profit less-than-4-year 14,994 1.05 

Private not-for-profit 4-year non-doctorate-granting 285,524 2.93 

Private not-for-profit 4-year doctorate-granting 67,835 1.20 

Private for-profit less-than-2-year 241,908 2.68 

Private for-profit 2-year or more 351,043 2.09 

Fall enrollment, by institution type 

Public less than 2-year 65,982 0.95 

Public 2-year 6,271,184 1.29 

Public 4-year non-doctorate-granting 2,156,077 1.13 

Public 4-year doctorate-granting 4,572,108 1.06 

Private not-for-profit less-than-4-year 94,080 1.25 

Private not-for-profit 4-year non-doctorate-granting 1,757,518 1.24 

Private not-for-profit 4-year doctorate-granting 1,711,139 0.98 

Private for-profit less-than-2-year 266,832 1.31 

Private for-profit 2-year or more 764,395 1.22 

Fall enrollment, by student type 

Undergraduate 15,186,075 1.18 

Graduate 2,134,427 1.01 

First-professional 338,813 1.51 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 2004 National Postsecondary Student 

Aid Study (NPSAS:04). 
Chapter 6. Unit Nonrepsonse Bias Analyses, Weighting and Variance Estimation 

135 

6.2.4 Student Weighting Adjustment Performance 

As shown earlier in table 51, the student weighting adjustments eliminated some, but not 

all, bias for students in public 2-year institutions. Significant bias was reduced somewhat for the 

variables known for most respondents and nonrespondents, which are considered to be some of 

the more analytically important variables and are correlated with many other variables. However, 

significant bias still remains because there were small numbers of nonrespondents in this type of 

institution applying for and receiving federal aid. This may be due to the definition of a 

respondent. All significant bias was eliminated for the non-aid variables, i.e. region, institution 

total enrollment, percent part-time fall enrollment, and in-state tuition. Appendix K contains 

detailed tables showing the estimated bias before and after weight adjustments for each domain 

for which nonresponse bias was conducted. 

Table 56 summarizes the institution weight distributions and the variance inflation due to 

unequal weighting, i.e., UWE, by student type and type of institution. The median student weight 

ranges from 22 for students in public less-than-2-year institutions to 266 for students in public 4-

year non-doctorate-granting institutions. The mean student weight ranges from 42 for students in 

private not-for-profit less-than-4-year institutions to 322 for students in public 2-year institutions. 

The UWE is 2.4 overall and ranges from 1.3 for first-professional students to 5.4 for graduate 

students. 

To assess the overall predictive ability of the nonresponse model, an ROC curve was 

used and developed as described in section 6.1.4. The predicted probabilities of response (c) 

were obtained as the product of the predicted response probabilities obtained at each of the three 

GEM nonresponse adjustment steps. Note that for the last two GEM steps (refusal and other 

nonresponse adjustments), predicted probabilities were not directly available for students who 

had already been dropped from the model due to nonresponse in an earlier step. For these 

students, their predicted probability was set equal to the mean of the predicted probabilities of 

students still in the model. 

The plot of the first probability against the second, for c from 0 to 1, resulted in the ROC 

curve shown in figure 16. The area under the curve equals the probability that the fitted model 

correctly classifies two randomly chosen individuals—one of which is a true respondent and the 

other a true nonrespondent—where the individual with the higher predicted probability of 

response is classified as the respondent. Figure 16 shows that the area under the ROC curve is 

0.86, so 86 percent of the time (or close to 9 of every 10 pairings) the predicted probabilities give 

the correct classification. Predictive probabilities from ROC curves can also be interpreted in 

terms of the nonparametric Wilcoxon test statistic, where the ROC area of 0.86 equals the value 

of the Wilcoxon test statistic. Viewed in this way, the Wilcoxon test provides a significant 

rejection of the null hypothesis of no predictive ability (p < 0.05). This level of discrimination 

implies that the variables used in the model are highly informative but not definitive predictors 

of a sample student’s overall response propensity. 
Chapter 6. Unit Nonresponse Bias Analyses, Weighting and Variance Estimation 

136 

Table 56. Student weight distribution and unequal weighting effects (UWEs): 2004 

Analysis domain Minimum 

First 

quartile Median 

Third 

quartile Maximum Mean UWE1

Total 0.2 75.6 166.4 332.6 23468.7 241.1 2.37 

 

Student type 

Undergraduate 0.2 79.2 167.0 331.7 4137.6 238.6 1.97 

Graduate 0.6 64.6 118.4 349.1 23468.7 258.0 5.38 

First-professional 6.7 193.8 243.3 319.4 2451.9 270.4 1.32 

Type of institution 

Public less than 2-year 0.7 11.5 21.7 52.8 745.9 48.1 2.75 

Public 2-year 0.9 108.3 201.1 457.8 4137.6 322.0 1.88 

Public 4-year non-doctorate-granting 0.8 148.8 266.0 396.3 4220.1 303.5 1.65 

Public 4-year doctorate-granting 0.6 116.0 221.9 348.1 2593.3 248.9 1.44 

Private not-for-profit less-than-4-year 1.4 16.7 26.1 38.4 1113.2 42.4 2.62 

Private not-for-profit 4-year non-doctorategranting 0.6 85.7 164.1 325.5 23468.7 244.0 5.17 

Private not-for-profit 4-year doctorategranting 0.2 76.8 146.5 274.7 12026.5 195.6 2.10 

Private for-profit less-than-2-year 2.0 33.9 52.7 86.7 1362.8 71.2 1.91 

Private for-profit 2-year or more 2.4 59.1 106.7 207.4 10216.3 192.0 3.67 

1 UWE calculated as n S(Wt)2 / (S Wt)2

. 

NOTE: UWE = Unequal Weighting Effects. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 2004 National Postsecondary Student Aid Study 

(NPSAS:04). 

Figure 16. Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) curve for overall student response 

propensity: 2004 

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1

P(response|nonrespondent)

P(response|respondent)

Observed ROC

area under the curve = 0.86362

50% predictive ROC

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 2004 National Postsecondary Student Aid Study 

(NPSAS:04). 
Chapter 6. Unit Nonrepsonse Bias Analyses, Weighting and Variance Estimation 

137 

6.3 Item Nonresponse Bias Analysis 

When item response rates were less than 85 percent, a nonresponse bias analysis was 

conducted. Item response rates (RRI) are calculated as the ratio of the number of respondents for 

whom an in-scope response was obtained (Ix

 for item x) to the number of respondents who are 

asked to answer that item. The number asked to answer an item is the number of unit level 

respondents (I) minus the number of respondents with a valid skip item for item x (Vx

). When an 

abbreviated questionnaire is used to convert refusals, the eliminated questions are treated as item 

nonresponse (U.S. Department of Education 2003). 

RRIx

 = Ix / (I – Vx) 

A student is defined to be an item respondent for an analytic variable if that student has 

data for that variable from any source, including logical imputation. Item response rates were 

computed using non-imputed data. Valid skips were later logically imputed to the follow-up 

items after the gate question was imputed. As shown in table 57, the weighted item response 

rates for all study respondents ranged from about 10 percent to 100 percent. The item response 

rates by type of institution ranged from about 2 percent to 100 percent. 

While values for many variables were derived from multiple sources, including the 

student interview, student record data, and extant data sources, some variables were obtained 

from only one source. Given that the weighted response rate to the student interview was about 

70 percent, items obtained solely from that source have 30 percent nonresponse even when all 

interview respondents provided an answer. This issue is compounded for nested items following 

gate questions, especially those applicable to a small subset of the sample members since followup items to unanswered gate items are also treated as nonresponse. 

To illustrate an example, the student interview included a set of items about distance 

education, and was the only source for these data. Students were first asked if they had taken any 

distance education courses. Those that had were then asked about the types of courses taken. If 

the first item in the set was not answered, the following questions about the types of distance 

education courses were treated as nonresponse. More specifically, the gate question 

(DISTEDUC) had a weighted response rate of about 66 percent, and was therefore missing for 

about a third of study respondents. Of those who responded to the gate, only about 16 percent 

reported that they had taken distance education courses. One of the follow-up items, DISTNUM, 

was not applicable (skipped) for the majority that reported not having taken any distance 

education courses. These not applicable cases were excluded from the response rate calculation, 

so the denominator used in computing the response rate for DISTNUM included those cases with 

a value of ‘yes’ for the gate item (DISTEDUC), as well as those who were nonrespondents to 

the gate item. Additionally, some students who responded to the gate did not provide a response 

to the follow-up item, thus DISTNUM has item nonresponse for some cases where DISTEDUC 

is ‘yes’. Therefore, the low response rate for DISTNUM is driven both by the large amount of 

missing data for DISTEDUC and the small number of cases where DISTNUM was applicable. 
138 

Table 57. Summary of item response rates for all students, by type of institution: 2004 

Weighted response rates 

Variable Variable label 

All 

students 

Public 

lessthan2-year Public 2-year 

Public 

4-year 

nondoctorate 

Public 

4-year 

doctorate 

Private 

not-forprofit lessthan4-year 

Private 

not-forprofit 4-

year nondoctorate 

P

n

doc

AGE Age as of 12/31/03 99.9 100.0 99.9 99.9 100.0 100.0 100.0 AGEGROUP Age groups as of 12/31/03 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 AIDAPP Applied for aid 99.4 98.8 98.9 99.7 99.8 99.5 99.9 ATTENDA 

Reason for attending NPSAS: complete associate’s 

degree 64.3 58.2 67.1 53.6 47.3 53.9 45.4 

ATTENDB Reason for attending NPSAS: complete certificate 64.3 58.2 67.1 53.6 47.3 53.9 45.4 ATTENDC Reason for attending NPSAS: learn job skills 64.3 58.2 67.1 53.6 47.3 53.9 45.4 ATTENDD 

Reason for attending NPSAS: personal interest or 

enrichment 64.3 58.2 67.1 53.6 47.3 53.9 45.4 

ATTENDE 

Reason for attending NPSAS: transfer to 2-year 

school 64.3 58.2 67.1 53.6 47.3 53.9 45.4 

ATTENDF 

Reason for attending NPSAS: transfer to 4-year 

school 64.3 58.2 67.1 53.6 47.3 53.9 45.4 

ATTENDG 

Reason for attending NPSAS: transfer to another 

school 64.3 58.2 67.1 53.6 47.3 53.9 45.4 

BAYEAR Year received bachelor's degree 78.4 † † 84.2 80.4 † 69.0 CC2000A Carnegie code (2000) with control 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 CITIZEN2 Citizenship (max non-citizen) 97.5 83.4 95.9 98.9 98.5 99.3 98.4 CLASSA Type of class: business 55.6 62.3 60.3 55.4 47.3 39.2 48.7 CLASSB Type of class: health 55.6 62.3 60.3 55.4 47.3 39.2 48.7 CLASSC Type of class: education 55.6 62.3 60.3 55.4 47.3 39.2 48.7 CLASSD 

Type of class: engineering and engineering 

technology 55.6 62.3 60.3 55.4 47.3 39.2 48.7 

CLASSE Type of class: computer and information sciences 55.6 62.3 60.3 55.4 47.3 39.2 48.7 CLASSF Type of class: social sciences 55.6 62.3 60.3 55.4 47.3 39.2 48.7 CLASSG Type of class: natural sciences and mathematics 55.6 62.3 60.3 55.4 47.3 39.2 48.7 CLASSH Type of class: arts and humanities 55.6 62.3 60.3 55.4 47.3 39.2 48.7 CLASSI Type of class: communications 55.6 62.3 60.3 55.4 47.3 39.2 48.7 CLASSJ Type of class: vocational program 55.6 62.3 60.3 55.4 47.3 39.2 48.7 CLASSK Type of class: university transfer 55.6 62.3 60.3 55.4 47.3 39.2 48.7 CLASSL Type of class: general education 55.6 62.3 60.3 55.4 47.3 39.2 48.7 CLASSX Type of class: other 55.6 62.3 60.3 55.4 47.3 39.2 48.7 COMHOUR Number of hours volunteered per month 38.5 19.5 32.8 40.4 46.4 20.8 43.2 COMONE One time event 43.3 21.5 36.7 45.3 52.0 23.7 48.3 COMPTO87 Comparable to 1987 NPSAS 99.0 99.7 98.6 99.6 99.4 98.6 99.7 COMREQ Volunteer work required for graduation/class 42.3 21.6 37.0 46.0 50.8 24.7 50.7 COMSERV Community service/volunteer in last year 65.5 53.8 64.4 67.2 69.7 49.1 64.5 

See notes at end of table. 
139 

Table 57. Summary of item response rates for all students, by type of institution: 2004—Continued 

Weighted response rates1

Variable Variable label 

All 

students 

Public 

lessthan2-year Public 2-year 

Public 

4-year 

nondoctorate 

Public 

4-year 

doctorate 

Private 

not-forprofit lessthan4-year 

Private 

not-forprofit 4-

year nondoctorate 

P

n

doc

COMSERVA Volunteer: fundraising (political and non-political) 44.4 22.8 37.9 46.8 53.0 24.9 49.5 COMSERVB Volunteer: homeless shelter/soup kitchen 44.4 22.8 37.9 46.8 53.0 24.9 49.5 COMSERVC Volunteer: health services 44.4 22.8 37.9 46.8 53.0 24.9 49.5 COMSERVD Volunteer: neighborhood improvement 44.4 22.8 37.9 46.8 53.0 24.9 49.5 COMSERVE Volunteer: service to the church 44.4 22.8 37.9 46.8 53.0 24.9 49.5 COMSERVF Volunteer: tutoring/education-related 44.4 22.8 37.9 46.8 53.0 24.9 49.5 COMSERVG Volunteer: other work with kids 44.4 22.8 37.9 46.8 53.0 24.9 49.5 COMSERVX Volunteer: other 44.4 22.8 37.9 46.8 53.0 24.9 49.5 CONSIDRA Consider campus safety 63.3 52.3 62.4 65.8 67.5 47.9 64.2 CONSIDRB Consider graduation rate 63.3 52.3 62.4 65.8 67.5 47.9 64.2 CONSIDRC Consider job rate 39.4 51.2 † † † 24.4 † CRBALDUE Balance due on all credit cards 29.0 10.2 27.5 32.0 33.5 13.8 27.9 DEGEARN Earned prior degree/certificates 69.8 61.5 68.9 71.4 73.0 55.9 70.0 DEGEARNA Already earned bachelor’s degree 41.7 32.2 35.8 43.3 47.6 22.1 42.5 DEGEARNB Already earned associate’s degree 41.7 32.2 35.8 43.3 47.6 22.1 42.5 DEGEARNC Already earned undergraduate certificate/diploma 41.7 32.2 35.8 43.3 47.6 22.1 42.5 DEGEARND Already earned post-BA certificate 41.7 32.2 35.8 43.3 47.6 22.1 42.5 DEGEARNE Already earned master’s degree 41.7 32.2 35.8 43.3 47.6 22.1 42.5 DEGEARNF Already earned post-MA certificate 41.7 32.2 35.8 43.3 47.6 22.1 42.5 DEGEARNG Already earned first professional degree 41.7 32.2 35.8 43.3 47.6 22.1 42.5 DEGEARNH Already earned doctoral degree 41.7 32.2 35.8 43.3 47.6 22.1 42.5 DEGFIRST Degree program 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 DELIVE Distance education: live 22.4 7.2 24.8 23.6 21.0 7.1 22.8 DEPANY Dependents - has dependents 86.0 72.5 82.2 86.7 87.1 91.4 89.8 DEPCARE Have dependent children in daycare 64.2 55.4 66.0 65.1 69.9 48.1 61.2 DEPCHILD Dependents - has dependent children 83.8 69.6 79.7 85.3 86.5 84.6 87.7 DEPCLAIM Claimed as a dependent 68.4 50.7 67.2 69.9 70.4 51.8 70.2 DEPCOST Monthly daycare costs 38.2 27.6 38.8 40.6 47.1 22.3 35.1 DEPEND Dependency status 94.1 93.4 92.6 94.2 93.2 96.2 97.0 DEPINC Dependent parent income derived 83.9 63.7 77.1 87.1 86.1 88.7 91.7 DEPNUMCH Dependents - number of dependent children 81.1 65.6 77.3 83.6 85.2 77.1 83.5 DEPOLD Dependent children - age of oldest 80.4 63.0 76.3 83.1 84.9 74.9 82.5 DEPOTHER Dependents - has dependent other than children 83.8 69.6 79.7 85.2 86.5 84.6 87.7 DEPYNG Dependent children - age of youngest 80.4 63.0 76.3 83.1 84.9 74.9 82.5 DERECR Distance education: pre-recorded 22.4 7.2 24.8 23.6 21.0 7.1 22.8 DEWWW Distance education: Internet 22.4 7.2 24.8 23.6 21.0 7.1 22.8 See notes at end of table. 
140 

Table 57. Summary of item response rates for all students, by type of institution: 2004—Continued 

Weighted response rates1

Variable Variable label 

All 

students 

Public 

lessthan2-year Public 2-year 

Public 

4-year 

nondoctorate 

Public 

4-year 

doctorate 

Private 

not-forprofit lessthan4-year 

Private 

not-forprofit 4-

year nondoctorate 

P

n

doc

DISABLE Disability Flag 65.9 55.5 64.7 67.5 69.7 51.9 65.5 DISMOBIL Condition that limits physical activities 66.0 55.7 64.8 67.6 69.8 52.0 65.6 DISOTHER Other condition lasting six months or more 66.0 55.5 64.8 67.7 69.9 52.0 65.6 DISOTHRA Difficulty: dressing, bathing, etc 10.4 8.2 11.2 10.7 10.9 6.7 9.4 DISOTHRB Difficulty: getting to school to attend class 10.3 8.1 11.2 10.7 10.9 6.7 9.4 DISOTHRC Difficulty: learning, remembering 10.4 8.2 11.2 10.7 10.9 6.7 9.4 DISOTHRD Difficulty: working at a job 10.4 8.2 11.2 10.7 10.9 6.7 9.4 DISSENSR Have a long-lasting sensory condition 66.1 55.7 64.8 67.7 69.9 52.0 65.6 DISTALL Distance education: entire program 23.2 7.5 25.5 24.3 22.2 7.5 23.6 DISTEDUC Distance education: took courses 65.8 54.9 64.8 67.6 70.0 49.5 64.5 DISTLOC Distance education: location of course(s) 23.1 7.9 25.4 24.3 22.2 7.5 23.4 DISTNUM Distance education: number of courses 22.3 7.2 24.7 23.4 21.2 7.2 22.4 DISTSATF Distance education: satisfaction 22.9 7.9 25.1 24.2 22.1 7.4 23.4 DISTYPES Main limiting condition 16.1 16.3 17.7 16.5 15.3 11.6 15.6 DSTUINC Dependent student earnings derived 56.6 32.2 42.6 62.5 58.4 77.0 77.3 EMPLWAIV Tuition waivers for faculty/staff 94.4 96.9 94.1 96.6 94.9 73.4 95.0 EMPLYAM1 Employer tuition aid (excl staff) 98.2 99.2 98.1 99.5 98.5 86.9 98.6 EMPLYAM2 Employer (parents) tuition aid 69.1 59.8 68.4 70.5 72.2 55.2 69.1 ENR01 Monthly enrollment status 2003/07 99.0 99.7 98.6 99.6 99.4 98.6 99.7 ENR02 Monthly enrollment status 2003/08 99.0 99.7 98.6 99.6 99.4 98.6 99.7 ENR03 Monthly enrollment status 2003/09 99.0 99.7 98.6 99.6 99.4 98.6 99.7 ENR04 Monthly enrollment status 2003/10 99.0 99.7 98.6 99.6 99.4 98.6 99.7 ENR05 Monthly enrollment status 2003/11 99.0 99.7 98.6 99.6 99.4 98.6 99.7 ENR06 Monthly enrollment status 2003/12 99.0 99.7 98.6 99.6 99.4 98.6 99.7 ENR07 Monthly enrollment status 2004/01 99.0 99.7 98.6 99.6 99.4 98.6 99.7 ENR08 Monthly enrollment status 2004/02 99.0 99.7 98.6 99.6 99.4 98.6 99.7 ENR09 Monthly enrollment status 2004/03 99.0 99.7 98.6 99.6 99.4 98.6 99.7 ENR10 Monthly enrollment status 2004/04 99.0 99.7 98.6 99.6 99.4 98.6 99.7 ENR11 Monthly enrollment status 2004/05 99.0 99.7 98.6 99.6 99.4 98.6 99.7 ENR12 Monthly enrollment status 2004/06 99.0 99.7 98.6 99.6 99.4 98.6 99.7 EVER2PUB Ever attended community college 67.6 53.2 100.0 68.2 70.6 49.8 65.5 EVER4YR Ever attended 4-year school 64.9 58.0 66.6 † † 53.6 100.0 FEDAPP Applied for federal aid 96.2 96.8 94.0 95.3 97.8 96.2 98.8 FORESCH 

Ever attended elementary or secondary school 

outside of the U.S. 65.2 53.6 64.5 67.2 68.2 54.0 67.5 

FPOFFER Offered first-professional degree 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 

See notes at end of table. 
141 

Table 57. Summary of item response rates for all students, by type of institution: 2004—Continued 

Weighted response rates1

Variable Variable label 

All 

students 

Public 

lessthan2-year Public 2-year 

Public 

4-year 

nondoctorate 

Public 

4-year 

doctorate 

Private 

not-forprofit lessthan4-year 

Private 

not-forprofit 4-

year nondoctorate 

P

n

doc

GAINSUR Health insurance with assistantship 77.7 † † 57.2 80.3 † 47.2 GENDER Gender 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 GPA Grad point average 89.6 57.9 86.1 95.4 94.7 75.8 92.3 GRADLVL Graduate class level 95.2 † 100.0 93.3 95.8 † 90.2 GRADPYR Year began graduate degree 70.5 † † 69.7 75.8 † 55.0 GRADTAA TA duties: student email 76.2 † † 59.0 78.1 † 43.3 GRADTAB TA duties: grading 76.2 † † 59.0 78.1 † 43.3 GRADTAC TA duties: teaching 76.2 † † 59.0 78.1 † 43.3 GRADTAD TA duties: office hours 76.2 † † 59.0 78.1 † 43.3 GRADTAE TA duties: discussion 76.2 † † 59.0 78.1 † 43.3 GRADTAF TA duties: lab 76.2 † † 59.0 78.1 † 43.3 GRASTUIT Tuition paid by assistantship 73.8 † † 53.3 76.4 † 46.6 GRENRST Graduate enrollment status (all years) 73.2 † † 71.5 78.4 † 61.3 GRFELAMT Graduate fellowships/grants/traineeships 99.9 100.0 100.0 99.9 99.8 100.0 99.9 GRGRDAMT Graduate other assistantship amount 99.9 100.0 100.0 99.9 99.8 100.0 99.9 GRINFEL Institutional graduate fellowships 99.9 100.0 100.0 99.9 99.8 100.0 99.9 GRRESAMT Research assistantship amount 99.9 100.0 100.0 99.9 99.8 100.0 99.9 GRTEAAMT Teaching assistantship amount 99.9 100.0 100.0 99.9 99.8 100.0 99.9 GRTRNAMT Federal traineeships 99.9 100.0 100.0 99.9 99.8 100.0 99.9 HBCU Historical Black college indicator 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 HIGHLVEX Highest level of education ever expected 65.7 54.6 64.1 68.2 70.1 49.2 65.5 HISPANIC Race-ethnicity: Hispanic or Latino origin 92.7 92.6 92.0 92.2 93.7 85.4 93.7 HISPTYPE Race-ethnicity: Type of Hispanic origin 89.4 84.8 88.4 89.9 92.0 77.0 90.4 HLOFFER Highest level of offering at NPSAS institution 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 HOMEDIST Distance from NPSAS school to home 63.0 53.1 62.4 64.6 67.6 45.9 60.7 HOMEPAR Parents own home 66.1 46.6 63.9 68.1 68.9 50.1 68.2 HOMESTUD Own home 56.3 50.8 56.0 58.7 60.5 40.7 55.1 HSDEG High school degree type 90.6 89.3 91.9 89.8 90.5 83.9 89.1 HSGRADYY High school graduation year 87.4 80.3 89.1 88.1 88.2 81.0 85.6 HSTYPE Type of high school attended 66.9 54.4 66.2 68.5 70.1 53.2 67.8 INATHAMT Athletic scholarship 94.9 96.9 94.1 97.0 95.8 73.4 95.9 INDEPINC Independent student & spouse income derived 81.5 69.0 77.2 81.0 82.8 90.1 84.3 INLNAMT Institutional loan 94.4 96.9 94.1 96.6 95.1 73.4 95.0 INNSLDS Positive value in NSLDS 2003-2004 data 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 INPELL Positive value in Pell data 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 INSMERIT Institutional merit grants 94.9 96.9 94.1 97.0 95.9 73.4 95.9 See notes at end of table. 
142 

Table 57. Summary of item response rates for all students, by type of institution: 2004—Continued 

Weighted response rates1

Variable Variable label 

All 

students 

Public 

lessthan2-year Public 2-year 

Public 

4-year 

nondoctorate 

Public 

4-year 

doctorate 

Private 

not-forprofit lessthan4-year 

Private 

not-forprofit 4-

year nondoctorate 

P

n

doc

INSTNEED Institutional need-based grant 94.9 96.9 94.1 97.0 95.9 73.4 95.9 INSTWRK Institutional work-study 98.3 99.3 98.1 99.5 98.6 87.0 98.6 INSWAIV Institutional tuition and fee waivers 94.4 96.9 94.1 96.6 95.1 73.4 95.0 JOBAFFOR Afford school without working 48.1 29.5 46.5 53.9 55.5 33.6 43.6 JOBCLASS Job related to coursework 56.9 72.2 61.9 53.2 45.5 31.7 49.0 JOBEARN Total amount earned during the school year 54.1 42.9 54.1 56.6 56.8 38.5 53.7 JOBEFFA Job helped with career preparation 48.2 29.5 46.7 54.2 55.6 33.6 43.7 JOBEFFB Job helped with coursework 48.2 29.5 46.7 54.2 55.6 33.6 43.7 JOBEFFC Job restricted class choice 48.2 29.5 46.7 54.2 55.6 33.6 43.7 JOBEFFD Job limited class schedule 48.2 29.5 46.7 54.2 55.6 33.6 43.7 JOBEFFE Job limited facility access 48.2 29.5 46.7 54.2 55.6 33.6 43.7 JOBEFFF Job limited number of classes 48.2 29.5 46.7 54.2 55.6 33.6 43.7 JOBEFFGR Effect of job on grades 66.3 50.5 64.4 69.3 70.3 54.5 65.9 JOBEMPL Type of employer 58.5 44.9 58.9 60.8 61.3 40.8 57.5 JOBEXPT Parents expect you to have a job 51.5 31.2 49.4 56.8 58.0 33.7 50.7 JOBHOUR Hours worked weekly during the school year 59.9 48.4 61.0 61.8 61.5 43.7 59.3 JOBMAIN Main reason for working 48.2 29.3 46.8 54.2 55.5 33.6 43.7 JOBMAJOR Job related to major 53.4 26.4 45.7 60.0 61.7 37.2 57.2 JOBNUM Number of jobs during NPSAS year 68.7 60.7 68.0 70.1 71.9 54.8 68.5 JOBONOFF Job on or off campus 59.8 46.5 60.6 62.1 62.3 42.7 58.5 JOBPRIOR Had job prior to enrollment at NPSAS 59.8 46.6 60.5 62.0 62.2 42.6 58.5 JOBROLE Working student/employee taking classes 61.0 49.5 61.8 63.4 62.8 44.2 61.0 JOBSAVE Amount saved from summer earnings 55.2 39.4 51.9 59.8 60.7 35.7 58.7 JOBSCHA Combine school and work: class outside work 36.4 32.2 40.2 32.2 28.7 19.3 39.9 JOBSCHB Combine school and work: distance ed 36.4 32.2 40.2 32.2 28.7 19.3 39.9 JOBSCHC Combine school and work: modify schedule 36.4 32.2 40.2 32.2 28.7 19.3 39.9 JOBSUMMR Work during summer 2003 64.4 51.7 62.6 67.0 68.6 47.9 65.8 JOBWEEK Weeks worked while enrolled 59.7 46.9 60.5 62.0 62.1 42.8 58.5 LOCALRES Housing 82.7 66.1 75.0 84.3 86.6 75.0 90.0 MAJORS Field of study/major (detailed) 90.6 84.5 82.9 95.0 95.4 82.1 96.1 MILTYPE Military service type 84.7 68.9 80.6 85.6 86.1 90.6 88.2 NPFIRST NPSAS was first school attended after high school 67.8 58.8 67.2 70.2 71.1 54.1 69.6 NUMCRED Number of credit cards in own name 66.3 46.6 64.1 68.4 69.0 50.3 68.2 ORPHAN Orphan or ward of court 93.2 90.7 91.6 93.1 92.5 95.2 96.2 OTHFDGRT Other federal grants 94.4 96.9 94.1 96.6 95.1 73.4 95.0 OWNINVST Own investments, business or farm over $10,000 56.5 50.4 56.1 58.3 60.4 40.8 55.2 See notes at end of table. 
143 

Table 57. Summary of item response rates for all students, by type of institution: 2004—Continued 

Weighted response rates1

Variable Variable label 

All 

students 

Public 

lessthan2-year Public 2-year 

Public 

4-year 

nondoctorate 

Public 

4-year 

doctorate 

Private 

not-forprofit lessthan4-year 

Private 

not-forprofit 4-

year nondoctorate 

P

n

doc

PARALLOW Monthly allowance amount from parents 75.9 70.4 75.3 76.2 76.6 63.9 75.7 PARBORN Student's parents were born in the United States 65.3 54.4 64.1 67.0 69.4 49.1 64.2 PARCOLL Parents taking college courses in 2003-2004 65.8 46.3 63.4 68.0 68.7 49.5 68.1 PARESTA Parents own other real estate 65.1 45.4 62.9 67.3 67.7 49.5 67.0 PARHELPA Help from parents: housing 68.4 52.0 67.2 69.9 70.5 51.7 70.1 PARHELPB Help from parents: other educational expenses 68.4 52.0 67.2 69.9 70.5 51.7 70.1 PARHELPC Help from parents: other living expenses 68.4 52.0 67.2 69.9 70.5 51.7 70.1 PARHELPD Help from parents: tuition and fees 68.4 52.0 67.2 69.9 70.5 51.7 70.1 PARLIVE Lived with parents while not enrolled 69.0 30.4 62.3 70.8 70.9 46.4 74.2 PARPAYCR Parents help pay credit bills 51.9 22.2 46.7 55.5 57.8 31.5 52.8 PAYOFBAL Payoff or carry credit balance 51.9 22.2 46.7 55.4 57.8 31.6 52.7 PAYTUIT Use credit to pay for tuition 52.0 22.4 46.9 55.6 57.8 31.6 53.0 PDADED Father’s highest education level 84.1 70.2 80.3 85.6 86.1 85.3 88.0 PELLAMT Pell grant amount 99.7 99.8 99.5 99.6 100.0 99.6 99.9 PERKAMT Perkins loan amount 98.0 98.4 97.0 97.7 98.8 97.6 99.2 PFAMNUM Dependent student’s parent’s family size 93.1 91.9 91.1 93.5 92.5 95.6 96.3 PINCOL Parent’s children in college 92.9 91.8 91.0 93.3 92.3 95.6 96.1 PLUSAMT PLUS loan amount 99.5 99.8 99.2 99.1 100.0 98.5 99.8 PMARITAL Parent’s marital status 93.3 92.1 91.4 93.7 92.6 95.8 96.5 PMOMED Mothers highest education level 84.2 70.4 80.4 85.4 86.2 85.1 88.2 PRIMLANG English as primary language 65.7 54.7 64.6 67.4 69.9 49.2 64.4 PRIVLOAN Private sources (alternative) loans 98.2 99.0 98.1 99.5 98.5 86.7 98.6 PSECTYR Year first enrolled in postsecondary education 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 RAASIAN Race--Asian 92.3 94.6 91.9 93.3 94.1 83.0 93.6 RABLACK Race--Black or African-American 92.3 94.6 91.9 93.3 94.1 83.0 93.6 RAINDIAN Race--American Indian or Alaska Native 92.3 94.6 91.9 93.3 94.1 83.0 93.6 RAINDTRB State/federally recognized tribe 63.3 54.1 62.3 62.0 66.4 38.9 62.2 RAISLAND Race--Native Hawaiian/other Pacific Islander 92.3 94.6 91.9 93.3 94.1 83.0 93.6 RAOTHER Race--Other 92.3 94.6 91.9 93.3 94.1 83.0 93.6 RAWHITE Race--White 92.3 94.6 91.9 93.3 94.1 83.0 93.6 REMEDIA Took remedial course: English 21.4 7.4 24.2 24.4 20.8 12.6 20.1 REMEDIB Took remedial course: math 21.4 7.4 24.2 24.4 20.8 12.6 20.1 REMEDIC Took remedial course: reading 21.4 7.4 24.2 24.4 20.8 12.6 20.1 REMEDID Took remedial course: study skills 21.4 7.4 24.2 24.4 20.8 12.6 20.1 REMEDIE Took remedial course: writing 21.4 7.4 24.2 24.4 20.8 12.6 20.1 REMETOOK Took remedial courses this school year 35.3 18.9 39.1 37.7 33.7 21.5 32.7 See notes at end of table. 
144 

Table 57. Summary of item response rates for all students, by type of institution: 2004—Continued 

Weighted response rates1

Variable Variable label 

All 

students 

Public 

lessthan2-year Public 2-year 

Public 

4-year 

nondoctorate 

Public 

4-year 

doctorate 

Private 

not-forprofit lessthan4-year 

Private 

not-forprofit 4-

year nondoctorate 

P

n

doc

REMEVER Ever taken remedial courses 66.0 57.1 65.4 68.4 69.3 52.7 67.5 SECTOR1 Institution sector 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 SEOGAMT FSEOG amount 94.9 96.9 94.1 97.0 95.8 73.4 95.9 SERNEEDA Adaptive equipment and technology 15.8 16.1 17.3 16.1 15.2 10.8 15.3 SERNEEDB Alternative exam formats or additional time 15.8 16.1 17.3 16.1 15.2 10.8 15.3 SERNEEDC Course substitution or waiver 15.8 16.1 17.3 16.1 15.2 10.8 15.3 SERNEEDD Readers, note takers, or scribes 15.8 16.1 17.3 16.1 15.2 10.8 15.3 SERNEEDE Registration assistance or priority class registration 15.8 16.1 17.3 16.1 15.2 10.8 15.3 SERNEEDF Sign language or oral interpreters 15.6 16.1 17.2 15.9 15.0 10.8 15.0 SERNEEDG Tutors to assist with homework 15.8 16.1 17.3 16.1 15.2 10.8 15.3 SERNEEDX Needs: other 15.8 16.1 17.3 16.1 15.2 10.8 15.3 SERRECVA Service: adaptive equipment and technology 16.1 16.0 17.6 16.6 15.2 11.1 15.3 SERRECVB Service: alternative exam formats/additional time 16.1 16.0 17.6 16.6 15.2 11.1 15.3 SERRECVC Service: course substitution or waiver 16.1 16.0 17.6 16.6 15.2 11.1 15.3 SERRECVD Service: readers, note takers, or scribes 16.1 16.0 17.6 16.6 15.2 11.1 15.3 SERRECVE Service: registration priority or assistance 16.1 16.0 17.6 16.6 15.2 11.1 15.3 SERRECVF Service: sign language or oral interpreters 16.1 16.0 17.6 16.6 15.2 11.1 15.3 SERRECVG Service: tutors to assist with homework 16.1 16.0 17.6 16.6 15.2 11.1 15.3 SERRECVX Service: other 16.1 16.0 17.6 16.6 15.2 11.1 15.3 SIBCOLB4 Siblings in college before respondent 65.9 46.4 63.5 68.1 68.7 49.6 68.2 SINCOL Number in college (independent students) 84.6 68.4 80.2 85.7 86.3 90.1 87.9 SJCOMSER Work-study: community service 67.1 75.7 66.6 71.5 65.8 62.3 69.2 SJHOURS Work study: hours worked per week 78.7 86.1 78.6 77.6 78.4 62.8 81.7 SJMAJOR Work study: related to major 67.1 55.7 69.6 70.3 64.0 61.4 69.6 SJONOFF Work study: on/off campus 66.7 73.4 69.0 70.0 63.4 63.5 68.7 SJSCHOOL Work study: for school 66.6 71.8 68.6 70.3 63.5 62.9 68.8 SJTUTOR Work study: tutoring 67.2 76.5 66.7 71.7 66.4 62.3 69.2 SMARITAL Student’s marital status 91.7 87.7 89.1 90.9 92.2 99.4 96.2 SPINCOL Spouse in college 68.0 53.9 67.7 70.9 73.1 54.3 64.0 SPSINC Spouse of student earnings derived 30.2 25.4 21.5 29.5 27.0 71.5 43.9 SSISSDI Receive SSI/SSDI 16.2 16.5 17.8 16.6 15.4 11.1 15.4 STAFSUB Stafford loan subsidized amount 99.5 99.8 99.2 99.0 100.0 98.5 99.8 STAFUNSB Stafford loan unsubsidized amount 99.5 99.8 99.2 99.0 100.0 98.5 99.8 STATNEED State need-based grants 94.4 96.9 94.1 96.6 95.1 73.4 95.0 STLNAMT State loan total 94.4 96.9 94.1 96.6 95.1 73.4 95.0 STMERIT State merit only grants 94.4 96.9 94.1 96.6 95.1 73.4 95.0 STNOND1 State non-need grants 94.4 96.9 94.1 96.6 95.1 73.4 95.0 See notes at end of table. 
145 

Table 57. Summary of item response rates for all students, by type of institution: 2004—Continued 

Weighted response rates1

Variable Variable label 

All 

students 

Public 

lessthan2-year Public 2-year 

Public 

4-year 

nondoctorate 

Public 

4-year 

doctorate 

Private 

not-forprofit lessthan4-year 

Private 

not-forprofit 4-

year nondoctorate 

P

n

doc

STUDMULT Number of institutions attended 83.6 69.5 78.8 85.0 85.8 87.0 87.9 STWKAMT State work-study total 97.8 99.2 98.0 99.2 97.9 86.7 97.6 TAXHOPE Claim Federal Hope scholarship 63.0 54.8 62.9 64.5 66.3 48.9 61.3 TAXLEARN Claim lifetime learning tax credit 63.5 54.7 63.0 65.2 67.3 48.6 61.9 TAXTUIT Claim tuition tax deduction 64.4 55.3 63.8 65.9 68.0 49.3 63.3 TFEDWRK Total federal work-study 97.8 99.2 98.0 99.2 97.9 86.7 97.6 TRANSCRD Transferred credits to NPSAS 30.5 7.7 21.5 44.3 45.9 29.5 44.9 TRANSFR Transferred from NPSAS 40.6 31.7 43.7 42.2 34.0 47.4 34.4 TRANSPLN Plan to transfer from NPSAS 51.3 28.7 48.7 55.6 57.7 30.9 55.8 TRANSTO Transferred to NPSAS 57.2 34.1 54.0 62.5 63.7 61.8 67.8 UGDEGAA Associate’s degree types 96.7 100.0 96.6 89.4 93.7 97.5 100.0 UNTAXBF Received untaxed benefits in 2003 65.4 57.3 64.7 66.5 70.8 51.6 62.5 UNTAXBFA Received child support 30.1 25.2 32.0 30.6 31.0 22.5 28.7 UNTAXBFB Received disability payments 20.1 21.6 23.8 19.5 15.3 16.1 17.9 UNTAXBFC Received food stamps 20.1 21.6 23.8 19.5 15.3 16.1 17.9 UNTAXBFD Received social security benefits 20.0 21.4 23.7 19.3 15.2 16.1 17.7 UNTAXBFE Received TANF 30.1 25.2 32.0 30.6 31.0 22.5 28.7 UNTAXBFF Received worker’s compensation 20.1 21.6 23.8 19.5 15.3 16.1 17.9 USBORN Respondent born in the U.S. 65.7 54.8 64.4 67.5 69.5 51.8 64.7 VADODAMT Federal veteran's and military aid 100.0 100.0 99.9 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 VETBEN Federal veteran's benefits 100.0 100.0 99.9 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 VETERAN Veteran status 95.4 86.6 94.8 95.3 95.9 97.7 94.6 VOCAPPLY Ever applied for Voc Rehab services 13.9 11.4 15.0 14.0 13.7 9.0 13.4 VOCHELP State voc rehab and job training (WIA) 94.4 96.9 94.1 96.6 95.1 73.4 95.0 VOCRECV Ever received Voc Rehab services 16.2 16.5 17.8 16.7 15.4 11.1 15.4 VOTEEVER Ever vote 65.5 55.1 64.2 67.3 69.3 51.7 64.5 VOTEREG Registered to vote 65.5 55.1 64.2 67.3 69.2 51.6 64.6 YEARGRAD Year began graduate school 73.0 † † 71.4 78.1 † 60.6 † Not applicable. NOTE: Nonresponse bias analysis was conducted only for each item with a weighted response rate less than 85 percent. Nonresponse bias analysis was based on known for both respondents and nonrespondents (described in the assessing student nonresponse bias section above). Note that while values for many variables asources, including the student interview, student record data, and extant data sources, some variables are obtained from only one source. Given that the weighted interview was about 70 percent, items obtained solely from the student interview have 30 percent nonresponse even when all student interview respondents providecompounded for nested items following gate questions. Response rates for items that follow a gate item include nonresponse resulting both from nonresponse to thmissing data for previously unanswered gate items. Consequently, item response rates to the follow-up items are deflated because the item is not applicable for an nonrespondents to the gate item. SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 2004 National Postsecondary Student Aid Study (NPSAS:04). 
Chapter 6. Unit Nonresponse Bias Analyses, Weighting and Variance Estimation 

146 

Therefore, a nonresponse bias analysis was conducted for all items with a weighted 

response rate less than 85 percent for all students or for students in a particular sector. The 

possibility of estimating the degree of bias depends on having some variables that reflect key 

characteristics of respondents and for which there is little or no missing data. The variables listed 

above in the student-level bias analysis section were used to compare the item respondents and 

nonrespondents. Additionally, gender and age group were used because they were known for all 

study respondents. Also, institution strata were used in analyses of items for all students. These 

variables are important to the study and are related to many of the items being analyzed for low 

item response rates. For these items, the nonresponse bias prior to imputation was estimated as 

described in the beginning of chapter 6 for each of these variables known for most respondents 

and nonrespondents and tested (adjusting for multiple comparisons) to determine if the bias was 

significant at the 5 percent level. 

Appendix K contains a table (table K-23) using one variable (DEPCHILD) to illustrate 

the estimated bias before imputation for all students. Similar computations were done for about 

200 additional variables with item response rates less than 85 percent for all students or for 

students in at least one sector. Table K-24 in appendix K summarizes these computations. This 

table also shows a large range for the percent of variable categories with significant bias across 

all items analyzed prior to imputation. A byproduct of the imputation (described in section 5.5) is 

the reduction or elimination of item-level nonresponse bias. Imputation reduces or eliminates 

nonresponse bias by replacing missing data with statistically plausible values. Missing data and 

the associated nonresponse bias for variables are usually not ignorable (i.e., the respondents’ 

distribution patterns differ from those in the full population). Therefore, replacing missing data 

with reasonable values produces imputed sample distributions that resemble full population 

distributions, thus reducing if not eliminating nonresponse bias. The use of carefully constructed 

imputation classes, donor-imputee matching criteria, and random hot-deck searches within 

imputation cells are all designed to ensure that imputed data are in fact plausible and that the 

nonresponse bias is ignorable within the imputation classes. 

To evaluate how well the imputation worked in reducing bias for items with a weighted 

response rate less than 85 percent for all students, the bias was estimated after imputation. For 

continuous variables, the estimated bias equals the mean before imputation minus the mean after 

imputation. For categorical variables, the estimated bias was computed for each category as the 

percentage of students in that category before imputation minus the percentage of students in that 

category after imputation. The estimated bias was then tested (adjusting for multiple 

comparisons) to determine if the bias was significant at the 5 percent level. A categorical 

variable was deemed to be significantly biased if any of the categories was significantly biased. 

As shown in tables K-25 and K-26 in appendix K, about 25 percent of the variables analyzed still 

had significant bias after imputation. The relative bias is greater than 10 percent for about 22 

percent of the items with remaining significant bias. Analysts should use caution when using the 

significantly biased items. 

6.4 Variance Estimation 

For probability-based sample surveys, most estimates are nonlinear statistics. For 

example, a mean or proportion, which is expressed as Σwy/Σw, is nonlinear because the 

denominator is a survey estimate of the (unknown) population total. In this situation, the 

variances of the estimates cannot be expressed in closed form. Two procedures for estimating 
Chapter 6. Unit Nonrepsonse Bias Analyses, Weighting and Variance Estimation 

147 

variances of survey statistics are the Taylor series linearization procedure and the bootstrap 

replication procedure, which are both available on the NPSAS data files. The analysis strata and 

replicates created for the Taylor series procedure are discussed in section 6.4.1, and section 6.4.2 

discusses the replicate weights created for the bootstrap procedure. Section 6.4.3 discusses the 

computation and use of design effects to measure the effects that complex sample design features 

had on the variances of survey estimates. 

6.4.1 Taylor Series 

The Taylor series variance estimation procedure is a well-known technique used to 

estimate the variances of nonlinear statistics. The procedure takes the first-order Taylor series 

approximation of the nonlinear statistic and then substitutes the linear representation into the 

appropriate variance formula based on the sample design. Woodruff(1971) presented the 

mathematical formulation of this procedure. 

For stratified multistage surveys, the Taylor series procedure requires analysis strata and 

analysis primary sampling units (PSUs), also called replicates, defined from the sampling strata 

and PSUs used in the first stage of sampling. For NPSAS:04, analysis strata and analysis PSUs 

were defined separately for all students combined and can be used for analyses of any domain. 

The first step was to identify the PSUs used at the first stage of sample selection. As 

discussed in chapter 2, the PSUs included the 860 noncertainty institutions. For the 810 certainty 

institutions, however, the students represent the first stage of sampling. To obtain appropriate 

degrees of freedom for variance estimation, the students selected from each certainty institution 

were partitioned into two, three, or four pseudo-PSUs by random assignment of sample students 

into approximately equal-sized groups. The number of pseudo-PSUs formed was based on the 

institution’s measure of size for first-stage sampling. 

The next step was to sort the PSUs and pseudo-PSUs by the 58 institution strata, then by 

certainty versus noncertainty, and then by the selection order for the noncertainty institutions and 

by IPEDS ID for the certainty institutions. From this sorted list, the analysis PSUs were then 

defined by collapsing the PSUs and pseudo-PSUs as required so each analysis PSU contained at 

least four respondents. This sample size requirement ensured stable variance estimates. Analysis 

PSUs were then paired to form analysis strata. Certainty institutions that included three or four 

pseudo-PSUs were made a single analysis stratum. This process resulted in 1,005 analysis strata. 

The names of the analysis strata and analysis PSU variables are ANALSTR and ANALPSU, 

respectively. 

The procedure described above may overestimate the variance because it does not always 

account for the finite population correction (FPC) at the institution stage of sampling. 

Alternatively, the Taylor series procedure can account for the FPC if the secondary sampling 

units (SSUs) and PSU counts are considered in addition to the analysis strata and analysis PSUs. 

These variable names are FANALSTR, FANALPSU, FANALSSU, and PSUCOUNT for the 

analysis strata, PSUs, and SSUs and the PSU counts, respectively. FANALSTR and FANALPSU 

differ from ANALSTR and ANALPSU in that for certainty institutions FANALSTR equals the 

institutional sampling stratum and FANALPSU equals ANALSTR. Also, FANALSSU equals 

ANALPSU for certainty institutions. For noncertainty institutions, FANALSTR equals 

ANALSTR and FANALPSU equals ANALPSU. Also, FANALSSU was created by randomly 
Chapter 6. Unit Nonresponse Bias Analyses, Weighting and Variance Estimation 

148 

dividing ANALPSU into two parts for noncertainty institutions. There are 658 analysis strata 

when taking the FPC into account. 

6.4.2 Bootstrap Replicate Weights 

The variance estimation strategy was chosen for NPSAS:04 to satisfy the following 

requirements: 

1. recognition of variance reduction due to stratification at all stages of sampling; 

2. recognition of effects of unequal weighting; 

3. recognition of possible increased variance due to sample clustering; 

4. recognition of effects of weight adjustments for nonresponse and for poststratification 

of selected total estimates to known external totals; 

5. satisfactory properties for estimating variances of nonlinear statistics and quantiles as 

well as for linear statistics; 

6. ability to apply finite population corrections at the institution stage of sampling and 

reflect the reduction in variance due to the high sampling rates in some first-stage 

sampling strata; and 

7. ability to test hypotheses about students based on normal distribution theory by 

ignoring the finite population corrections at the student level of sampling. 

Commonly applied bootstrap variance estimation techniques satisfy requirements 1 

through 5. To meet requirements 6 and 7 as well, a methodology and computer software 

developed by Kaufman (2004) were applied. This methodology allows for finite population 

correction factors at two stages of sampling. The application of the method incorporated the 

finite population correction factor at the first stage only where sampling fractions were generally 

high. At the second stage, where the sampling fractions were generally low, the finite population 

correction factor was set to 1.00. 

The Kaufman methodology was used to develop a vector of bootstrap sample weights 

which was added to the analysis file. These weights are zero for units not selected in a particular 

bootstrap sample; weights for other units are inflated for the bootstrap subsampling. The initial 

analytic weights for the complete sample are also included for the purposes of computing the 

desired estimates. The vector of replicate weights allows for computing additional estimates for 

the sole purpose of estimating a variance. Assuming B sets of replicate weights, the variance of 

any estimate,θ

ˆ, can be estimated by replicating the estimation procedure for each replicate and 

computing a simple variance of the replicate estimates, as follows: 

B

B

b

∑ b

=

−

= 1

* 2

) ˆ ˆ (

)ˆ var(

θ θ

θ , 

where ˆ* θb is the estimate based on the b-th replicate weight (where b=1 to the number of 

replicates) and B is the total number of sets of replicate weights. See appendix L for more details 

of this variance estimation procedure. Once the replicate weights are provided, this estimate can 

be produced by most survey software packages (e.g., SUDAAN [RTI International 2004] 
Chapter 6. Unit Nonrepsonse Bias Analyses, Weighting and Variance Estimation 

149 

computes this estimate by invoking the DESIGN=BRR option). See appendix M for an example 

of SUDAAN code. 

The number of replicate weights was set at 64 based on an empirical investigation of the 

behavior of variance estimates as the number of replicates increased. This investigation showed 

that the stability of variance estimates improved with increasing numbers of replicates and 

became fairly stable for most estimates when between 50 and 55 replicate weights were used. 

For the 64 replicate weights included on the analysis file (BOOTWT01 – BOOTWT64), the 

poststratification process was repeated so that replicate weight variation did not include 

components that would be controlled by replication of the entire process in conjunction with the 

same poststratification process. For several of the replicates, one or two of the control totals 

could not be met due to model convergence problems (i.e., there was no solution to satisfy all 

model equations simultaneously. 

6.4.3 Variance Approximation 

The survey design effect for a statistic is defined as the ratio of the design-based variance 

estimate over the variance estimate that would have been obtained from a simple random sample 

of the same size (if that were practical). It is often used to measure the effects that sample design 

features have on the precision of survey estimates. For example, stratification tends to decrease 

the variance, but multistage sampling and unequal sampling rates usually increase the variance. 

Also, weight adjustments for nonresponse (performed to reduce nonresponse bias) and 

poststratification increase the variance by increasing the weight variation. Because of these 

effects, most complex multistage sampling designs, like NPSAS:04, result in design effects 

greater than one. That is, the design-based variance is larger than the simple random sample 

variance. 

Specifically, the survey design effect for a given estimate, ˆ

θ , is defined as 

ˆ(θ) ˆ(θ) . ˆ(θ)

design

srs

Var

Deff Var =

Also, the square root of the design effect is another measure, which can also be expressed 

as the ratio of the standard errors, or 

ˆ(θ) ˆ(θ) ˆ(θ)

design

srs

SE

Deft SE = . 

In appendix N, design effect estimates are presented for important survey domains and 

estimates among undergraduate students, graduate students, and first-professional students to 

summarize the effects of stratification, multistage sampling, unequal probabilities of selection, 

and the weight adjustments. These design effects were estimated using SUDAAN and the 

bootstrap variance estimation procedure described in section 6.4.2 and appendix L. If one must 

perform a quick analysis of NPSAS:04 data without using one of the software packages for 

analysis of complex survey data, the design effect tables in appendix N can be used to make 

approximate adjustments to the standard errors of survey statistics computed using the standard 

software packages that assume simple random sampling designs. However, one cannot be 

confident regarding the actual design-based standard errors without performing the analysis 
Chapter 6. Unit Nonresponse Bias Analyses, Weighting and Variance Estimation 

150 

using one of the software packages specifically designed for analysis of data from complex 

sample surveys. See appendix M for more details concerning the use of such software packages. 

Large design effects imply large standard errors and relatively poor precision. Small 

design effects imply small standard errors and good precision. In general terms, a design effect 

under 2.0 is low, 2.0 to 3.0 is moderate, and above 3.0 is high. Moderate and high design effects 

often occur in complex surveys such as NPSAS, and the design effects in appendix N are 

consistent with those in past NPSAS studies. Unequal weighting causes large design effects and 

is often due to nonresponse and poststratification adjustments. However, in NPSAS, the unequal 

weighting is also due to the sample design and different sampling rates between institution strata 

and also different sampling rates between student strata. 
151 

References 

Ault, K., Black, S., Chromy, J., Fahimi, M., Siegel, P., Trofimovich, L., Whitmore, R., and 

Berkner, L. (2003). Imputation Methodology for the National Postsecondary Student Aid 

Study: 2004 (NCES 2003–20). U.S. Department of Education. Washington, DC: National 

Center for Education Statistics. 

Chromy, J.R. (1979). Sequential Sample Selection Methods. Proceedings of the American 

Statistical Association Section on Survey Research Methods of the American Statistical 

Association, 401–406. 

Chromy, J.R. (1981). Variance Estimators for a Sequential Sample Selection Procedure. In. D. 

Krewski, R. Platek, and J.N.K. Rao (Eds.), Current Top IMS in Survey Sampling (pp. 329-

347). New York: Academic Press. 

Cohen, S.B. (1997). An Evaluation of Alternative PC-Based Software Packages Developed for 

the Analysis of Complex Survey Data. The American Statistician, 57(13): 285-292. 

Cox, B. (1980). The Weighted Sequential Hot Deck Imputation Procedure. Proceedings of the 

American Statistical Association, Section on Survey Research Methods, 721-726. 

Deville, J.C., and Särndal, C.E. (1992). Calibration Estimating in Survey Sampling. Journal of 

the American Statistical Association, 87:376-382. 

Education Sciences Reform Act of 2002. (2002). Public Law 107-279, Title I, Section 153. 

Available: http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgibin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=107_cong_public_laws&docid=f:publ279.107.pdf. 

Hanley, J.A., and McNeil, B.J. (1982). The Meaning and Use of the Area under a Receiver 

Operating Characteristic Curve. Diagnostic Radiology, 143: 29–36. 

Heuer, R., Kuhr, B., Fahimi, M., Curtin, T.R., Hinsdale, M., Carley-Baxter, L., and Green, P. 

(forthcoming). National Study of Postsecondary Faculty (NSOPF:04) Methodology Report

(NCES 2005–xxx). U.S. Department of Education. Washington, DC: National Center for 

Education Statistics. 

Iannacchione, V. (1982). Weighted Sequential Hot Deck Imputation Macros. Presented at the 

Seventh Annual SAS User’s Group International Conference, San Francisco, February. 

Iannacchione, V. (2003). Sequential weight adjustments for location and cooperation propensity 

for the 1995 National Survey of Family Growth. Journal of Official Statistics, 16:31-43. 

Kass, G..V. (1980). An Exploratory Technique for Investigating Large Quantities of Categorical 

Data. Applied Statistics, 29: 119-127. 
References 

152 

Kaufman, S. (2004). Using the Bootstrap in a Two-Stage Design when Some Second-Stage 

Strata have only One Unit Allocated. Proceedings of the American Statistical Association, 

Section on Survey Research Methods. 

Folsom, R.E., and Singh, A.C. (2000). The Generalized Exponential Model for Sampling Weight 

Calibration for Extreme Values, Nonresponse, and Poststratification. Proceedings of the 

Section on Survey Research Methods of the American Statistical Association, 598–603. 

Riccobono, J.A., Whitmore, R.W., Gabel, T.J., Traccarella, M.A., Pratt, D.J., and Berkner, L.K. 

(1997). National Postsecondary Student Aid Study, 1995–96 (NPSAS:96), Methodology 

Report (NCES 98–073). U.S. Department of Education. Washington, DC: National Center 

for Education Statistics. 

RTI International (RTI). (2004). SUDAAN User's Manual, Release 9.0. Research Triangle Park, 

NC: RTI International. 

U.S. Department of Education. (1999). NCES Restricted-Use Data Procedures Manual. 

Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics. 

U.S. Department of Education. (2003). NCES Statistical Standards (NCES 2003–601). 

Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics. 

Woodruff, R.S. (1971). A Simple Method for Approximating the Variance of a Complicated 

Estimate. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 66: 411–414. 
A-1 

Appendix A 

Technical Review Panel 
Appendix A. Technical Review Panel 

National Postsecondary Student Aid Study (NPSAS:2004) 

Staff Contact List

A-2 

Gary Andeen 

Executive Director 

Oregon Independent Colleges Association 

7150 Southwest Hampton Street 

Suite 101 

Portland, OR 97223 

 Telephone: (503) 639-4541 

 Fax: (503) 639-4851 

 E-mail: andeen@oicanet.org

Frank Balz 

Vice President for Research & Policy Analysis 

National Association of Independent Colleges & 

Universities 

1025 Connecticut Avenue NW 

Suite 700 

Washington, DC 20036 

 Telephone: (202) 785-8866 

 Fax: (202) 835-0003 

 E-mail: frank@naicu.edu

Nancy Broff 

General Counsel 

Career College Association 

10 G Street NE 

Suite 750 

Washington, DC 20002-4213 

 Telephone: (202) 336-6755 

 Fax: (202) 336-6828 

 E-mail: nancyb@career.org

May Chen 

Assistant Vice Chancellor 

Community College of Baltimore County 

800 South Rolling Road 

Baltimore, MD 21228-5317 

 Telephone: (410) 869-1135 

 Fax: (410) 869-1265 

 E-mail: mchen@ccbcmd.edu

George Chin 

University Director 

Student Financial Assistance 

City University of New York 

1114 Avenue of the Americas 

15th Floor 

New York, NY 10036 

 Telephone: (212) 290-5693 

 Fax: (212) 290-5685 

 E-mail: gchin@uapc.cuny.edu

Melanie Corrigan 

Assistant Director 

Center for Policy Analysis 

American Council on Education 

One Dupont Circle NW 

Washington, DC 20036 

 Telephone: (202) 939-9554 

 Fax: (202) 785-2990 

 E-mail: Melanie_Corrigan@ace.nche.edu

Alisa Cunningham 

Director of Research 

The Institute for Higher Education Policy 

1320 19th Street NW 

Suite 400 

Washington, DC 20036 

 Telephone: (202) 861-8223 

 Fax: (202) 861-9307 

 E-mail: alisa@ihep.org

John Curtice 

Assistant Vice Chancellor for Financial Aid and 

Enrollment Policy 

State University of New York 

State University Plaza 

Albany, NY 12246 

 Telephone: (518) 443-5474 

 Fax: (518) 443-5225 

 E-mail: curticjo@sysadm.suny.edu
Appendix A. Technical Review Panel 

A-3 

Jerry Davis 

15 Montego Court 

Dillsburg, PA 17019 

 Telephone: (317) 502-9748 

 Fax: None listed 

 E-mail: KarunaToo@aol.com

Tricia Grimes 

Research Analyst 

Minnesota Higher Education Services Office 

1450 Energy Park Drive 

Suite 350 

St. Paul, MN 55108 

 Telephone: (651) 642-0589 

 Fax: (651) 642-0675 

 E-mail: grimes@heso.state.mn.us

Albert Hermsen 

Associate Director, Financial Aid 

University of Michigan 

Office of Financial Aid 

2011 SAB 

Ann Arbor, MI 48109 

 Telephone: (734) 763-4119 

 Fax: (734) 615-2641 

 E-mail: ahermsen@umich.edu

Jacqueline King 

Director, Center for Policy Analysis 

American Council on Education 

One Dupont Circle NW 

Suite 800 

Washington, DC 20036 

 Telephone: (202) 939-9559 

 Fax: (202) 785-2990 

 E-mail: jacqueline_king@ace.nche.edu

John Lee 

President 

JBL Associates 

6900 Wisconsin Avenue 

Suite 606 

Bethesda, MD 20814 

 Telephone: (301) 654-5154 

 Fax: (301) 654-6242 

 E-mail: jbl@jblassoc.com

Jamie Merisotis 

President 

The Institute for Higher Education Policy 

1320 19th Street NW 

Suite 400 

Washington, DC 20036 

 Telephone: (202) 861-8223 

 Fax: (202) 861-9307 

 E-mail: jamie@ihep.com

Elise Miller 

Research & Policy Analyst 

National Association of Independent Colleges & 

Universities 

1025 Connecticut Avenue NW 

Suite 700 

Washington, DC 20036 

 Telephone: (202) 785-8866 

 Fax: (202) 835-0003 

 E-mail: elise@naicu.edu

James Palmer 

Professor 

Illinois State University 

5900 Educational Administration and 

Foundations 

Normal, IL 61790-5900 

 Telephone: (309) 438-2041 

 Fax: (309) 438-8683 

 E-mail: jcpalmer@ilstu.edu

Kent Phillippe 

Senior Research Associate 

American Association of Community Colleges 

One Dupont Circle NW 

Suite 410 

Washington, DC 20036 

 Telephone: (202) 728-0200 

 Fax: (202) 833-2467 

 E-mail: kphillippe@aacc.nche.edu
Appendix A. Technical Review Panel 

A-4 

Travis Reindl 

American Association of State Colleges and 

Universities (AASCU) 

1307 New York Avenue NW 

Washington, DC 20005 

 Telephone: (202) 293-7070 

 Fax: (202) 296-5819 

 E-mail: reindlt@aascu.org

Watson Scott Swail 

President & CEO 

Educational Policy Institute 

25 Ludwell Lane 

Stafford, VA 22554 

 Telephone: (540) 288-2322 

 Fax: None Listed 

 E-mail: wswail@educationalpolicy.org

Peter Syverson 

Vice President for Research 

Council of Graduate Schools 

One Dupont Circle NW 

Suite 430 

Washington, DC 20036 

 Telephone: (202) 223-3791 

 Fax: (202) 331-7157 

 E-mail: psyverson@cgs.nche.edu

Dawn Terkla 

Executive Director 

Tufts University 

Institutional Research 

28 Sawyer Avenue 

Medford, MA 02155 

 Telephone: (617) 627-3274 

 Fax: (617) 627-3993 

 E-mail: dawn.terkla@tufts.edu

Vincent Tinto 

Distinguished Professor 

Syracuse University 

School of Education 

353 Huntington Hall 

Syracuse, NY 13244-2340 

 Telephone: (315) 443-3343 

 Fax: (315) 443-9218 

 E-mail: vtinto@syr.edu

U.S. Government 

Clifford Adelman 

U.S. Department of Education, Institute of 

Education Sciences (IES) 

550 12th Street SW 

Potomac Center Plaza -Room 11110 

Washington, DC 20065 

 Telephone: (202) 245-7805 

 Fax: (202) 501-3005 

 E-mail: clifford.adelman@ed.gov

Nabeel Alsalam 

Congressional Budget Office 

Ford House Office Building 

Room 423A 

Washington, DC 20515 

 Telephone: (202) 225-2639 

 Fax: (202) 225-3149 

 E-mail: nabeel@cbo.gov

David Bergeron 

Chief 

Budget and Policy Development 

U.S. Department of Education, OPE 

1990 K Street NW 

Washington, DC 20006-8540 

 Telephone: (202) 502-7815 

 Fax: (202) 708-9107 

 E-mail: david.bergeron@ed.gov
Appendix A. Technical Review Panel 

A-5 

Susan Broyles 

Program Director 

Integrated Postsecondary Education Data 

System (IPEDS) 

Postsecondary Studies Division 

U.S. Department of Education, NCES 

1990 K Street NW 

Room 8113A 

Washington, DC 20006-5652 

 Telephone: (202) 502-7318 

 Fax: (202) 502-7460 

 E-mail: susan.broyles@ed.gov

C. Dennis Carroll 

Associate Commissioner 

Postsecondary Studies Division 

U.S. Department of Education, NCES 

1990 K Street NW 

Room 8107 

Washington, DC 20006-5652 

 Telephone: (202) 502-7323 

 Fax: (202) 502-7460 

 E-mail: dennis.carroll@ed.gov

Daniel Goldenberg 

U.S. Department of Education, Office of the 

Undersecretary 

400 Maryland Avenue 

Room 6W118 

Washington, DC 20202 

 Telephone: (202) 401-3562 

 Fax: (202) 401-6139 

 E-mail: daniel.goldenberg@ed.gov

James Griffith 

Program Director 

Postsecondary Longitudinal and Sample Survey 

Studies 

Postsecondary Studies Division 

U.S. Department of Education, NCES 

1990 K Street NW 

Room 8103 

Washington, DC 20006 

 Telephone: (202) 502-7387 

 Fax: (202) 502-7460 

 E-mail: James.Griffith@ed.gov

Brian Harris-Kojetin 

Office of Management and Budget 

725 17th Street NW 

Room 10201 

Washington, DC 20503 

 Telephone: (202) 395-7314 

 Fax: (202) 395-7245 

 E-mail: bharrisk@omb.eop.gov

Lisa Hudson 

Education Statistician 

U.S. Department of Education, NCES 

1990 K Street NW 

Suite 900 

Washington, DC 20006 

 Telephone: (202) 502-7358 

 Fax: (202) 502-7490 

 E-mail: lisa.hudson@ed.gov

Tracy Hunt-White 

Project Officer 

2004-06 Beginning Postsecondary Student 

Longitudinal Study (BPS:04/06) 

Postsecondary Studies Division 

U.S. Department of Education, NCES 

1990 K Street NW 

Room 8121 

Washington, DC 20006 

 Telephone: (202) 502-7438 

 Fax: (202) 502-7460 

 E-mail: tracy.hunt-white@ed.gov

Paula Knepper 

Senior Technical Advisor 

Postsecondary Studies Division 

U.S. Department of Education, NCES 

1990 K Street NW 

Room 8104 

Washington, DC 20006-5652 

 Telephone: (202) 502-7367 

 Fax: (202) 502-7372 

 E-mail: paula.knepper@ed.gov
Appendix A. Technical Review Panel 

A-6 

Daniel Madzelan 

Management Analysis Officer 

U.S. Department of Education 

1990 K Street NW 

Room 8036 

Washington, DC 20006-8073 

 Telephone: (202) 502-7816 

 Fax: (202) 502-7873 

 E-mail: dan.madzelan@ed.gov

Edith McArthur 

Demographer 

U.S. Department of Education, NCES 

1990 K Street NW 

Room 9081 

Washington, DC 20006-5652 

 Telephone: (202) 502-7393 

 Fax: (202) 502-7490 

 E-mail: edith.mcarthur@ed.gov

Jay Noell 

Program Analyst 

U.S. Department of Education 

Office of the Deputy Secretary 

400 Maryland Avenue SW 

Room 6W116 

Washington, DC 20202-8036 

 Telephone: (202) 401-1026 

 Fax: None Listed 

 E-mail: jay.noell@ed.gov

Kristin Perry 

Project Officer 

2003 Baccalaureate and Beyond (B&B:03) 

Postsecondary Studies Division 

U.S. Department of Education, NCES 

1990 K Street NW 

Room 8113B 

Washington, DC 20006 

 Telephone: (202) 502-7428 

 Fax: None Listed 

 E-mail: kristin.perry@ed.gov

Adam Stoll 

Social Science Analyst 

Domestic Social Policy Division 

Congressional Research Service -LM-323 

Library of Congress 

101 Independence Avenue SE 

Washington, DC 20540-7440 

 Telephone: (202) 707-4375 

 Fax: (202) 707-7338 

 E-mail: astoll@crs.loc.gov

John Wirt 

Statistician 

Annual Reports Program-ECICSD 

U.S. Department of Education, NCES 

1990 K Street NW 

Room 9028 

Washington, DC 20006 

 Telephone: (202) 502-7478 

 Fax: None Listed 

 E-mail: john.wirt@ed.gov

Linda Zimbler 

Project Officer 

National Study of Postsecondary Faculty 

(NSOPF:04) 

Postsecondary Studies Division 

U.S. Department of Education, NCES 

1990 K Street NW 

Room 8123 

Washington, DC 20006-5652 

 Telephone: (202) 502-7481 

 Fax: (202) 502-7450 

 E-mail: linda.zimbler@ed.gov

MPR Associates, Inc. 

Lutz Berkner 

Senior Research Associate 

MPR Associates 

2150 Shattuck Avenue 

Suite 800 

Berkeley, CA 94704-0794 

 Telephone: (510) 849-4942 

 Fax: (510) 849-0794 

 E-mail: lberkner@mprinc.com
Appendix A. Technical Review Panel 

A-7 

Susan Choy 

Vice President 

MPR Associates, Inc. 

2150 Shattuck Avenue 

Suite 800 

Berkeley, CA 94704-0794 

 Telephone: (510) 849-4942 

 Fax: (510) 849-0794 

 E-mail: schoy@mprinc.com

Laura Horn 

Director 

Statistical Analysis and Data Design 

MPR Associates 

2150 Shattuck Avenue 

Suite 800 

Berkeley, CA 94704-0794 

 Telephone: (510) 849-4942 

 Fax: (510) 849-0794 

 E-mail: lhorn@mprinc.com

National Association of Student Financial Aid 

Administrators 

Mary Ann O'Connor 

Project Director 

National Association of Student Financial Aid 

Administrators (NASFAA) 

1129 20th Street NW 

Suite 400 

Washington, DC 20036 

 Telephone: (202) 785-0453 

 Fax: (202) 785-1487 

 E-mail: oconnorm@nasfaa.org

Kenneth Redd 

Director of Research and Policy Analysis 

National Association of Student Financial Aid 

Administrators (NASFAA) 

1129 20th Street NW 

Suite 400 

Washington, DC 20036-3453 

 Telephone: (202) 785-0453 

 Fax: (202) 785-1487 

 E-mail: reddk@nasfaa.org

Pinkerton Computer Consultants, Inc. 

Daniel Heffron 

Statistician 

Pinkerton Computer Consultants, Inc. 

1900 North Beauregard Street 

Suite 112 

Alexandria, VA 22311-1722 

 Telephone: (703) 245-7350 

 Fax: (703) 245-7560 

 E-mail: heffrond@pcci.com

RTI International 

Janet Austin 

Technical Staff Assistant 

RTI International 

P.O. Box 12194 

3040 Cornwallis Road 

RTP, NC 27709 

 Telephone: (919) 541-7101 

 Fax: (919) 541-7014 

 E-mail: jra@rti.org

Melissa Cominole 

Research Education Scientist 

RTI International 

P.O. Box 12194 

3040 Cornwallis Road 

RTP, NC 27709 

 Telephone: (919) 990-8456 

 Fax: (919) 541-7014 

 E-mail: mcominole@rti.org

Mansour Fahimi 

Statistical Task Leader 

NSOPF:2004 

RTI International 

6110 Executive Boulevard 

Suite 420 

Rockville, MD 20852-3907 

 Telephone: (301) 230-4675 

 Fax: (301) 230-4647 

 E-mail: fahimi@rti.org
Appendix A. Technical Review Panel 

A-8 

Tim Gabel 

Vice President 

Survey and Computing Sciences 

RTI International 

PO Box 12194 

RTP, NC 27709 

 Telephone: (919) 541-7415 

 Fax: (919) 541-6178 

 E-mail: tjg@rti.org

Patricia Green 

Research Education Scientist 

RTI International 

203 North Wabash Avenue 

Suite 1900 

Chicago, IL 60601 

 Telephone: (312) 456-5260 

 Fax: (312)-456-5250 

 E-mail: pgreen@rti.org

Brian Kuhr 

Education Analyst 

NSoFaS 

RTI International 

203 North Wabash Avenue 

Suite 1900 

Chicago, IL 60601 

 Telephone: (312) 456-5263 

 Fax: (312) 456-5250 

 E-mail: bdk@rti.org

John Riccobono 

Director 

Education Surveys Division 

RTI International 

P.O. Box 12194 

3040 Cornwallis Road 

RTP, NC 27709 

 Telephone: (919) 541-7006 

 Fax: (919) 541-7014 

 E-mail: jar@rti.org

Peter Siegel 

Research Statistician 

RTI International 

PO Box 12194 

RTP, NC 27709 

 Telephone: (919) 541-6348 

 Fax: (919) 541-6416 

 E-mail: siegel@rti.org

Jennifer Wine 

Research Psychologist 

RTI International 

P.O. Box 12194 

3040 Cornwallis Road 

RTP, NC 27709 

 Telephone: (919) 541-6870 

 Fax: (919) 541-7014 

 E-mail: jennifer@rti.org
B-1 

Appendix B 

Sampling Details 

Appendix B. Sampling Details 

B-3 

B.1 Target Population and Sample Design Overview 

The 2004 National Postsecondary Student Aid Study (NPSAS:04) target population 

consists of all eligible students enrolled at any time between July 1, 2003, and June 30, 2004, in 

postsecondary institutions in the United States or Puerto Rico which had signed Title IV 

participation agreements with the U.S. Department of Education making them eligible for the 

federal student aid programs (Title IV institutions). To be eligible for NPSAS, students had to be 

enrolled in either an academic program with at least one course for credit that could be applied 

toward fulfilling the requirements for an academic degree or enrolled in an occupational or 

vocational program that requires at least 3 months or 300 clock hours of instruction to receive a 

degree, certificate, or other formal award. Eligible students could not be concurrently enrolled in 

high school and could not be enrolled solely in a general equivalency diploma (GED) or other 

high school completion program. The target population is the population about which inferences 

will be made. The survey population is the population actually covered by the sampling frame. 

Nearly all members of the target population also are members of the survey population; however, 

the adopted definition of the survey population allowed the student lists needed for sample 

selection to be obtained before June. More specific definitions of the institution and student 

populations are provided later in this appendix. 

There have been three changes in the design of NPSAS over time. For NPSAS:2000, the 

survey was restricted for the first time to institutions participating in Title IV student aid 

programs. Another design change was made beginning with NPSAS:90 to improve full-year 

estimates. NPSAS:87 sampled students enrolled in the fall (October). However, NPSAS:90 

sampled students who were enrolled at four discrete points in time: summer (August), fall 

(October), winter (February), and spring (June). Since implementation of NPSAS in 1993, 

institutions have been asked to provide one list that represented students enrolled at any time 

during the respective financial aid award year. In NPSAS:87 and NPSAS:90, those students who 

were initially sampled in the fall could have been enrolled for the full academic year. Another 

difference to note is that Puerto Rico was not part of the sample in NPSAS:87. 

An overview of the sequential statistical sampling process for NPSAS:04 is provided in 

figure B-1. The goal of all sampling activities was to attain the numbers of eligible sample 

postsecondary students (within specified student and institution types) required by the National 

Center for Education Statistics (NCES). Since it was necessary to select the student samples on a 

flow basis as sample institutions provided their enrollment lists (to meet the data collection 

schedule), the students were sampled at fixed rates.1

 Under this approach, the actual numbers of 

students sampled are random variables; however, the sampling rates were set to meet or exceed, 

in expectation, the sample sizes shown in table B-1 and B-2. 

 

1

 The target population includes students enrolled at any time between July 1, 2003 and June 30, 2004. The 

Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System (IPEDS) data used for the initial sampling frame were collected in 

2001, and the IPEDS data used for sample freshening (described in section 2.1.2) were collected in 2002. Thus, any 

institutions that came into existence or became eligible between the IPEDS data collections in 2002 and June 30, 

2004 were not included. 
Appendix B. Sampling Details 

B-4 

Figure B-1. Schematic of sequential NPSAS:04 sampling operations 

Construct sampling frame from 

2000–01 IPEDS files

Stratify 6,430 institutions by 

institutional control, institutional level, 

highest level of offering, Carnegie 

classification, and state

Select probabilities proportional to 

size (pps) sample of 1,630 

institutions

Construct sampling frame for sample 

freshening from 2001–02 IPEDS files

Stratify 280 institutions eligible for 

freshening by institutional control, 

institutional level, highest level of 

offering, Carnegie classification, and 

state

Select probabilities proportional to 

size sample of 30 freshened 

institutions

Verify institution eligibility and obtain 

student lists from 1,360 of 1,6301 

eligible institutions

Use fixed rates to sample 109,210 

students within institutions from up to 

eight student strata per participating 

eligible institution

1

 The 1,630 eligible institutions include the 1,630 originally selected, minus 30 ineligible institutions, plus 30 

institutions from the freshened sample. 

NOTE: IPEDS = Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 2004 National Postsecondary 

Student Aid Study (NPSAS:04). 
Appendix B. Sampling Details 

B-5 

Table B-1. Target numbers of sample students, by institutional characteristics and type of 

student: 2004 

Undergraduates 

Institutional stratum 

All 

students 

All 

undergraduates FTBs 

Other 

undergraduates 

Graduate 

students 

Firstprofessionals 

 All institutions 121,680 110,560 56,070 54,490 9,340 1,780 

Public less than 2-year 4,990 4,990 4,540 440 † †

Public 2-year 45,060 45,060 20,280 24,780 † †

Public 4-year non-doctorategranting 

11,270 10,480 3,380 7,110 790 † 

Public 4-year doctorategranting 

21,130 15,060 4,570 10,490 5,210 860 

Private not-for-profit lessthan-4-year 

3,310 3,310 2,740 570 † †

Private not-for-profit 4-year 

non-doctorate-granting 

10,250 9,650 4,320 5,340 600 † 

Private not-for-profit 4-year 

doctorate-granting 

10,220 6,620 2,750 3,870 2,680 920 

Private for-profit less-than-2-

year 

9,040 9,040 8,830 210 † †

Private for-profit 2-year or 

more 

6,430 6,340 4,670 1,680 80 † 

† Not applicable. 

NOTE: Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. First-time beginner (FTB) and other undergraduate counts 

are based on the status known at the time of sampling. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 2004 National Postsecondary 

Student Aid Study (NPSAS:04). 
Appendix B. Sampling Details 

B-6 

Table B-2. Target numbers of sample students in the 12 state representative samples, by 

institutional stratum and type of student: 2004 

Institutional stratum All undergraduates FTBs Other undergraduates 

California 11,510 1,910 9,590 

 Public 2-year 8,620 1,120 7,500 

 Public 4-year 2,070 490 1,570 

 Private not-for-profit 4-year 820 310 520 

Connecticut 1,510 660 850 

 Public 2-year 590 250 340 

 Public 4-year 500 210 290 

 Private not-for-profit 4-year 420 210 210 

Delaware 1,770 800 970 

 Public 2-year 720 290 440 

 Public 4-year 640 320 320 

 Private not-for-profit 4-year 410 200 210 

Georgia 2,340 1,200 1,140 

 Public 2-year 1,160 750 410 

 Public 4-year 800 280 530 

 Private not-for-profit 4-year 380 180 200 

Illinois 4,170 1,680 2,490 

 Public 2-year 2,560 1,120 1,440 

 Public 4-year 790 230 560 

 Private not-for-profit 4-year 810 330 480 

Indiana 1,970 910 1,060 

 Public 2-year 470 250 220 

 Public 4-year 1,010 420 600 

 Private not-for-profit 4-year 490 240 250 

Minnesota 2,390 1,320 1,070 

 Public 2-year 1,360 910 440 

 Public 4-year 640 220 420 

 Private not-for-profit 4-year 390 190 200 

Nebraska 1,400 650 750 

 Public 2-year 530 270 260 

 Public 4-year 580 250 330 

 Private not-for-profit 4-year 290 130 160 

New York 5,140 2,230 2,910 

 Public 2-year 1,900 1,030 870 

 Public 4-year 1,380 410 970 

 Private not-for-profit 4-year 1,860 790 1,070 

Oregon 1,970 860 1,110 

 Public 2-year 1,090 490 600 

 Public 4-year 590 230 360 

 Private not-for-profit 4-year 290 140 150 

Tennessee 1,810 800 1,010 

 Public 2-year 750 370 380 

 Public 4-year 660 230 430 

 Private not-for-profit 4-year 400 200 200 

Texas 6,260 2,970 3,290 

 Public 2-year 4,030 2,280 1,740 

 Public 4-year 1,640 450 1,190 

 Private not-for-profit 4-year 600 240 360 

NOTE: Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. First-time beginner (FTB) and other undergraduate counts are 

based on the status known at the time of sampling. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 2004 National Postsecondary Student 

Aid Study (NPSAS:04). 
Appendix B. Sampling Details 

B-7 

The NPSAS:04 sample also was designed to achieve at least four student respondents 

from each sample institution that had at least that many eligible students enrolled during the 

NPSAS year. This was to have sufficient yield for variance estimation. Consequently, institution 

sample sizes were determined to achieve at least 10 sample students per institution. NPSAS also 

included state-representative undergraduate student samples for three types of institution (public 

4-year, public 2-year, and private not-for-profit 4-year) in 12 states.2

Given the student sample size goals, the desired number of participating institutions was 

determined to be approximately 1,450. Based on projected institutional participation rates 

obtained in prior NPSAS rounds and the NPSAS:04 field test, an initial sample of about 1,600 

institutions was initially selected. Approximately 30 additional sample institutions were added 

during a freshening process at a later date. 

B.2 The Institutional Sample 

The target population for NPSAS:04 included nearly all Title IV participating 

postsecondary institutions in the 50 states, the District of Columbia, and Puerto Rico.3

 To be 

eligible for NPSAS:04, an institution was required, during the 2003–04 academic year, to

• offer an educational program designed for persons who had completed secondary 

education; 

• offer at least one academic, occupational, or vocational program of study lasting at 

least 3 months or 300 clock hours; 

• offer courses that were open to more than the employees or members of the company 

or group (e.g., union) that administered the institution; 

• be located in the 50 states, the District of Columbia, or Puerto Rico; 

• be other than a U.S. Service Academy;4

 and 

• have a signed Title IV participation agreement with the U.S. Department of 

Education. 

As indicated above, institutions providing only avocational, recreational, or remedial 

courses or only in-house courses for their own employees were excluded. The listed eligibility 

requirements are consistent with those used in previous NPSAS rounds, with two exceptions: the 

last requirement was new for NPSAS:2000, and offering more than just correspondence courses 

was no longer a requirement beginning with NPSAS:04. 

B.2.1 Sample Frame Construction 

The institution sampling frame for NPSAS:04 was constructed from the 2000–01 

Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System (IPEDS) Institutional Characteristics (IC) and 

 

2

 These 12 states were selected by NCES from those expressing interest. The 12 states were categorized into three 

groups based on population size: four small states (Connecticut, Delaware, Nebraska, Oregon), four medium-size 

states (Georgia, Indiana, Minnesota, Tennessee), and four large states (California, Illinois, New York, Texas). 3 Title IV participating institutions excluded from the target population were the five U.S. service academies. 4

 These academies were not eligible for this financial aid study because of their unique funding/tuition base. 
Appendix B. Sampling Details 

B-8 

header files. The IPEDS files provided nearly complete coverage5 of the institutions in the target 

population. Listings include (a) all institutions whose primary purpose is the provision of 

postsecondary education; (b) all branches of colleges, universities, and other institutions, as long 

as the branch offers a full program of study (not just courses); (c) free-standing medical schools, 

as well as schools of nursing, schools of radiology, etc., within hospitals; and (d) schools offering 

occupational and vocational training with the intent of preparing students for work (e.g., a 

modeling school training for professional modeling—not just a charm school). The IPEDS files 

do not include (a) schools not open to the general public (i.e., training sites at prisons, military 

installations, corporations); (b) hospitals offering internships or residency programs only; or 

hospitals that only offer training as part of a medical school program at an institution of higher 

education; (c) organizational entities providing only noncredit continuing education (CEUs); 

(d) schools whose only purpose is to prepare students to take a particular test, (e.g., CPA 

examination or Bar exams); or (e) branch campuses of U.S. institutions in foreign countries. 

Institutions in the file that were not eligible (e.g., institutions located outside the United States 

and Puerto Rico, central offices, military academies) were deleted from the population file. 

The IPEDS file exclusions, themselves, eliminate some categories of ineligible 

institutions; however, additional deletion from this file was required. Starting with the 9,000 

“institutions” on this database, records were deleted to yield a sampling frame containing 6,430 

institutions appearing to be eligible for NPSAS:04 based on their 2000–01 IPEDS data. 

Deletions included (1) administrative units; (2) U.S. service academies; (3) schools outside of the 

United States and Puerto Rico; (4) institutions offering no programs of at least 300 content hours, 

six semesters/trimesters, or 12 quarter hours and for which the highest level of offering was a 

certificate or diploma of less than one academic year; (5) institutions offering only 

correspondence courses; and (6) institutions not eligible for Title IV funding. 

Because enrollment data were needed to compute measures of size for sample selection, 

the 2000 IPEDS Fall Enrollment Survey data were edited and/or imputed to eliminate missing 

data. IPEDS unduplicated counts could not be used because at the time they did not go through 

the IPEDS imputation procedure. Missing undergraduate, graduate, and first-professional 

enrollments were set to zero for institutions that did not offer that level of instruction, and 

missing first-time student counts were set to zero for graduate institutions. Sets of records were 

identified for which the enrollment data either (a) were reported with another institution’s, or 

(b) contained combined data. In such cases, the combined enrollment data were allocated equally 

to all institutions in the set, with the exception that if a “parent” institution was identified, that 

institution was assigned double the enrollment of the “children” institutions. For institutions with 

any missing enrollments, enrollment was imputed using the IPEDS methodology. 

The eligible institutions on the sampling frame were partitioned into 58 institutional strata 

based on institutional control, level, highest level of offering, Carnegie classification, and state. 

The 58 institutional strata are listed below: 

 

5

 The target population includes students enrolled at any time between July 1, 2003 and June 30, 2004. The IPEDS 

data used for the initial sampling frame were collected in 2001, and the IPEDS data used for sample freshening (to be 

described in section 2.1.2) were collected in 2002. Thus, any institutions that came into existence or became eligible 

between the IPEDS data collections in 2002 and June 30, 2004 were not included. 
Appendix B. Sampling Details 

B-9 

1. Public less than 2-year 

2. Public 2-year, associate’s Carnegie 

classification 

3. Public 2-year, other Carnegie 

classification—degree-granting 

4. Public 2-year, other Carnegie 

classification—NPSAS only 

5. Public 4-year non-doctorate-granting, 

master’s Carnegie classification 

6. Public 4-year non-doctorate-granting, 

bachelor’s Carnegie classification 

7. Public 4-year non-doctorate-granting, 

other Carnegie classification 

8. Public 4-year doctorate-granting, 

doctor’s Carnegie classification 

9. Public 4-year doctorate-granting, other 

Carnegie classification 

10. Public 4-year NPSAS only 

11. Private not-for-profit less-than-4-year, 

associate’s Carnegie classification 

12. Private not-for-profit less-than-4-year, 

other Carnegie classification—degreegranting 

13. Private not-for-profit less-than-4-year, 

other Carnegie classification—NPSAS 

only 

14. Private not-for-profit 4-year nondoctorate-granting, master’s Carnegie 

classification 

15. Private not-for-profit 4-year nondoctorate-granting, bachelor’s Carnegie 

classification 

16. Private not-for-profit 4-year nondoctoral, other Carnegie classification 

17. Private not-for-profit 4-year doctorategranting, doctoral Carnegie classification 

18. Private not-for-profit 4-year doctorategranting, master’s Carnegie 

classification 

19. Private not-for-profit 4-year doctorategranting, other Carnegie classification 

20. Private not-for-profit 4-year—NPSAS 

only 

21. Private for-profit less-than-2-year 

22. Private for-profit 2-year or more 

23. California public 2-year 

24. California public 4-year 

25. California private not-for-profit 4-year 

26. Connecticut public 2-year 

27. Connecticut public 4-year 

28. Connecticut private not-for-profit 4-year 

29. Delaware public 2-year 

30. Delaware public 4-year 

31. Delaware private not-for-profit 4-year 

32. Georgia public 2-year 

33. Georgia public 4-year 

34. Georgia private not-for-profit 4-year 

35. Illinois public 2-year 

36. Illinois public 4-year 

37. Illinois private not-for-profit 4-year 

38. Indiana public 2-year 

39. Indiana public 4-year 

40. Indiana private not-for-profit 4-year 

41. Minnesota public 2-year 

42. Minnesota public 4-year 

43. Minnesota private not-for-profit 4-year 

44. Nebraska public 2-year 

45. Nebraska public 4-year 

46. Nebraska private not-for-profit 4-year 

47. New York public 2-year 

48. New York public 4-year 

49. New York private not-for-profit 4-year 

50. Oregon public 2-year 

51. Oregon public 4-year 

52. Oregon private not-for-profit 4-year 

53. Tennessee public 2-year 

54. Tennessee public 4-year 

55. Tennessee private not-for-profit 4-year 

56. Texas public 2-year 

57. Texas public 4-year 

58. Texas private not-for-profit 4-year 

A stratified sample of about 1,600 institutions was then selected with probabilities 

proportional to size (pps); some of these institutions subsequently proved to be ineligible and 

others failed to participate. 
Appendix B. Sampling Details 

B-10 

The sample of institutions was initially selected in September 2002 to allow the field test 

sample institutions to be selected from the complement of the full-scale sample. In July 2003, a 

freshened sample of institutions was selected from a frame of institutions that were not on the 

original sampling frame because they were new institutions, newly eligible institutions, or 

mistakenly ineligible due to IPEDS classification errors. Freshening was done to ensure the 

representativeness of the sample because the initial sample was selected a year earlier. The 

measures of size for the supplemental sampling frame from which the freshened sample was 

selected were based on the 2002 IPEDS Fall Enrollment Survey counts. 

B.2.2 Selecting Sample Institutions 

It was necessary to allocate the student sample to the separate applicable institutional 

(defined above) and student sampling strata. There were eight student sampling strata as follows: 

1. in-state first-time beginner students; 

2. out-of-state first-time beginner students; 

3. in-state other undergraduate students; 

4. out-of-state other undergraduate students; 

5. master’s students; 

6. doctoral students; 

7. other graduate students; and 

8. first-professional students. 

First-time beginner students (FTBs) were stratified separately from other undergraduate 

students because they were oversampled to allow for sufficient numbers to be surveyed in the 

2006 follow-up study, the Beginning Postsecondary Students Longitudinal Study (BPS:04/06). 

FTBs and other undergraduate students were each divided into in-state and out-of-state strata 

because undergraduate in-state students were oversampled in the 12 states with staterepresentative samples. These in-state and out-of-state strata were used for all institutions to 

allow for sampling ease and consistency; however, in states that did not have state-representative 

samples, in-state students were sampled at the same rate as out-of-state students. 

The NSOPF:04 institution sample was a subset of the NPSAS:04 sample. Therefore, 

when the institutions were selected, students as well as faculty were considered. The discussion 

below focuses on the students; however, there were six faculty strata that factored into some of 

the computations. When both student and faculty strata were used, the term person strata is used. 

In determining the allocation, the following notation is used: 

(1) r = 1, 2, ..., 58 indexes the previously defined institutional strata; 

(2) s = 1, 2, 3, ..., 14 indexes the previously defined initial person strata; 

(3) j = 1, 2, ..., J(r) indexes the institutions within stratum “r”; 

(4) Mrs(j) = number of students enrolled or faculty employed during the NPSAS year 

who belong to person stratum “s” at the j-th institution in institutional stratum “r”; 
Appendix B. Sampling Details 

B-11 

(5) mrs = number of persons to be selected from person stratum “s” within the r-th 

institutional stratum (referred to henceforth as person stratum “rs”); and 

(6) πr(j) = probability of selecting the j-th institution in institutional stratum “r.” 

The overall population sampling rate (frs) for person stratum “rs” is given by 

= (+) rs mrs Mrs f / 

where 

() () ∑=

+ =

( )

1

J r

j

rs rs M M j . 

The student sample was allocated to the separate applicable institutional and student 

sampling strata, defined above. Student sampling rates, which were used to compute institutionlevel composite measures of size, were based on the 2000 IPEDS Fall Enrollment Survey counts 

and the required sample sizes (see tables B-1 and B-2). The initially computed stratum-level 

student sampling rates, frs (used to define institution measures of size) are shown in tables B-3 

and B-4. Table B-3 presents the sampling rates for FTBs and other undergraduate students for 

each of the 22 national strata and the 36 state strata. The institutions included in the national 

sample were selected from all 58 strata, while the institutions included in the state samples were 

only selected from the 36 state strata. Table B-4 presents sampling rates for masters, doctoral, 

other graduate, and first-professional students. The IPEDS files do not provide separate counts 

for masters, doctoral, and other graduate students; hence, the partitioning of total graduate 

enrollment into these three categories was based on NPSAS:2000 data. 
Appendix B. Sampling Details 

B-12 

Table B-3. Student sampling rates used in determining measures of size by institutional stratum 

and type of student (undergraduate students): 2004 

Undergraduate students 

FTBs Other undergraduates 

Institutional stratum1 Size of 

universe2

Sampling 

rate 

Sample 

size 

Size of 

universe2

Sampling 

rate 

Sample 

size 

 Total 1,898,677 0.010 18,600 6,200,814 0.003 16,490 

Public less than 2-year 72,141 0.028 2,010 24,472 0.020 490 

Public 2-year associate’s 497,349 0.003 1,610 2,218,074 0.001 3,150 

Public 2-year other—degree-granting 14,443 0.005 70 39,718 0.006 230 

Public 2-year other—NPSAS only 25,552 0.018 470 13,557 0.015 200 

Public 4-year non-doctorate-granting master’s 114,348 0.004 450 523,223 0.002 1,230 

Public 4-year non-doctorate-granting bachelor’s 36,811 0.004 160 172,824 0.003 490 

Public 4-year non-doctorate-granting other 17,793 0.005 80 65,711 0.001 50 

Public 4-year doctorate-granting doctor’s 300,138 0.004 1,190 1,394,886 0.002 2,810 

Public 4-year doctorate-granting other 61,807 0.004 220 298,610 0.002 690 

Public 4-year NPSAS only 13,220 0.002 30 49,839 0.001 40 

Private not-for-profit less-than-4-year, associate 17,767 0.029 520 24,744 0.028 680 

Private not-for-profit less-than-4-year, other—degreegranting 2,412 # # 4,454 # # 

Private not-for-profit less-than-4-year, other—NPSAS 28,714 0.029 820 6,355 0.025 160 

Private not-for-profit 4-year non-doctorate-granting, 

master’s 

44,061 0.015 640 221,327 0.004 930 

Private not-for-profit 4-year non-doctorate-granting, 

bachelor’s 

93,989 0.015 1,460 304,509 0.003 870 

Private not-for-profit 4-year non-doctorate-granting, 

other 

27,060 0.016 420 100,735 0.008 810 

Private not-for-profit 4-year doctorate-granting, doctor’s 58,368 0.011 660 221,636 0.005 1,110 

Private not-for-profit 4-year doctorate-granting, 

master’s 

34,040 0.011 360 137,685 0.002 330 

Private not-for-profit 4-year doctorate-granting, other 8,344 0.017 140 28,132 0.001 40 

Private not-for-profit 4-year NPSAS only 17,119 0.014 230 67,576 0.001 50 

Private for-profit less-than-2-year 202,939 0.027 5,400 16,927 0.027 460 

Private for-profit 2-year or more 210,262 0.008 1,660 265,820 0.006 1,680 

California 

 Public 2-year 131,839 0.008 1,040 1,268,189 0.004 5,020 

 Public 4-year 65,657 0.005 340 367,345 0.003 1,030 

 Private not-for-profit 4-year 22,108 0.013 290 100,256 0.005 470 

Connecticut 

 Public 2-year 6,506 0.135 880 34,371 0.071 2,460 

 Public 4-year 8,099 0.079 640 37,368 0.033 1,230 

 Private not-for-profit 4-year 9,122 0.046 420 30,374 0.016 480 

Delaware 

 Public 2-year 1,810 0.448 810 10,209 0.235 2,400 

 Public 4-year 4,296 0.187 810 14,669 0.083 1,220 

 Private not-for-profit 4-year 1,463 0.148 220 5,333 0.053 280 

Georgia 

 Public 2-year 29,516 0.046 1,350 75,904 0.025 1,930 

 Public 4-year 24,047 0.035 850 112,323 0.014 1,590 

 Private not-for-profit 4-year 10,128 0.032 320 34,083 0.009 320 

Illinois 

 Public 2-year 55,763 0.024 1,360 284,609 0.013 3,620 

 Public 4-year 23,768 0.011 260 121,846 0.006 670 

 Private not-for-profit 4-year 22,208 0.018 400 94,850 0.006 540 

Indiana 

 Public 2-year 10,451 0.084 880 42,150 0.044 1,840 

 Public 4-year 32,007 0.041 1,310 126,254 0.019 2,340 

 Private not-for-profit 4-year 13,073 0.037 490 43,692 0.014 600 

See notes at end of table. 
Appendix B. Sampling Details 

B-13 

Table B-3. Student sampling rates used in determining measures of size by institutional stratum 

and type of student (undergraduate students): 2004—Continued 

Undergraduate students 

FTBs Other undergraduates 

Institutional stratum1 Size of 

universe2

Sampling 

rate 

Sample 

size 

Size of 

universe2

Sampling 

rate 

Sample 

size 

Minnesota 

 Public 2-year 31,381 0.048 1,490 70,764 0.026 1,830 

 Public 4-year 17,494 0.032 560 79,641 0.014 1,100 

 Private not-for-profit 4-year 9,566 0.030 290 34,263 0.008 280 

Nebraska 

 Public 2-year 6,423 0.159 1,020 29,258 0.088 2,580 

 Public 4-year 7,745 0.086 670 33,846 0.040 1,370 

 Private not-for-profit 4-year 3,384 0.079 270 13,814 0.027 370 

New York 

 Public 2-year 47,991 0.020 940 187,756 0.011 2,030 

 Public 4-year 44,911 0.015 670 224,965 0.006 1,350 

 Private not-for-profit 4-year 58,988 0.016 920 223,251 0.005 1,170 

Oregon 

 Public 2-year 13,052 0.089 1,160 70,536 0.047 3,350 

 Public 4-year 8,860 0.041 360 47,902 0.017 830 

 Private not-for-profit 4-year 3,854 0.055 210 13,731 0.016 230 

Tennessee 

 Public 2-year 13,023 0.085 1,100 62,971 0.049 3,060 

 Public 4-year 15,976 0.040 650 78,992 0.019 1,480 

 Private not-for-profit 4-year 10,024 0.044 450 33,193 0.013 450 

Texas 

 Public 2-year 101,563 0.016 1,650 358,510 0.008 3,030 

 Public 4-year 53,496 0.008 430 287,690 0.004 1,130 

 Private not-for-profit 4-year 16,944 0.014 240 69,535 0.005 350 

# Rounds to zero. 

1 Stratum reflects institutional categorization as determined from the 2000–01 and 2002-03 Integrated Postsecondary Education 

Data System (IPEDS) files; some errors in this classification were uncovered when institutions were contacted. 2

 The size of the universe is based on counts from the 2000 and 2002 IPEDS Fall Enrollment Surveys. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 2004 National Postsecondary Student Aid Study 

(NPSAS:04). 
B-14

Table B-4. Student sampling rates used in determining measures of size by institutional stratum and type of stud

students and first-professional students): 2004 Graduate students Master’s students Doctor’s students Other graduate students 

Institutional stratum1 Size of universe2 Sampling rate Sample size Size of universe2 Sampling rate Sample size Size of universe2 Sampling rate Sample size 

u

Total 1,633,015 0.003 5,008 162,228 0.024 3,943 73,816 0.006 414 

Public less than 2-year † † † † † † † † † Public 2-year associate’s † † † † † † 327 # # Public 2-year other—degree-granting † † † † † † † † † Public 2-year other—NPSAS only † † † † † † † † † Public 4-year non-doctorate-granting master’s 101,289 0.001 120 13 # # 3,248 0.002 10 Public 4-year non-doctorate-granting 

bachelor’s 

3,899 0.003 10 † † † 624 0.003 # 

Public 4-year non-doctorate-granting other 6,524 # # † † † 1,699 # # Public 4-year doctorate-granting doctor’s 401,988 0.003 1,130 60,343 0.021 1,250 9,575 0.007 60 Public 4-year doctorate-granting other 64,391 0.002 130 1,035 0.025 30 2,137 0.002 10 Public 4-year NPSAS only 4,136 # # 747 0.009 10 143 # # Private not-for-profit less-than-4-year, 

associate’s 

† † † † † † † † † 

Private not-for-profit less-than-4-year, other—

degree-granting 

† † † † † † † † † 

Private not-for-profit less-than-4-year, other—

NPSAS 

† † † † † † † † † 

Private not-for-profit 4-year non-doctorategranting, master’s 69,872 0.001 70 7 # # 2,154 0.001 # Private not-for-profit 4-year non-doctorategranting, bachelor’s 11,473 0.001 10 † † † 1,143 0.003 # Private not-for-profit 4-year non-doctorategranting, other 19,485 # 10 † † † 2,450 0.001 # Private not-for-profit 4-year doctorate-granting 132,740 0.004 560 18,977 0.034 640 5,830 0.015 90 Private not-for-profit 4-year doctorate-granting, 

master’s 

76,154 0.004 280 1,276 0.034 40 1,684 0.003 10 

Private not-for-profit 4-year doctorate-granting, 

other 

14,716 0.004 70 3,980 0.033 130 1,033 # # 

Private not-for-profit 4-year NPSAS only 8,229 # # 574 0.023 10 1,993 # # Private for-profit less-than-2-year † † † † † † † † † Private for-profit 2-year or more 46,151 0.001 30 3,433 # # 1,851 # # California 

Public 2-year † † † † † † † † † Public 4-year 99,569 0.002 230 10,134 0.020 210 2,486 0.009 20 Private not-for-profit 4-year 69,851 0.003 210 10,744 0.033 360 10,347 0.002 20 

Connecticut 

Public 2-year † † † † † † † † † Public 4-year 10,541 0.003 30 1,741 0.021 40 1,448 0.003 10 Private not-for-profit 4-year 14,083 0.005 70 1,017 0.032 30 1,294 0.011 10 

See notes at end of table. 
B-15 

Table B-4. Student sampling rates used in determining measures of size by institutional stratum and type of stud

students and first-professional students): 2004—Continued 

Graduate students 

Master’s students Doctor’s students Other graduate students 

Institutional stratum1

Size of

universe2

Sampling

rate

Sample

size

Size of

universe2

Sampling

rate

Sample 

size 

Size of

universe2

Sampling

rate

Sample

size

u

Delaware 

Public 2-year † † † † † † † † † Public 4-year 2,670 0.004 10 540 0.020 10 † † † Private not-for-profit 4-year 1,609 0.005 10 59 0.017 # 26 # # 

Georgia 

Public 2-year † † † † † † † † † Public 4-year 23,951 0.004 110 2,500 0.020 50 1,761 0.007 10 Private not-for-profit 4-year 8,527 0.006 50 1,127 0.032 40 208 0.010 # 

Illinois 

Public 2-year † † † † † † † † † Public 4-year 39,623 0.002 80 3,867 0.021 80 320 0.003 # Private not-for-profit 4-year 48,999 0.006 310 4,879 0.033 160 836 0.011 10 

Indiana 

Public 2-year † † † † † † † † † Public 4-year 23,097 0.005 120 3,493 0.020 70 728 0.010 10 Private not-for-profit 4-year 7,135 0.005 40 506 0.032 20 35 # # 

Minnesota 

Public 2-year † † † † † † † † † Public 4-year 13,757 0.004 60 2,347 0.020 50 526 0.004 # Private not-for-profit 4-year 12,390 0.006 80 519 0.033 20 1,102 0.013 10 

Nebraska 

Public 2-year † † † † † † † † † Public 4-year 8,720 0.004 40 1,007 0.021 20 236 0.008 # Private not-for-profit 4-year 1,893 0.002 # 143 0.028 # 75 # # 

New York 

Public 2-year † † † † † † † † † Public 4-year 50,905 0.003 150 5,424 0.021 110 5,002 0.008 40 Private not-for-profit 4-year 101,355 0.006 610 7,609 0.032 240 5,113 0.011 60 

Oregon 

Public 2-year † † † † † † † † † Public 4-year 9,030 0.003 20 1,126 0.020 20 3,761 0.006 20 Private not-for-profit 4-year 2,915 0.005 20 207 0.034 10 595 # # 

Tennessee 

Public 2-year † † † † † † † † † Public 4-year 16,573 0.002 40 1,485 0.021 30 708 0.004 # Private not-for-profit 4-year 7,523 0.005 40 883 0.033 30 724 0.003 # 

See notes at end of table. 
B-16

Table B-4. Student sampling rates used in determining measures of size by institutional stratum and type of stud

students and first-professional students): 2004—Continued Graduate students Master’s students Doctor’s students Other graduate students 

Institutional stratum1 Size of universe2 Sampling rate Sample size Size of universe2 Sampling rate Sample size Size of universe2 Sampling rate Sample size 

u

Texas Public 2-year † † † † † † † † † 

Public 4-year 75,495 0.002 170 8,797 0.021 180 139 # # Private not-for-profit 4-year 21,757 0.006 140 1,689 0.033 60 455 0.011 10 

† Not applicable. # Rounds to zero. 1 Stratum reflects institutional categorization as determined from the 2000–01 and 2002–03 Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System (IPEDS) file; some e

uncovered when institutions were contacted. 

2 The size of the universe is based on counts from the 2000 and 2002 IPEDS Fall Enrollment Surveys and the distribution of graduate student type is based on NPS

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 2004 National Postsecondary Student Aid Study (NPSAS:04). 
Appendix B. Sampling Details 

B-17 

The composite measure of size for the j-th institution in stratum “r” was then defined to 

be 

() () ∑=

=

7

s 1

r rs rs S j f M j , 

which is the number of persons that would be selected from the j-th institution if all institutions 

on the frame were to be sampled. 

Institutions were selected using Chromy’s sequential probability minimum replacement 

(pmr) sampling algorithm (Chromy 1979), which is similar to systematic sampling, to select 

institutions with probabilities proportional to a composite measure of size based on expected 

enrollment. A sample of 1,630 institutions was selected in Fall 2002 so that these institutions 

could be notified early of their selection and to allow a separate sample to be selected for the 

field test from the remaining institutions on the sampling frame. In Summer 2003, an additional 

sample of about 30 institutions was selected from a frame of institutions not included on the 

initial sampling frame. Of the sample institutions selected for the full-scale study, about 810 

were selected with certainty. The certainty institutions were either in strata in which all 

institutions were selected or had expected frequencies of selection greater than unity (1.00). 

About 1,630 of the sampled institutions were found to be NPSAS eligible, and about 1,360 of 

these eligible institutions provided student enrollment lists for use as the second stage (i.e., 

student) sampling frame. 

An independent sample of institutions was selected for each institutional stratum using 

Chromy’ssequential probability minimum replacement (pmr) sampling algorithm (Chromy 

1979) to select institutions with probabilities proportional to their computed measures of size. 

However, rather than multiple selections of sample institutions being allowed,6 those with 

expected frequencies of selection greater than unity (1.00) were selected with certainty. Also, 

institutions were selected with certainty if they were in strata where all institutions were selected. 

The remainder of the institutional sample was selected from the remaining institutions within 

each stratum. The sampling algorithm was implemented with a random start for each institutional 

stratum to ensure the positive pairwise probabilities of selection that were needed for proper 

variance estimation (Chromy 1981). 

Therefore, the probability of selection for the j-th institution in institutional stratum “r” is 

given by 

( ) for noncertainty selections ( ) ( )

1 for certainty selections. 

r r

r r

nS i

π i S

⎧

⎪ = ⎨ +

⎪

⎩

where 

() () ( )

∑=

+ =

J r

j

r r S S j

1

, 

and nr

*

 is the number of noncertainty selections from stratum “r.” 

 

6

 Precluding institutions with multiple selections at the first stage of sampling made it unnecessary to select multiple 

second-stage samples of students. 
Appendix B. Sampling Details 

B-18 

Table B-5 shows the institution sampling rates and the numbers of certainty and 

noncertainty institutions selected for each of the 22 national strata and the 36 state strata, 

respectively. Within each institutional stratum, additional implicit stratification was 

accomplished by sorting the stratum sampling frame by the following classifications: (1) 

historically black colleges and universities (HBCU) indicator; (2) Carnegie classifications of 

postsecondary institutions; (3) the Office of Business Economics (OBE) Region from the IPEDS 

header file (Bureau of Economic Analysis of the U.S. Department of Commerce Region);7

 and 

(4) the institution measure of size. The objective of this implicit stratification was to approximate 

proportional representation of institutions on these measures. 

Table B-5. Institutional sampling rates and number of certainty and noncertainty institutions 

sampled, by institutional stratum: 2004 

Number of sample institutions 

Institutional stratum1

Size of 

universe2

Sampling 

rate Total Certainty Noncertainty 

 Total 6,706 0.25 1,670 810 860 

Public less than 2-year 317 0.21 70 20 50 

Public 2-year associate 623 0.12 70 # 70 

Public 2-year other—degree-granting 36 0.14 10 # # 

Public 2-year other—NPSAS only3

 69 0.45 30 10 20 

Public 4-year non-doctorate-granting, master’s 118 0.17 20 # 20 

Public 4-year non-doctorate-granting, bachelor’s 65 0.17 10 # 10 

Public 4-year non-doctorate-granting, other 47 0.06 # # # 

Public 4-year doctorate-granting, doctor’s 126 1.00 130 130 # 

Public 4-year doctorate-granting, other 49 0.20 10 # 10 

Public 4-year NPSAS only3

 16 0.13 # # # 

Private not-for-profit less-than-4-year, associate 108 0.31 30 # 30 

Private not-for-profit less-than-4-year, other—degree-granting 24 0.08 # # # 

Private not-for-profit less-than-4-year, other—NPSAS only3

 240 0.16 40 10 30 

Private not-for-profit 4-year non-doctorate-granting, master’s 132 0.09 10 # 10 

Private not-for-profit 4-year non-doctorate-granting, bachelor’s 293 0.12 30 # 30 

Private not-for-profit 4-year non-doctorate-granting, other 202 0.16 30 # 30 

Private not-for-profit 4-year doctorate-granting, doctor’s 52 1.00 50 50 # 

Private not-for-profit 4-year doctorate-granting, master’s 61 0.18 10 # 10 

Private not-for-profit 4-year doctorate-granting, other 143 0.09 10 # 10 

Private not-for-profit 4-year—NPSAS only3

 51 0.06 # # # 

Private for-profit less-than-2-year 1,445 0.12 170 10 170 

Private for-profit 2-year or more 1,149 0.10 110 10 110 

California 298 0.38 110 50 60 

 Public 2-year 114 0.33 40 # 40 

 Public 4-year 33 1.00 30 30 # 

 Private not-for-profit 4-year 151 0.27 40 20 20 

Connecticut 45 1.00 50 50 # 

 Public 2-year 15 1.00 20 20 # 

 Public 4-year 10 1.00 10 10 # 

 Private not-for-profit 4-year 20 1.00 20 20 # 

Delaware 9 1.00 10 10 # 

 Public 2-year 3 1.00 # # # 

 Public 4-year 2 1.00 # # # 

 Private not-for-profit 4-year 4 1.00 # # # 

See notes at end of table. 

 

7 For sorting purposes, Alaska and Hawaii were combined with Puerto Rico in the Outlying Areas region rather than in 

the Far West region. 
Appendix B. Sampling Details 

B-19 

Table B-5. Institutional sampling rates and number of certainty and noncertainty institutions 

sampled, by institutional stratum: 2004—Continued 

Number of sample institutions 

Institutional stratum1

Size of 

universe2

Sampling 

rate Total Certainty Noncertainty 

Georgia 108 0.79 90 60 30 

 Public 2-year 53 0.57 30 10 30 

 Public 4-year 21 1.00 20 20 # 

 Private not-for-profit 4-year 34 1.00 30 30 # 

Illinois 148 0.49 70 40 40 

 Public 2-year 48 0.63 30 10 20 

 Public 4-year 12 1.00 10 10 # 

 Private not-for-profit 4-year 88 0.34 30 10 20 

Indiana 71 0.85 60 50 10 

 Public 2-year 16 1.00 20 20 # 

 Public 4-year 14 1.00 10 10 # 

 Private not-for-profit 4-year 41 0.73 30 20 10 

Minnesota 90 0.86 80 70 10 

 Public 2-year 43 0.70 30 20 10 

 Public 4-year 11 1.00 10 10 # 

 Private not-for-profit 4-year 36 1.00 40 40 # 

Nebraska 29 1.00 30 30 # 

 Public 2-year 7 1.00 10 10 # 

 Public 4-year 7 1.00 10 10 # 

 Private not-for-profit 4-year 15 1.00 20 20 # 

New York 249 0.43 110 70 30 

 Public 2-year 37 1.00 40 40 # 

 Public 4-year 45 0.67 30 20 10 

 Private not-for-profit 4-year 167 0.24 40 20 20 

Oregon 52 1.00 50 50 # 

 Public 2-year 17 1.00 20 20 # 

 Public 4-year 10 1.00 10 10 # 

 Private not-for-profit 4-year 25 1.00 30 30 # 

Tennessee 75 0.81 60 50 10 

 Public 2-year 21 1.00 20 20 # 

 Public 4-year 10 1.00 10 10 # 

 Private not-for-profit 4-year 44 0.68 30 20 10 

Texas 166 0.54 90 50 40 

 Public 2-year 68 0.44 30 10 20 

 Public 4-year 43 0.70 30 20 10 

 Private not-for-profit 4-year 55 0.55 30 20 10 

# Rounds to zero. 

1 Stratum reflects institutional categorization as determined from the 2000–01 Integrated Postsecondary Education Data 

System (IPEDS) file; some errors in this classification were uncovered when institutions were contacted. 2 Based on the 2000–01 and 2002–03 IPEDS file. 

NOTE: Detail may not sum to total because of rounding. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 2004 National Postsecondary Student 

Aid Study (NPSAS:04). 

B.3 The Student Samples 

The initial student sample was selected from lists provided by about 1,360 of the 1,630 

institutions (from the original sample) that proved to be eligible. The postsecondary students 

eligible for NPSAS:04 were those who attended a NPSAS-eligible institution during the 2003–04 

academic year and who were 
Appendix B. Sampling Details 

B-20 

• enrolled in either (1) an academic program; (2) at least one course for credit that 

could be applied toward fulfilling the requirements for an academic degree; or (3) an 

occupational or vocational program that required at least 3 months or 300 clock hours 

of instruction to receive a degree, certificate, or other formal award; 

• not concurrently enrolled in high school; and 

• not enrolled solely in a GED or other high school completion program. 

B.3.1 Construction of Sampling Frames 

The sampling frames provided by sample institutions included paper and electronic lists 

of students enrolled in terms or courses of instruction during the previously defined NPSAS year. 

Each sampled institution that was verified as NPSAS-eligible was asked to provide a list 

of all its students who satisfied all the NPSAS eligibility conditions, preferably an 

“unduplicated” electronic list (i.e., one in which each student’s name appeared only once), 

together with identifying, classifying, and locating information (see section 2.3.2 in the main 

report). Although electronic files were preferred, student lists were accepted in a variety of 

formats, as long as they were complete. 

Several checks on quality and completeness of student lists were implemented before the 

sample students were selected. Institutions providing lists that failed these checks were contacted 

to resolve the detected problems. Enrollment lists failed quality control checks under the 

following conditions: 

• FTBs were not identified (unless the institution only enrolled graduate/firstprofessional students or explicitly indicated that no FTBs existed in the school); 

and/or 

• student level—undergraduate, master’s, doctoral, other graduate, or first 

professional—was not clearly identified. 

Quality checks on student counts were performed separately for FTBs and all other 

students. The “unduplicated” FTB counts were checked against the fall enrollment counts from 

the IPEDS Fall Enrollment Survey because IPEDS does not have “unduplicated” annual FTB 

counts. The check failed if the count for any “unduplicated” list was at least 50 percent less than 

the IPEDS count. The list counts were expected to almost always be more than the IPEDS counts 

because the IPEDS counts were not annual counts. This check identified institutional enrollment 

lists that under-reported FTBs. The “unduplicated” counts of other undergraduates, graduates, 

and first-professionals were checked against the “unduplicated” annual enrollment counts from 

the IPEDS Fall Enrollment Survey. The check failed if the count for any “unduplicated” list 

differed by at least 50 percent from the IPEDS count.8

B.3.2 Student Sample Selection 

As student lists were received from institutions, students were sampled using 

predetermined sampling rates that varied by student stratum. Stratified systematic sampling was 

used to ensure comparable sampling procedures for both paper and electronic lists. 

 

8

 If provided paper lists were not “unduplicated,” an “unduplicated” total was estimated by applying an empirically 

determined multiplicity factor (0.50) to the count over provided lists. 
Appendix B. Sampling Details 

B-21 

For each institution, the student sampling rates, rather than the student sample sizes, were 

set to fixed values: 

• to facilitate sampling students on a flow basis as student lists were received; 

• to facilitate the procedures used to “unduplicate” the samples selected from 

(duplicated) hard-copy lists; and 

• because sampling at a fixed rate based on the overall stratum sampling rates and the 

institutional probabilities of selection results in approximately equal overall 

probabilities of selection within the ultimate institution-by-student strata. 

Some institutional systems sent in lists for multiple institutions or campuses. If the lists 

were separate for each institution or campus, then the samples were selected separately and 

independently. If the lists were combined into one list with no identifier mapping students to 

institution or campus, then one student sample was selected that represented all of the institutions 

or campuses included on the list. In such cases, sampling rates were adjusted, and a weight 

adjustment was made (see section 6.1.1 in the main report). 

For paper lists, samples were selected manually, and then the list of sample students was 

entered into an electronic file. When students from different strata (e.g., FTBs and other 

undergraduates) were combined on a paper list, the sampling rate from the stratum with the 

higher rate was used. Then after the sample was entered into an electronic file, the students from 

the other stratum (or strata) were subsampled to match the sampling rates for that stratum.9

After the sample of students had been selected for an institution, Social Security numbers 

(SSNs) of those sampled were compared to those of students who had already been selected from 

other institutions to eliminate cross-institution duplication. Multiplicity adjustments in the 

sample weighting (described in more detail in section 6.2.1 in the main report) accounted for the 

fact that any students who attended more than one institution during the NPSAS year had more 

than one chance of selection. 

The development of student sampling rates within student stratum “rs” (i.e., the r-th 

institutional stratum and the s-th student stratum within institutional stratum) were previously 

discussed in section B.2.2, and the notation used in that development will be used here, except 

that person strata one through eight are used for student sampling and are referred to as student 

strata below. 

For the unconditional probability of selection to be a constant for all eligible students in 

stratum “rs,” the overall probability of selection should be the overall student sampling fraction, 

frs; i.e., it must be required that 

( )

( ) ( ) r rs

rs

rs j f M j

m j π = , 

or equivalently, 

( ) ( )

( )

rs

rs rs

r

M j mj f

π j = . 

 

9

 The issue of combined strata was not a problem for electronic lists since the file could be sorted by stratum prior to 

sampling. 
Appendix B. Sampling Details 

B-22 

Thus, the conditional sampling rate for stratum “rs,” given selection of the j-th institution, 

becomes 

f f ( j) rs| j = rs π r . 

It should be noted that, in this case, the desired overall student sample size, ms , is achieved only 

in expectation over all possible samples. 

Achieving the desired sample sizes with equal probabilities within strata in the particular 

sample that has been selected and simultaneously adjusting for institutional nonresponse and 

ineligibility requires that 

∑ ( ) =

j R

rs mrs m j

ε

, 

where “R” denotes the set of eligible, responding institutions. Letting the conditional student 

sampling rate for stratum “rs” in the j-th institution be 

f f ( j) rs j rs π r ˆ ˆ | = , 

then requires 

( )

( ) rs

i R r

rs

rs m

j

M j ∑ f =

ε

π

ˆ , 

or equivalently, 

rs mrs Mrs f

ˆ = ˆ

where 

( )

( )j

M j

M

r

j R

rs

rs

π

ε

∑ ˆ = . 

Since it was necessary to set student sampling rates before complete information on institutional 

eligibility and response status was available, Mrs ˆ was calculated as follows: 

( )

( ) = ∑

j S r

rs

rs Er Rr Ers

j

M j M

ε

π

* * * ˆ , 

where “S” denotes the set of all sample institutions, 

 Er = the institutional eligibility factor for institutional stratum “r”; 

 Rr = the institutional response factor for institutional stratum “r”; and 

 Ers = the student eligibility factor for student stratum “rs”. 

These factors were the proportions of institutions or students, respectively, expected to be 
Appendix B. Sampling Details 

B-23 

eligible or responding within the defined strata. Since this determination was made after 

eligibility status had already been determined for some institutions, values of 0 (known not 

eligible) or 1 (known eligible) were used, if known at that time. 

These sampling rates were sometimes modified as follows: 

• Student sampling rates were increased, as needed, so that the sample size achieved at 

each sample institution would be at least 10 sample students, where possible, to 

ensure sufficient yield for variance estimation. 

• Student sampling rates were decreased if the sample size was more than 50 greater 

than the institution had been told to expect, which was based on the sampling rate 

applied to the enrollment count on the sampling frame.10

• Sample yield was monitored throughout enrollment list collection and student 

sampling rates were adjusted periodically for institutions for which sample selection 

had not yet been performed to ensure that the desired student sample sizes were 

achieved. 

These adjustments to the initial sampling rates resulted in some additional variability in 

the student sampling rates and, hence, in some increase in survey design effects (variance 

inflation—see section 6.4.3 in the main report). 

The sampling procedures resulted in the selection of 109,210 students. The planned and 

achieved sample sizes by student stratum and level of offering are shown in table B-6. The initial 

classification of the student sample overall and by institution type and student stratum are shown 

in table B-7. The achieved sample yield was less than what was planned (109,210 students as 

compared to the target of 121,680). Institutional participation rates were somewhat lower than 

expected, and sampling rates were not adjusted high enough and early enough for the 

participating institutions to compensate for the loss of sample yield from the nonparticipating 

institutions. Overall, there were more doctoral and other graduate students in the sample than 

planned, and there were fewer FTBs, other undergraduate students, and master’s students than 

planned. 

The sample size for NPSAS:04 is larger than past NPSAS studies. The first reason for the 

increased sample size was to ensure sufficient yield for analytic purposes. The sample size was 

designed so that respondent yield would be sufficient for analyses even if actual response rates 

were lower than the targeted rates. Second, NCES desired one weight to make the data easier for 

analysts to use. Also, as mentioned above, NPSAS:04 includes state-representative 

undergraduate student samples for three types of institutions (public 2-year, public 4-year, and 

private not-for-profit 4-year) in 12 states. A larger overall sample size was necessary to achieve 

state-representative samples in addition to the nationally-representative sample. 

 

10 This was to ensure minimal burden for the institutions participating in computer-assisted data entry (CADE) data 

abstraction. 
Appendix B. Sampling Details 

B-24 

Table B-6. Planned and achieved NPSAS:04 student samples, by student stratum and level of 

offering 

Students sampled 

Student stratum1 Institutional level2 Number expected3

 Number achieved4 Percent5

 Total All institutions 121,680 109,210 89.8 

FTB Subtotal 56,070 49,410 88.1 

 Less-than-2-year 14,080 11,370 80.8 

 2- to 3-year 24,530 22,250 90.7 

 4-year 42,700 15,790 37.0 

 

Other undergraduate Subtotal 54,490 47,680 87.5 

 Less-than-2-year 800 920 115.1 

 2- to 3-year 25,990 19,660 75.6 

 4-year 27,690 27,100 97.9 

Master's 4-year 5,310 3,720 70.1 

Doctor's 4-year 3,630 4,950 136.1 

Other graduate 4-year 400 1,660 416.3 

First-professional 4-year 1,780 1,790 100.7 1 As expected the sampling frames misclassified some individual students with respect to first-time beginner (FTB), 

undergraduate, graduate, and first-professional status; statistics presented in this table are based on the sampling 

frame classification. The two FTB strata (in-state and out-of-state) have been combined, and the two other 

undergraduate strata (in-state and out-of-state) have been combined. 2 Institutional level is based on level confirmed by institution during school contacting. 3 Based on sample allocation and 2000–01 and 2002-03 Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System (IPEDS) 

file enrollment counts. 

4 The student sample was drawn from 1,360 eligible institutions that provided enrollment lists. 5 Percent reported reflects the ratio of “achieved” to “expected.” 

NOTE: Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 2004 National Postsecondary 

Student Aid Study (NPSAS:04). 
B-25 

Table B-7. Initial classification of NPSAS:04 student sample, by institutional characteristics and student stratum 

Total sample1 Student sampling stratum2

FTB sample3

Other undergraduate 

sample Graduate samp

Institutional characteristics Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent Number Perc

All institutions 109,210 100.0 49,410 100.0 47,680 100.0 10,330 10

Institutional level 

Less-than-2-year 12,310 11.3 11,370 23.0 920 1.9 20 

2-year 41,960 38.5 22,250 45.0 19,660 41.2 40 4-year non-doctorate-granting 21,550 19.8 8,220 16.6 12,130 25.4 1,180 14-year doctorate-granting 33,400 30.6 7,570 15.3 14,970 31.4 9,100 8

Institutional control 

Public 71,030 65.2 27,820 56.3 35,720 74.9 6,570 6Private not-for-profit 22,730 20.9 8,770 17.8 9,450 19.8 3,640 3Private for-profit 15,460 14.2 12,820 26.0 2,510 5.3 120 

Type of institution 

Public less-than-2-year 2,780 2.5 2,330 4.7 440 0.9 # 

Public 2-year 36,340 33.3 17,780 36.0 18,520 38.8 30 Public 4-year non-doctorate-granting 9,210 8.5 2,680 5.4 5,970 12.5 550 Public 4-year doctorate-granting 22,700 20.8 5,030 10.2 10,790 22.6 5,980 5Private not-for-profit 2-year or less 3,020 2.8 2,350 4.8 670 1.4 10 Private not-for-profit 4-year non-doctorate-granting 9,310 8.5 3,920 7.9 4,840 10.1 540 Private not-for-profit 4-year doctorate-granting 10,400 9.5 2,510 5.1 3,940 8.3 3,090 3Private for-profit less-than-2-year 8,750 8.0 8,280 16.8 460 1.0 10 

Private for-profit 2-year or more 6,710 6.2 4,540 9.2 2,050 4.3 110 

# Rounds to zero. 1 The student sample was drawn from 1,360 eligible institutions that provided enrollment lists. 2 As expected, the sampling frames misclassified some individual students as to first-time beginner (FTB), undergraduate, graduate, and first-pro

presented in this table are based on the sampling frame classification. This explains why some graduate/first-professional students were sample

not have such students. 

3 The two FTB strata (in-state and out-of-state) have been combined, the two other undergraduate strata (in-state and out-of-state) have been co

doctorate, and other graduate strata have been combined. NOTE: Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 2004 National Postsecondary Student Aid Study (NPSAS:04)
Appendix B. Sampling Details 

B-26 

B.4 Determining NSoFaS Sample Sizes and Sampling Rates 

Institution, student, and faculty sample sizes and sampling rates were determined for the 

2004 National Study of Faculty and Students (NSoFaS:04) using cost/variance optimization 

procedures to determine the allocation that would maximize the inferences supported by the 

design while minimizing data collection costs. The sample allocation was first determined as if 

all sample institutions eligible for both the student and faculty components of NSoFaS would 

participate in both components. Because smaller sample sizes were sufficient to support the 

National Study of Postsecondary Faculty (NSOPF) inference requirements, institutions for the 

NSOPF sample then were selected as a subsample of the NPSAS sample institutions. The 

process below focuses on NPSAS. 

The cost/variance sample optimization process consisted of the following steps: 

1. Precision requirements were established for key estimates. 

2. Institution-level and person-level sampling strata were developed to support the key 

estimates. 

3. A cost model was developed. 

4. A relative variance model was developed. 

5. The optimum sample allocation was determined. 

Each of these steps of the cost/variance optimization process is discussed below. 

B.4.1 Precision Requirements for Key Estimates 

The precision goal for NPSAS:04 was to achieve precision comparable to or better than 

NPSAS:2000 for national-level estimates for the overall student population and to achieve 

precision comparable to NPSAS:96 for national estimates for the population of beginning 

postsecondary students. The population of institutions for which these precision goals were 

established consisted of the institutions in the United States and Puerto Rico that were 

participating in Title IV federal student financial aid programs in the 2003–04 academic year. 

The NPSAS:2000 E.D. Tab (NCES 2001–209) was used to identify 162 key nationallevel estimates for the overall student population. Likewise, Descriptive Summary of 1995–96 

Beginning Postsecondary Students (NCES 1999–030) was reviewed to identify 102 key nationallevel estimates for the population of beginning postsecondary students. Hence, a total of 264 

precision constraints were developed for national-level student estimates. These student 

estimates (outcomes) by domain are shown in table B-8. For each estimate, the objective was to 

achieve a level of precision that was at least as good as that obtained in the prior study. 

Precision requirements also were established for 174 key estimates regarding the in-state 

student populations in each of the following 12 states: California, Connecticut, Delaware, 

Georgia, Illinois, Indiana, Minnesota, Nebraska, New York, Oregon, Tennessee, and Texas. The 

174 key estimates for each state were a subset of the 264 national-level constraints for in-state11

 

11 In the first NSoFaS Technical Review Panel meeting, representatives of the 12 states indicated that they were 

primarily interested in inferences regarding their in-state students. 
Appendix B. Sampling Details 

B-27 

undergraduate students enrolled in 2003–04 in the following types of institutions participating in 

Title IV federal student financial aid programs: 

1. Public, 2-year institutions. 

2. Public, 4-year institutions. 

3. Private, not-for-profit, 4-year institutions. 

The 174 key state-level estimates are presented in table B-9. For each estimate, the goal was to 

achieve a relative standard error of 10 percent or less. As is usually the case with survey 

optimization problems, it was necessary to constrain the sample sizes not to exceed those 

budgeted for the study: about 81,000 responding students. 

B.4.2 Institution-Level and Person-Level Sampling Strata 

Twenty-four institution-level NSoFaS sampling strata were defined for the NSoFaS 

national-level sample by crossing: 

• The nine strata traditionally used for the NPSAS (based on institution level, control, 

and highest level of offering) (called NPSASSTR). 

• The 10 strata traditionally used for the NSOPF (based on Carnegie classification) and 

control (called NSOPFSTR). 

• An indicator of 2-year and 4-year institutions that were eligible only for NPSAS (i.e., 

institutions located in PR and non-degree-granting institutions). 

Because of small stratum sizes, two pairs of strata (doctorate-granting and non-doctorategranting) were collapsed for institutions that were eligible only for NPSAS to form the following 

two strata: 

• Public 4-year, NPSAS-only institutions. 

• Private not-for-profit 4-year, NPSAS-only institutions. 

The result was a 22-level institutional stratum variable (called STRAT22) defined for the 

national NSoFaS sample. 

Eighteen of the original 24 institution strata defined for the national sample were 

applicable for the analysis domains defined for the 12 states that had separate precision 

requirements. Hence, these 18 strata were replicated for each of the 12 states, forming 216 state 

strata and a total of 240 institution-level strata.12,13

For the sample optimization process, it was necessary to use the 240-level institution 

stratum variable so that the sample sizes could be accurately mapped to the analysis domains 

(per tables B-8 and B-9) for which precision requirements had been established. However, since 

many of these strata contained few institutions, the sample was selected using 58 collapsed strata 

(called STRAT58) defined by using the 22 national-level institution strata discussed above 

(STRAT22) and by collapsing the 18 strata for each of the 12 states into the following three 

strata that represent the domains for which state-specific inferences were required: 

 

12 Some of the state strata did not actually contain any institutions, so some of the 240 strata had no institutions. 13 The state strata included graduate institutions. Only institutions offering undergraduate programs should have been 

placed in the state strata because state precision requirements are only for undergraduate students. 
Appendix B. Sampling Details 

B-28 

• Public 2-year institutions. 

• Public 4-year institutions. 

• Private not-for-profit 4-year institutions. 

The number of institutions on the initial sampling frame in each of these 58 sampling strata is 

provided in tables B-4 and B-5. 
B-29 

Table B-8. Domains and outcomes for NPSAS:04 national sample optimization: 

Institution domain Student level Dependency/income status 

Attendance status Outcome 

All Undergraduate All All Percent recePublic less-than-2-year or private not-for-profit less-than-4-year 

Undergraduate All All Percent rece

Public 2-year Undergraduate All All Percent recePublic 4-year non-doctorate-granting Undergraduate All All Percent recePublic 4-year doctorate-granting Undergraduate All All Percent recePrivate not-for-profit 4-year non-doctorategranting Undergraduate All All Percent recePrivate not-for-profit 4-year doctorate-granting Undergraduate All All Percent recePrivate for-profit less-than-2-year Undergraduate All All Percent recePrivate for-profit 2-year or more Undergraduate All All Percent receAll Undergraduate All All Percent recePublic less-than-2-year or private not-for-profit less-than-4-year 

Undergraduate All All Percent rece

Public 2-year Undergraduate All All Percent recePublic 4-year non-doctorate-granting Undergraduate All All Percent recePublic 4-year doctorate-granting Undergraduate All All Percent recePrivate not-for-profit 4-year non-doctorategranting Undergraduate All All Percent recePrivate not-for-profit 4-year doctorate-granting Undergraduate All All Percent recePrivate for-profit less-than-2-year Undergraduate All All Percent recePrivate for-profit 2-year or more Undergraduate All All Percent receAll Undergraduate All All Percent recePublic less-than-2-year or private not-for-profit less-than-4-year 

Undergraduate All All Percent rece

Public 2-year Undergraduate All All Percent recePublic 4-year non-doctorate-granting Undergraduate All All Percent recePublic 4-year doctorate-granting Undergraduate All All Percent recePrivate not-for-profit 4-year non-doctorategranting Undergraduate All All Percent recePrivate not-for-profit 4-year doctorate-granting Undergraduate All All Percent recePrivate for-profit less-than-2-year Undergraduate All All Percent recePrivate for-profit 2-year or more Undergraduate All All Percent receAll Undergraduate All All Average amoPublic less-than-2-year or private not-for-profit less-than-4-year 

Undergraduate All All Average amo

Public 2-year Undergraduate All All Average amoPublic 4-year non-doctorate-granting Undergraduate All All Average amoPublic 4-year doctorate-granting Undergraduate All All Average amo

See notes at end of table. 
B-30 

Table B-8. Domains and outcomes for NPSAS:04 national sample optimization: 2004—Continued Institution domain Student level Dependency/income status Attendance status Outcome Private not-for-profit 4-year non-doctorate- granting Undergraduate All All Average amo

Private not-for-profit 4-year doctorate-granting Undergraduate All All Average amoPrivate for-profit less-than-2-year Undergraduate All All Average amoPrivate for-profit 2-year or more Undergraduate All All Average amoAll Undergraduate All All Average amoPublic less-than-2-year or private not-for-profit less-than-4-year Undergraduate All All Average amoPublic 2-year Undergraduate All All Average amoPublic 4-year non-doctorate-granting Undergraduate All All Average amoPublic 4-year doctorate-granting Undergraduate All All Average amoPrivate not-for-profit 4-year non-doctorategranting Undergraduate All All Average amoPrivate not-for-profit 4-year doctorate-granting Undergraduate All All Average amoPrivate for-profit less-than-2-year Undergraduate All All Average amoPrivate for-profit 2-year or more Undergraduate All All Average amoAll Undergraduate All All Average amoPublic less-than-2-year or private not-for-profit less-than-4-year 

Undergraduate All All Average amo

Public 2-year Undergraduate All All Average amoPublic 4-year non-doctorate-granting Undergraduate All All Average amoPublic 4-year doctorate-granting Undergraduate All All Average amoPrivate not-for-profit 4-year non-doctorategranting Undergraduate All All Average amoPrivate not-for-profit 4-year doctorate-granting Undergraduate All All Average amoPrivate for-profit less-than-2-year Undergraduate All All Average amoPrivate for-profit 2-year or more Undergraduate All All Average amoAll Undergraduate Dependent less than $40,000 All Percent receAll Undergraduate Dependent $40,000-79,999 All Percent receAll Undergraduate Dependent $80,000 or more All Percent receAll Undergraduate Independent less than $20,000 All Percent receAll Undergraduate Independent $20,000-29,999 All Percent receAll Undergraduate Independent $30,000 or more All Percent receAll Undergraduate Dependent less than $40,000 All Percent receAll Undergraduate Dependent $40,000 or more All Percent receAll Undergraduate Independent less than $20,000 All Percent receAll Undergraduate Independent $20,000 or more All Percent rece

See notes at end of table. 
B-31 

Table B-8. Domains and outcomes for NPSAS:04 national sample optimization: 2004—Continued 

Institution domain Student level Dependency/income status 

Attendance status Outcome 

All Undergraduate Dependent less than $40,000 All Percent receAll Undergraduate Independent less than $20,000 All Percent receAll Undergraduate Dependent less than $40,000 All Average amoAll Undergraduate Dependent $40,000-79,999 All Average amoAll Undergraduate Dependent $80,000 or more All Average amoAll Undergraduate Independent less than $20,000 All Average amoAll Undergraduate Independent $20,000-29,999 All Average amoAll Undergraduate Independent $30,000 or more All Average amoAll Undergraduate Dependent less than $40,000 All Average amoAll Undergraduate Dependent $40,000 or more All Average amoAll Undergraduate Independent less than $20,000 All Average amoAll Undergraduate Independent $20,000 or more All Average amoAll Undergraduate Dependent less than $40,000 All Average amoAll Undergraduate Independent less than $20,000 All Average amoPublic 4-year Undergraduate All Full-time Percent recePublic 4-year Undergraduate Dependent less than $40,000 Full-time Percent recePublic 4-year Undergraduate Dependent $40,000-79,999 Full-time Percent recePublic 4-year Undergraduate Dependent $80,000 or more Full-time Percent recePublic 4-year Undergraduate Independent less than $20,000 Full-time Percent recePublic 4-year Undergraduate Independent $20,000-29,999 Full-time Percent recePublic 4-year Undergraduate Independent $30,000 or more Full-time Percent recePublic 4-year Undergraduate All Full-time Percent recePublic 4-year Undergraduate Dependent less than $40,000 Full-time Percent recePublic 4-year Undergraduate Dependent $40,000 or more Full-time Percent recePublic 4-year Undergraduate Independent less than $20,000 Full-time Percent recePublic 4-year Undergraduate Independent $20,000 or more Full-time Percent recePublic 4-year Undergraduate All Full-time Percent recePublic 4-year Undergraduate Dependent less than $40,000 Full-time Percent recePublic 4-year Undergraduate Independent less than $20,000 Full-time Percent recePublic 4-year Undergraduate All Full-time Average amoPublic 4-year Undergraduate Dependent less than $40,000 Full-time Average amoPublic 4-year Undergraduate Dependent $40,000-79,999 Full-time Average amoPublic 4-year Undergraduate Dependent $80,000 or more Full-time Average amoPublic 4-year Undergraduate Independent less than $20,000 Full-time Average amoPublic 4-year Undergraduate Independent $20,000-29,999 Full-time Average amo

See notes at end of table. 
B-32 

Table B-8. Domains and outcomes for NPSAS:04 national sample optimization—Continued Institution domain Student level Dependency/income status Attendance status Outcome Public 4-year Undergraduate Independent $30,000 or more Full-time Average amo

Public 4-year Undergraduate All Full-time Average amoPublic 4-year Undergraduate Dependent less than $40,000 Full-time Average amoPublic 4-year Undergraduate Dependent $40,000 or more Full-time Average amoPublic 4-year Undergraduate Independent less than $20,000 Full-time Average amoPublic 4-year Undergraduate Independent $20,000 or more Full-time Average amoPublic 4-year Undergraduate All Full-time Average amoPublic 4-year Undergraduate Dependent less than $40,000 Full-time Average amoPublic 4-year Undergraduate Independent less than $20,000 Full-time Average amoPrivate not-for-profit 4-year Undergraduate All Full-time Percent recePrivate not-for-profit 4-year Undergraduate Dependent less than $40,000 Full-time Percent recePrivate not-for-profit 4-year Undergraduate Dependent $40,000-79,999 Full-time Percent recePrivate not-for-profit 4-year Undergraduate Dependent $80,000 or more Full-time Percent recePrivate not-for-profit 4-year Undergraduate Independent less than $20,000 Full-time Percent recePrivate not-for-profit 4-year Undergraduate Independent $20,000-29,999 Full-time Percent recePrivate not-for-profit 4-year Undergraduate Independent $30,000 or more Full-time Percent recePrivate not-for-profit 4-year Undergraduate All Full-time Percent recePrivate not-for-profit 4-year Undergraduate Dependent less than $40,000 Full-time Percent recePrivate not-for-profit 4-year Undergraduate Dependent $40,000 or more Full-time Percent recePrivate not-for-profit 4-year Undergraduate Independent less than $20,000 Full-time Percent recePrivate not-for-profit 4-year Undergraduate Independent $20,000 or more Full-time Percent recePrivate not-for-profit 4-year Undergraduate All Full-time Percent recePrivate not-for-profit 4-year Undergraduate Dependent less than $40,000 Full-time Percent recePrivate not-for-profit 4-year Undergraduate Independent less than $20,000 Full-time Percent recePrivate not-for-profit 4-year Undergraduate All Full-time Average amoPrivate not-for-profit 4-year Undergraduate Dependent less than $40,000 Full-time Average amoPrivate not-for-profit 4-year Undergraduate Dependent $40,000-79,999 Full-time Average amoPrivate not-for-profit 4-year Undergraduate Dependent $80,000 or more Full-time Average amoPrivate not-for-profit 4-year Undergraduate Independent less than $20,000 Full-time Average amoPrivate not-for-profit 4-year Undergraduate Independent $20,000-29,999 Full-time Average amoPrivate not-for-profit 4-year Undergraduate Independent $30,000 or more Full-time Average amoPrivate not-for-profit 4-year Undergraduate All Full-time Average amoPrivate not-for-profit 4-year Undergraduate Dependent less than $40,000 Full-time Average amoPrivate not-for-profit 4-year Undergraduate Dependent $40,000 or more Full-time Average amo

See notes at end of table. 
B-33 

Table B-8. Domains and outcomes for NPSAS:04 national sample optimization—Continued 

Institution domain Student level Dependency/income status 

Attendance status Outcome 

Private not-for-profit 4-year Undergraduate Independent less than $20,000 Full-time Average amoPrivate not-for-profit 4-year Undergraduate Independent $20,000 or more Full-time Average amoPrivate not-for-profit 4-year Undergraduate All Full-time Average amoPrivate not-for-profit 4-year Undergraduate Dependent less than $40,000 Full-time Average amoPrivate not-for-profit 4-year Undergraduate Independent less than $20,000 Full-time Average amoAll Beginning postsecondary students All All Percent receAll Beginning postsecondary students Dependent less than $40,000 All Percent receAll Beginning postsecondary students Dependent $40,000-79,999 All Percent receAll Beginning postsecondary students Dependent $80,000 or more All Percent receAll Beginning postsecondary students Independent less than $20,000 All Percent receAll Beginning postsecondary students Independent $20,000-29,999 All Percent receAll Beginning postsecondary students Independent $30,000 or more All Percent receAll Beginning postsecondary students All All Percent receAll Beginning postsecondary students Dependent less than $40,000 All Percent receAll Beginning postsecondary students Dependent $40,000 or more All Percent receAll Beginning postsecondary students Independent less than $20,000 All Percent receAll Beginning postsecondary students Independent $20,000 or more All Percent receAll Beginning postsecondary students All All Percent receAll Beginning postsecondary students Dependent less than $40,000 All Percent receAll Beginning postsecondary students Independent less than $20,000 All Percent receAll Beginning postsecondary students All All Average amoAll Beginning postsecondary students Dependent less than $40,000 All Average amoAll Beginning postsecondary students Dependent $40,000-79,999 All Average amoAll Beginning postsecondary students Dependent $80,000 or more All Average amoAll Beginning postsecondary students Independent less than $20,000 All Average amoAll Beginning postsecondary students Independent $20,000-29,999 All Average amoAll Beginning postsecondary students Independent $30,000 or more All Average amoAll Beginning postsecondary students All All Average amoAll Beginning postsecondary students Dependent less than $40,000 All Average amoAll Beginning postsecondary students Dependent $40,000 or more All Average amoAll Beginning postsecondary students Independent less than $20,000 All Average amoAll Beginning postsecondary students Independent $20,000 or more All Average amoAll Beginning postsecondary students All All Average amoAll Beginning postsecondary students Dependent less than $40,000 All Average amoAll Beginning postsecondary students Independent less than $20,000 All Average amo

See notes at end of table. 
B-34 

Table B-8. Domains and outcomes for NPSAS:04 national sample optimization—Continued Institution domain Student level Dependency/income status Attendance status Outcome Public 4-year Beginning postsecondary students All All Percent rece

Public 4-year Beginning postsecondary students Dependent less than $40,000 or Independent less than $20,000 All Percent rece

Public 4-year Beginning postsecondary students Other All Percent recePrivate not-for-profit 4-year Beginning postsecondary students All All Percent rece

Private not-for-profit 4-year Beginning postsecondary students Dependent less than $40,000 or Independent less than $20,000 All Percent rece

Private not-for-profit 4-year Beginning postsecondary students Other All Percent receFor-profit Beginning postsecondary students All All Percent receFor-profit Beginning postsecondary students Dependent less than $40,000 or 

Independent less than $20,000 

All Percent rece

For-profit Beginning postsecondary students Other All Percent recePublic or private not-for-profit, less-than-4-year Beginning postsecondary students All All Percent rece

Public or private not-for-profit, less-than-4-year Beginning postsecondary students Dependent less than $40,000 or 

Independent less than $20,000 

All Percent rece

Public or private not-for-profit, less-than-4-year Beginning postsecondary students Other All Percent recePublic 4-year Beginning postsecondary students All All Percent recePublic 4-year Beginning postsecondary students Dependent less than $40,000 or 

Independent less than $20,000 

All Percent rece

Public 4-year Beginning postsecondary students Other All Percent recePrivate not-for-profit 4-year Beginning postsecondary students All All Percent recePrivate not-for-profit 4-year Beginning postsecondary students Dependent less than $40,000 or 

Independent less than $20,000 

All Percent rece

Private not-for-profit 4-year Beginning postsecondary students Other All Percent receFor-profit Beginning postsecondary students All All Percent receFor-profit Beginning postsecondary students Dependent less than $40,000 or 

Independent less than $20,000 

All Percent rece

For-profit Beginning postsecondary students Other All Percent recePublic or private not-for-profit, less-than-4-year Beginning postsecondary students All All Percent recePublic or private not-for-profit, less-than-4-year Beginning postsecondary students Dependent less than $40,000 or 

Independent less than $20,000 

All Percent rece

Public or private not-for-profit, less-than-4-year Beginning postsecondary students Other All Percent rece

Public 4-year Beginning postsecondary students All All Percent recePublic 4-year Beginning postsecondary students Dependent less than $40,000 or 

Independent less than $20,000 

All Percent rece

Public 4-year Beginning postsecondary students Other All Percent recePrivate not-for-profit 4-year Beginning postsecondary students All All Percent rece

Private not-for-profit 4-year Beginning postsecondary students Dependent less than $40,000 or 

Independent less than $20,000 

All Percent rece

See notes at end of table. 
B-35 

Table B-8. Domains and outcomes for NPSAS:04 national sample optimization—Continued 

Institution domain Student level Dependency/income status 

Attendance status Outcome 

Private not-for-profit 4-year Beginning postsecondary students Other All Percent receFor-profit Beginning postsecondary students All All Percent receFor-profit Beginning postsecondary students Dependent less than $40,000 or 

Independent less than $20,000 

All Percent rece

For-profit Beginning postsecondary students Other All Percent recePublic or private not-for-profit, less-than-4-year Beginning postsecondary students All All Percent recePublic or private not-for-profit, less-than-4-year Beginning postsecondary students Dependent less than $40,000 or 

Independent less than $20,000 

All Percent rece

Public or private not-for-profit, less-than-4-year Beginning postsecondary students Other All Percent recePublic 4-year Beginning postsecondary students All All Average amoPublic 4-year Beginning postsecondary students Dependent less than $40,000 or 

Independent less than $20,000 

All Average amo

Public 4-year Beginning postsecondary students Other All Average amoPrivate not-for-profit 4-year Beginning postsecondary students All All Average amo

Private not-for-profit 4-year Beginning postsecondary students Dependent less than $40,000 or 

Independent less than $20,000 

All Average amo

Private not-for-profit 4-year Beginning postsecondary students Other All Average amo

For-profit Beginning postsecondary students All All Average amoFor-profit Beginning postsecondary students Dependent less than $40,000 or 

Independent less than $20,000 

All Average amo

For-profit Beginning postsecondary students Other All Average amoPublic or private not-for-profit, less-than-4-year Beginning postsecondary students All All Average amoPublic or private not-for-profit, less-than-4-year Beginning postsecondary students Dependent less than $40,000 or 

Independent less than $20,000 

All Average amo

Public or private not-for-profit, less-than-4-year Beginning postsecondary students Other All Average amoPublic 4-year Beginning postsecondary students All All Average amoPublic 4-year Beginning postsecondary students Dependent less than $40,000 or 

Independent less than $20,000 

All Average amo

Public 4-year Beginning postsecondary students Other All Average amoPrivate not-for-profit 4-year Beginning postsecondary students All All Average amoPrivate not-for-profit 4-year Beginning postsecondary students Dependent less than $40,000 or 

Independent less than $20,000 

All Average amo

Private not-for-profit 4-year Beginning postsecondary students Other All Average amoFor-profit Beginning postsecondary students All All Average amoFor-profit Beginning postsecondary students Dependent less than $40,000 or 

Independent less than $20,000 

All Average amo

For-profit Beginning postsecondary students Other All Average amoPublic or private not-for-profit, less-than-4-year Beginning postsecondary students All All Average amo

Public or private not-for-profit, less-than-4-year Beginning postsecondary students Dependent less than $40,000 or 

Independent less than $20,000 

All Average amo

See notes at end of table. 
B-36 

Table B-8. Domains and outcomes for NPSAS:04 national sample optimization—Continued Institution domain Student level Dependency/income status Attendance status Outcome Public or private not-for-profit, less-than-4-year Beginning postsecondary students Other All Average amo

Public 4-year Beginning postsecondary students All All Average amoPublic 4-year Beginning postsecondary students Dependent less than $40,000 or Independent less than $20,000 All Average amo

Public 4-year Beginning postsecondary students Other All Average amoPrivate not-for-profit 4-year Beginning postsecondary students All All Average amoPrivate not-for-profit 4-year Beginning postsecondary students Dependent less than $40,000 or Independent less than $20,000 All Average amoPrivate not-for-profit 4-year Beginning postsecondary students Other All Average amoFor-profit Beginning postsecondary students All All Average amoFor-profit Beginning postsecondary students Dependent less than $40,000 or 

Independent less than $20,000 

All Average amo

For-profit Beginning postsecondary students Other All Average amoPublic or private not-for-profit, less-than-4-year Beginning postsecondary students All All Average amo

Public or private not-for-profit, less-than-4-year Beginning postsecondary students Dependent less than $40,000 or 

Independent less than $20,000 

All Average amo

Public or private not-for-profit, less-than-4-year Beginning postsecondary students Other All Average amo

All 4-year All graduate/first-professional 

students 

All All Percent rece

All 4-year Master's students All All Percent receAll 4-year, doctorate-granting Doctoral students All All Percent receAll 4-year Post-bachelor’s certificate All All Percent receAll 4-year Other graduate students All All Percent receAll 4-year, doctorate-granting First-professional students All All Percent receAll 4-year All graduate/first-professional 

students 

All All Average amo

All 4-year Master's students All All Average amoAll 4-year, doctorate-granting Doctoral students All All Average amoAll 4-year Post-bachelor’s certificate All All Average amoAll 4-year Other graduate students All All Average amoAll 4-year, doctorate-granting First-professional students All All Average amoPublic, 4-year, non-doctorate-granting Master's students All All Percent recePublic, 4-year, doctorate-granting Master's students All All Percent recePrivate, 4-year, not-for-profit, non-doctorategranting Master's students All All Percent recePrivate, 4-year, not-for-profit, doctorate-granting Master's students All All Percent recePublic, 4-year, doctorate-granting Doctoral students All All Percent recePrivate, 4-year, not-for-profit, doctorate-granting Doctoral students All All Percent rece

See notes at end of table. 
B-37 

Table B-8. Domains and outcomes for NPSAS:04 national sample optimization—Continued 

Institution domain Student level Dependency/income status 

Attendance status Outcome 

Public, 4-year, non-doctorate-granting Master's students All All Average amoPublic, 4-year, doctorate-granting Master's students All All Average amoPrivate, 4-year, not-for-profit, non-doctorategranting Master's students All All Average amoPrivate, 4-year, not-for-profit, doctorate-granting Master's students All All Average amoPublic, 4-year, doctorate-granting Doctoral students All All Average amoPrivate, 4-year, not-for-profit, doctorate-granting Doctoral students All All Average amo

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 2004 National Postsecondary Student Aid Study (NPSAS:04). 
B-38 

Table B-9. Domains and outcomes for NPSAS:04 state sample optimization Institution domain Student level Dependency/income status Attendance status Outcome All Undergraduate All All Percent rece

Public 2-year Undergraduate All All Percent recePublic 4-year Undergraduate All All Percent recePrivate not-for-profit 4-year Undergraduate All All Percent receAll Undergraduate All All Percent recePublic 2-year Undergraduate All All Percent recePublic 4-year Undergraduate All All Percent recePrivate not-for-profit 4-year Undergraduate All All Percent receAll Undergraduate All All Percent recePublic 2-year Undergraduate All All Percent recePublic 4-year Undergraduate All All Percent recePrivate not-for-profit 4-year Undergraduate All All Percent receAll Undergraduate All All Average amoPublic 2-year Undergraduate All All Average amoPublic 4-year Undergraduate All All Average amoPrivate not-for-profit 4-year Undergraduate All All Average amoAll Undergraduate All All Average amoPublic 2-year Undergraduate All All Average amoPublic 4-year Undergraduate All All Average amoPrivate not-for-profit 4-year Undergraduate All All Average amoAll Undergraduate All All Average amoPublic 2-year Undergraduate All All Average amoPublic 4-year Undergraduate All All Average amoPrivate not-for-profit 4-year Undergraduate All All Average amoAll Undergraduate Dependent less than $40,000 All Percent receAll Undergraduate Dependent $40,000-79,999 All Percent receAll Undergraduate Dependent $80,000 or more All Percent receAll Undergraduate Independent less than $20,000 All Percent receAll Undergraduate Independent $20,000-29,999 All Percent receAll Undergraduate Independent $30,000 or more All Percent receAll Undergraduate Dependent less than $40,000 All Percent receAll Undergraduate Dependent $40,000 or more All Percent receAll Undergraduate Independent less than $20,000 All Percent receAll Undergraduate Independent $20,000 or more All Percent rece

See notes at end of table. 
B-39 

Table B-9. Domains and outcomes for NPSAS:04 state sample optimization—Continued 

Institution domain Student level Dependency/income status 

Attendance status Outcome 

All Undergraduate Dependent less than $40,000 All Percent receAll Undergraduate Independent less than $20,000 All Percent receAll Undergraduate Dependent less than $40,000 All Average amoAll Undergraduate Dependent $40,000-79,999 All Average amoAll Undergraduate Dependent $80,000 or more All Average amoAll Undergraduate Independent less than $20,000 All Average amoAll Undergraduate Independent $20,000-29,999 All Average amoAll Undergraduate Independent $30,000 or more All Average amoAll Undergraduate Dependent less than $40,000 All Average amoAll Undergraduate Dependent $40,000 or more All Average amoAll Undergraduate Independent less than $20,000 All Average amoAll Undergraduate Independent $20,000 or more All Average amoAll Undergraduate Dependent less than $40,000 All Average amoAll Undergraduate Independent less than $20,000 All Average amoPublic 4-year Undergraduate All Full-time Percent recePublic 4-year Undergraduate Dependent less than $40,000 Full-time Percent recePublic 4-year Undergraduate Dependent $40,000-79,999 Full-time Percent recePublic 4-year Undergraduate Dependent $80,000 or more Full-time Percent recePublic 4-year Undergraduate Independent less than $20,000 Full-time Percent recePublic 4-year Undergraduate Independent $20,000-29,999 Full-time Percent recePublic 4-year Undergraduate Independent $30,000 or more Full-time Percent recePublic 4-year Undergraduate All Full-time Percent recePublic 4-year Undergraduate Dependent less than $40,000 Full-time Percent recePublic 4-year Undergraduate Dependent $40,000 or more Full-time Percent recePublic 4-year Undergraduate Independent less than $20,000 Full-time Percent recePublic 4-year Undergraduate Independent $20,000 or more Full-time Percent recePublic 4-year Undergraduate All Full-time Percent recePublic 4-year Undergraduate Dependent less than $40,000 Full-time Percent recePublic 4-year Undergraduate Independent less than $20,000 Full-time Percent recePublic 4-year Undergraduate All Full-time Average amoPublic 4-year Undergraduate Dependent less than $40,000 Full-time Average amoPublic 4-year Undergraduate Dependent $40,000-79,999 Full-time Average amoPublic 4-year Undergraduate Dependent $80,000 or more Full-time Average amoPublic 4-year Undergraduate Independent less than $20,000 Full-time Average amo

See notes at end of table. 
B-40 

Table B-9. Domains and outcomes for NPSAS:04 state sample optimization—Continued Institution domain Student level Dependency/income status Attendance status Outcome Public 4-year Undergraduate Independent $20,000-29,999 Full-time Average amo

Public 4-year Undergraduate Independent $30,000 or more Full-time Average amoPublic 4-year Undergraduate All Full-time Average amoPublic 4-year Undergraduate Dependent less than $40,000 Full-time Average amoPublic 4-year Undergraduate Dependent $40,000 or more Full-time Average amoPublic 4-year Undergraduate Independent less than $20,000 Full-time Average amoPublic 4-year Undergraduate Independent $20,000 or more Full-time Average amoPublic 4-year Undergraduate All Full-time Average amoPublic 4-year Undergraduate Dependent less than $40,000 Full-time Average amoPublic 4-year Undergraduate Independent less than $20,000 Full-time Average amoPrivate not-for-profit 4-year Undergraduate All Full-time Percent recePrivate not-for-profit 4-year Undergraduate Dependent less than $40,000 Full-time Percent recePrivate not-for-profit 4-year Undergraduate Dependent $40,000-79,999 Full-time Percent recePrivate not-for-profit 4-year Undergraduate Dependent $80,000 or more Full-time Percent recePrivate not-for-profit 4-year Undergraduate Independent less than $20,000 Full-time Percent recePrivate not-for-profit 4-year Undergraduate Independent $20,000-29,999 Full-time Percent recePrivate not-for-profit 4-year Undergraduate Independent $30,000 or more Full-time Percent recePrivate not-for-profit 4-year Undergraduate All Full-time Percent recePrivate not-for-profit 4-year Undergraduate Dependent less than $40,000 Full-time Percent recePrivate not-for-profit 4-year Undergraduate Dependent $40,000 or more Full-time Percent recePrivate not-for-profit 4-year Undergraduate Independent less than $20,000 Full-time Percent recePrivate not-for-profit 4-year Undergraduate Independent $20,000 or more Full-time Percent recePrivate not-for-profit 4-year Undergraduate All Full-time Percent recePrivate not-for-profit 4-year Undergraduate Dependent less than $40,000 Full-time Percent recePrivate not-for-profit 4-year Undergraduate Independent less than $20,000 Full-time Percent recePrivate not-for-profit 4-year Undergraduate All Full-time Average amoPrivate not-for-profit 4-year Undergraduate Dependent less than $40,000 Full-time Average amoPrivate not-for-profit 4-year Undergraduate Dependent $40,000-79,999 Full-time Average amoPrivate not-for-profit 4-year Undergraduate Dependent $80,000 or more Full-time Average amoPrivate not-for-profit 4-year Undergraduate Independent less than $20,000 Full-time Average amoPrivate not-for-profit 4-year Undergraduate Independent $20,000-29,999 Full-time Average amoPrivate not-for-profit 4-year Undergraduate Independent $30,000 or more Full-time Average amoPrivate not-for-profit 4-year Undergraduate All Full-time Average amoPrivate not-for-profit 4-year Undergraduate Dependent less than $40,000 Full-time Average amoPrivate not-for-profit 4-year Undergraduate Dependent $40,000 or more Full-time Average amo

See notes at end of table. 
B-41 

Table B-9. Domains and outcomes for NPSAS:04 state sample optimization—Continued 

Institution domain Student level Dependency/income status 

Attendance status Outcome 

Private not-for-profit 4-year Undergraduate Independent less than $20,000 Full-time Average amoPrivate not-for-profit 4-year Undergraduate Independent $20,000 or more Full-time Average amoPrivate not-for-profit 4-year Undergraduate All Full-time Average amoPrivate not-for-profit 4-year Undergraduate Dependent less than $40,000 Full-time Average amoPrivate not-for-profit 4-year Undergraduate Independent less than $20,000 Full-time Average amoAll Beginning postsecondary students All All Percent receAll Beginning postsecondary students Dependent less than $40,000 All Percent receAll Beginning postsecondary students Dependent $40,000-79,999 All Percent receAll Beginning postsecondary students Dependent $80,000 or more All Percent receAll Beginning postsecondary students Independent less than $20,000 All Percent receAll Beginning postsecondary students Independent $20,000-29,999 All Percent receAll Beginning postsecondary students Independent $30,000 or more All Percent receAll Beginning postsecondary students All All Percent receAll Beginning postsecondary students Dependent less than $40,000 All Percent receAll Beginning postsecondary students Dependent $40,000 or more All Percent receAll Beginning postsecondary students Independent less than $20,000 All Percent receAll Beginning postsecondary students Independent $20,000 or more All Percent receAll Beginning postsecondary students All All Percent receAll Beginning postsecondary students Dependent less than $40,000 All Percent receAll Beginning postsecondary students Independent less than $20,000 All Percent receAll Beginning postsecondary students All All Average amoAll Beginning postsecondary students Dependent less than $40,000 All Average amoAll Beginning postsecondary students Dependent $40,000-79,999 All Average amoAll Beginning postsecondary students Dependent $80,000 or more All Average amoAll Beginning postsecondary students Independent less than $20,000 All Average amoAll Beginning postsecondary students Independent $20,000-29,999 All Average amoAll Beginning postsecondary students Independent $30,000 or more All Average amoAll Beginning postsecondary students All All Average amoAll Beginning postsecondary students Dependent less than $40,000 All Average amoAll Beginning postsecondary students Dependent $40,000 or more All Average amoAll Beginning postsecondary students Independent less than $20,000 All Average amoAll Beginning postsecondary students Independent $20,000 or more All Average amoAll Beginning postsecondary students All All Average amoAll Beginning postsecondary students Dependent less than $40,000 All Average amo

See notes at end of table. 
B-42 

Table B-9. Domains and outcomes for NPSAS:04 state sample optimization—Continued Institution domain Student level Dependency/income status Attendance status Outcome All Beginning postsecondary students Independent less than $20,000 All Average amo

Public 4-year Beginning postsecondary students All All Percent recePublic 4-year Beginning postsecondary students Dependent less than $40,000 or Independent less than $20,000 All Percent rece

Public 4-year Beginning postsecondary students Other All Percent recePrivate not-for-profit 4-year Beginning postsecondary students All All Percent rece

Private not-for-profit 4-year Beginning postsecondary students Dependent less than $40,000 or Independent less than $20,000 All Percent rece

Private not-for-profit 4-year Beginning postsecondary students Other All Percent recePublic 4-year Beginning postsecondary students All All Percent recePublic 4-year Beginning postsecondary students Dependent less than $40,000 or 

Independent less than $20,000 

All Percent rece

Public 4-year Beginning postsecondary students Other All Percent recePrivate not-for-profit 4-year Beginning postsecondary students All All Percent recePrivate not-for-profit 4-year Beginning postsecondary students Dependent less than $40,000 or 

Independent less than $20,000 

All Percent rece

Private not-for-profit 4-year Beginning postsecondary students Other All Percent recePublic 4-year Beginning postsecondary students All All Percent recePublic 4-year Beginning postsecondary students Dependent less than $40,000 or 

Independent less than $20,000 

All Percent rece

Public 4-year Beginning postsecondary students Other All Percent recePrivate not-for-profit 4-year Beginning postsecondary students All All Percent rece

Private not-for-profit 4-year Beginning postsecondary students Dependent less than $40,000 or 

Independent less than $20,000 

All Percent rece

Private not-for-profit 4-year Beginning postsecondary students Other All Percent rece

Public 4-year Beginning postsecondary students All All Average amoPublic 4-year Beginning postsecondary students Dependent less than $40,000 or 

Independent less than $20,000 

All Average amo

Public 4-year Beginning postsecondary students Other All Average amoPrivate not-for-profit 4-year Beginning postsecondary students All All Average amo

Private not-for-profit 4-year Beginning postsecondary students Dependent less than $40,000 or 

Independent less than $20,000 

All Average amo

Private not-for-profit 4-year Beginning postsecondary students Other All Average amo

Public 4-year Beginning postsecondary students All All Average amoPublic 4-year Beginning postsecondary students Dependent less than $40,000 or 

Independent less than $20,000 

All Average amo

Public 4-year Beginning postsecondary students Other All Average amo

See notes at end of table. 
B-43 

Table B-9. Domains and outcomes for NPSAS:04 state sample optimization—Continued 

Institution domain Student level Dependency/income status 

Attendance status Outcome 

Private not-for-profit 4-year Beginning postsecondary students All All Average amoPrivate not-for-profit 4-year Beginning postsecondary students Dependent less than $40,000 or 

Independent less than $20,000 

All Average amo

Private not-for-profit 4-year Beginning postsecondary students Other All Average amoPublic 4-year Beginning postsecondary students All All Average amoPublic 4-year Beginning postsecondary students Dependent less than $40,000 or 

Independent less than $20,000 

All Average amo

Public 4-year Beginning postsecondary students Other All Average amoPrivate not-for-profit 4-year Beginning postsecondary students All All Average amoPrivate not-for-profit 4-year Beginning postsecondary students Dependent less than $40,000 or 

Independent less than $20,000 

All Average amo

Private not-for-profit 4-year Beginning postsecondary students Other All Average amo

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 2004 National Postsecondary Student Aid Study (NPSAS:04). 
Appendix B. Sampling Details 

B-44 

B.4.3 Cost Model 

The cost model necessary to support the cost/variance optimization process was the 

following: 

∑ ∑∑

= ==

= + +

240

1

240

1

14

1

0

h hk

C C nhCh nhnhkChk

where C represents the total cost of the NSoFaS, C0 represents the “fixed costs” that do not 

depend on the number of sample institutions, students, or faculty members, Ch represents the 

variable cost per participating institution in stratum h, Chk represents the variable cost per 

responding person (student or faculty member) in stratum (h,k), nh represents the number of 

participating institutions selected from stratum h, and nhk represents the number of responding 

persons selected from stratum (h,k). 14

Only the components of variable cost, Ch and Chk, must be estimated to support the 

cost/variance optimization. They were estimated using the spreadsheet developed for the study 

budget. The cost per participating institution was estimated by holding the numbers of 

responding students and faculty members constant while varying the numbers of participating 

institutions. The resulting estimate of the variable cost per participating institution was: 

$1,164.23 for institutions in stratum that are eligible for both NPSAS

 and NSOPF

 $890.84 for institutions in stratum that are eligible only for NPSAS 

h

h

C

h

=

⎧

⎪

⎨

⎪

⎩

Likewise, the variable cost per participant was estimated by holding the number of 

participating institutions constant while varying the number of participating students and faculty 

members. The resulting estimate of the variable cost per participant was: 

$45.28 for students (k=1-8)

$32.91 for faculty members (k=9-14) 

Chk = ⎧

⎨

⎩

B.4.4 Relative Variance Model 

The following model was developed to represent the relative variance of the NSoFaS 

estimate g (e.g., percentage of student receiving any federal student aid) for students or faculty 

belonging to domain d (e.g., all students enrolled in public 2-year institutions): 

2 2

2 2 2

2

gd

2 2

4

1

1 RelVar

1

gd gd

dhk hk md

h k h

dhk hk

h k

h

h h

gd gd

dhk hk

CV

W UWE CV

r

W UWE

r

n N

CV

α n

+

⎡ ⎤ ⎡ ⎤⎡ ⎤ ⎧ ⎫ ⎣ ⎦ ⎡ ⎤ ⎣ ⎦ = − ⎨ ⎬ ⎢ ⎥⎡ ⎤ ⎣ ⎦⎢ ⎥ ⎩ ⎭ ⎢ ⎥ ⎣ ⎦ ⎣ ⎦

⎡ ⎤⎡ ⎤ ⎣ ⎦ ⎡ ⎤ ⎣ ⎦ + ⎢ ⎥ ⎣ ⎦

∑ ∑ ∑

∑∑ ∑

 

14 k = 1-8 represents the eight student strata and k = 9-14 represents the six faculty strata. 
Appendix B. Sampling Details 

B-45 

where the parameters of this model are defined as follows: 

1. h = 1, 2, ..., 240 represents the institution sampling strata; 

2. k = 1, 2, ..., 14 represents the person sampling strata (1-8 for students and 9-14 for 

faculty); 

3. Wdhk = proportion of domain d members who belong to stratum (h,k); 

4. UWEhk = unequal weighting effect within stratum (h,k); 

5. 2 σ1gd = the variance between institution strata; 

6. 2 σ 2gd = the variance between institutions within strata; 

7. 2 σ 3gd = the variance between student or faculty strata; 

8. 2 σ 4gd = the variance between participants within person strata; 

9. 2

4

2

3

2

2

2

1

2 σ Tgd = σ gd +σ gd +σ gd +σ gd = total variance of NSoFaS observations; 

10. ∑ = 2

2

2 2

2 gd σ gd σ Tgd = proportion of variance between institutions within institution 

strata; 

11. ∑ = 2

4

2 2

4 gd σ gd σTgd = proportion of variance between participants with person strata; 

12. 2 / CV y gd Tgd gd = σ = coefficient of variation among NSoFaS observations; 

13. rh = stratum h institution response rate; 

14. CVmd = coefficient of variation of cluster sizes (m) among domain d members; and 

15. αdhk = proportion of stratum (h,k) members who belong to domain d. 

The proportion of domain d members who belong to stratum (h,k), Wdhk, and the 

proportion of stratum (h,k) members who belong to domain d, αdh, were estimated using 

NPSAS:96, NPSAS:2000, and NSOPF:99 data. Using the restricted use data file for each study, 

each sample member was first assigned to the appropriate NSoFaS institution and person strata. 

Then, the analysis domains to which each sample student belonged were also identified (per 

tables B-8 and B-9). The statistical analysis weights from the respective surveys were then used 

to estimate the size of the domain d population within each stratum (h, k) for each of the 22 

NSoFaS national-level institution sampling strata (STRAT22). These domain sizes were used to 

compute the domain prevalences, Wdhk, and αdhk, for the national sample. The national domain 

prevalences were then replicated for the corresponding domains in the 12 states because the 

sample sizes in the prior surveys were not sufficient to estimate the prevalences separately for 

each state. 

The above estimates of domain prevalences did not distinguish between in-state and outof-state NPSAS undergraduate students for two reasons. First, there was no need to distinguish 

them outside the 12 states. Second, the prior NPSAS data did not include a reliable indicator of 

in-state versus out-of-state students. Hence, the 2000 IPEDS Fall Enrollment Survey data were 
Appendix B. Sampling Details 

B-46 

used to estimate the proportion of in-state undergraduate students in each of the three state 

reporting domains in each of the 12 states.15 These proportions were used to partition the 

proportion of stratum (h,k) members who belong to domain d, αdhk, into in-state and out-of-state 

proportions for each state. 

The components of variance – 2

4

2

3

2

2

2

1 σ gd ,σ gd ,σ gd , andσ gd – were computed using the 

method of moments procedures in SAS Proc Nested, which resulted in some negative estimates. 

When a between-stratum variance component was estimated to be negative, the variance 

component for that stratum was considered to be negligible, and the variance components were 

re-computed without including that stratum in the computation. In addition, unusually small and 

extremely large person-level components of variance were truncated so that the person-level 

component of variance was always between 40 percent and 95 percent of the total variance. 

Unequal weighting effects, UWEhk, were computed based on the NPSAS:2000 statistical 

analysis weights. However, their values were highly variable, and it was decided that they were 

not reliable predictions of the unequal weighting effects to be expected with the NSoFaS:04 

design. Hence, all the UWEs were set to 1.05. 

The coefficient of variation, CVmd, of cluster sizes (numbers of students and faculty per 

institution) was computed for the members of each analysis domain d using the NPSAS:96 and 

NPSAS:2000 data and the domains in tables B-8 and B-9. 

B.4.5 Optimum Sample Allocation 

The technique developed by Chromy (1987) was used to determine the sample allocation 

to the 240 institution strata and 14 person strata that satisfied the precision constraints and other 

study objectives discussed in section B.4.1 at minimum cost using the cost model and relative 

variance model discussed in sections B.4.3 and B.4.4, respectively. 

The results of this initial sample optimization exercise were used as the basis for the 

initial sample of about 1,600 institutions, as discussed in section B.2. All institutions with a 

Carnegie classification as public doctoral or private not-for-profit doctoral institutions were 

selected with certainty for NSoFaS because they have always been certainty strata for NSOPF. 

Within each state stratum, institutions belong to the NSOPF certainty strata first were selected 

with certainty. The computed allocations to the 240 institution strata were summarized at the 

level of the 58 strata (STRAT58), and the remaining institutions then were selected with 

probabilities proportional to size, after selecting with certainty any institutions for which the 

expected frequency of selection exceeded unity (1.00), as discussed in section B.2. As also 

discussed in section B.2, about 30 institutions were added to the sample during a freshening 

process. 

After selecting the sample institutions, further refinements were made to the manner in 

which the optimization program determined which binding constraints could be relaxed. As 

precision constraints were iteratively relaxed during the optimization process, the student sample 

size distributions were constrained to achieve approximately the desired institution- and studentlevel marginal distributions. Hence, the sample optimization was re-run conditional on the 

sample of institutions that had already been selected to determine the optimum allocation of the 

 

15 The state of residence was used for the first-time, full-time degree/certificate-seeking students as the indicator of 

in-state enrollees. 
Appendix B. Sampling Details 

B-47 

student sample sizes to these institutions. The results of this conditional optimization were used 

to set the final student sample rates, as discussed in section 3. 

B.5 Appendix B References 

Chromy, J.R. (1979). Sequential Sample Selection Methods. Proceedings of the American 

Statistical Association Section on Survey Research Methods of the American Statistical 

Association, 401–406. 

Chromy, J.R. (1981). Variance Estimators for a Sequential Sample Selection Procedure. In. D. 

Krewski, R. Platek, and J.N.K. Rao (Eds.), Current Top IMS in Survey Sampling (pp. 329-

347). New York: Academic Press. 

Chromy, J.R. (1987). Design Optimization with Multiple Objectives. Proceedings of the 

American Statistical Association Section on Social Statistics, 194–199. 

Williams, R.L., and Chromy, J.R. (1980). SAS Sample Selection MACROs. Proceedings of the 

Fifth Annual SAS Users Group International Conference, 392–396. 
Appendix B. Sampling Details 

B-48 
C-1 

Appendix C 

Data Collection Notification Materials 

Institution Contacting Letters and Inserts 

Chief Administrator Letter ........................................................................................................C-5 

Institution Coordinator Early Contacting Letter .......................................................................C-7 

Institution Coordinator Binder Letter........................................................................................C-9 

Institution Refusal Conversion Letter .....................................................................................C-11 

Coordinator Response Form....................................................................................................C-13 

Student Enrollment List Specifications...................................................................................C-20 

Pamphlets 

NSoFaS Pamphlet....................................................................................................................C-31 

NSOPF Pamphlet.....................................................................................................................C-35 

NPSAS Pamphlet.....................................................................................................................C-37 

Student Contacting Letters and E-Mail 

Initial Letter ............................................................................................................................C-41 

Initial Letter (Spanish Version) ..............................................................................................C-42 

Web Insert...............................................................................................................................C-43 

Initial E-mail ...........................................................................................................................C-44 

Second E-mail.........................................................................................................................C-45 

Third E-mail............................................................................................................................C-46 

Nonresponse Letter .................................................................................................................C-47 

Nonresponse Letter (Spanish Version)...................................................................................C-48 

Nonresponse E-mail................................................................................................................C-49 

Refusal Letter..........................................................................................................................C-50 

Refusal Letter (Spanish Version)............................................................................................C-51 

Refusal E-mail ........................................................................................................................C-52 

Will Complete Web E-mail Document...................................................................................C-53 

Postcard...................................................................................................................................C-54 

Final Letter..............................................................................................................................C-55 

Final Letter (Spanish Version)................................................................................................C-56 

Final E-mail ............................................................................................................................C-57 

Incentive Letter .......................................................................................................................C-58 

Appendix C. Data Collection Notification Materials 

C-3 

Institution Contacting Letters and Inserts 

Appendix C. Data Collection Notification Materials 

C-5 

NSoFaS 

Endorsed by 

American Association for 

Higher Education 

American Association of 

Collegiate Registrars and 

Admissions Officers 

American Association of 

Community Colleges 

American Association of 

State Colleges and 

Universities 

American Association of 

University Professors 

American Council on 

Education 

American Federation of 

Teachers 

Association for Institutional 

Research 

Association of American 

Colleges and Universities 

Association of Catholic 

Colleges and Universities 

Career College Association 

The Carnegie Foundation for 

the Advancement of Teaching 

College and University 

Professional Association for 

Human Resources 

The College Board 

The College Fund/UNCF 

Council of Graduate Schools 

The Council of Independent 

Colleges 

Hispanic Association of 

Colleges and Universities 

National Accrediting 

Commission of Cosmetology 

Arts and Sciences 

National Association of 

College and University 

Business Officers 

National Association for 

Equal Opportunity in Higher 

Education 

National Association of 

Independent Colleges and 

Universities 

National Association of State 

Universities and 

Land-Grant Colleges 

National Association of 

Student Financial Aid 

Administrators 

National Education 

Association

CHIEF ADMINISTRATOR LETTER 

<DATE>

<CHIEF ADMIN NAME> 

<ADDR 1> 

<ADDR 2> 

<CITY STATE ZIP> 

Your IPEDS UNITID: 

Your PASSWORD: 

Dear <NAME>: 

<INSTITUTION NAME> has been selected to participate in the 2004 National Study 

of Faculty and Students. The Higher Education Act (Sec. 131 (d), as amended in 1998) 

authorizes the U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics 

(NCES) to periodically gather information from students, faculty, and instructional 

staff on two pivotal areas of national concern: 

• How do students and their families finance education after high school? 

• Who teaches in our colleges and universities, and how do they conduct 

their work? 

 

In response to the continuing need for these data, information was collected from 

students in 1987, 1990, 1993, 1996, and 2000 as part of the National Postsecondary 

Student Aid Study (NPSAS). Data on full- and part-time faculty and instructional staff 

were collected for the National Study of Postsecondary Faculty (NSOPF) in 1988, 

1993, and 1999. NCES has contracted with RTI International (RTI) to conduct the next 

data collection cycle for both studies under the 2004 National Study of Faculty and 

Students (NSoFaS:04) in order to minimize the reporting burden to postsecondary 

institutions. Additional information about our plans for NSoFaS:04 is provided in the 

enclosed materials, which include an NSoFaS brochure and copies of the brochures 

that participating students or faculty will receive. 

Your institution’s participation is crucial to the success of NSoFaS:04. I am writing to 

request that you appoint an NSoFaS coordinator to oversee the preparation of 

lists of faculty/instructional staff and students at your institution. The NSoFaS 

coordinator will also complete a brief questionnaire on the Internet about your 

institution’s policies and procedures related to faculty and instructional staff. We will 

use the lists prepared by your institution to draw samples of faculty/instructional staff 

and students for participation in the 2004 NSOPF and NPSAS data collection cycles, 

respectively. Sampled faculty and students will be asked to complete a questionnaire 

on the Internet. 
Appendix C. Data Collection Notification Materials 

C-6 

The individual whom you designate as coordinator should be someone (such as the Director of 

Institutional Research) who is familiar with data and information sources at your institution. If you 

require assistance with selecting an appropriate coordinator, you may call the NSoFaS Help Desk at 1–

866–NSOFAS4 (1–866–676–3274, toll-free). 

We are aware that you and the staff at your institution are confronted with many competing demands for 

your time. Therefore, we are providing you—and the coordinator you designate—with this advance 

notice of the study to allow you adequate time to plan for this data collection effort and, if needed, to 

contact us for more information prior to the start of data collection in the fall 2003/2004 term. Once 

designated, an RTI representative will contact your coordinator to discuss the study timeline and 

procedures required for your institution. Your coordinator will also be provided with a complete summary 

of our data request for the NPSAS and NSOPF components of NSoFaS. 

All responses that relate to or describe identifiable characteristics of individuals may be used only for 

statistical purposes and may not be disclosed, or used, in identifiable form for any other purpose, unless 

otherwise compelled by law. The enclosed pamphlets detail our data collection procedures and provide a 

full description of the laws and procedures safeguarding the confidentiality of questionnaire responses, 

contact information, and other data. Additional information, including reports based on data from 

previous NSOPF and NPSAS studies, is available on the NSoFaS web site: 

https://surveys.nces.ed.gov/nsofas2004

If you have any questions about the study or procedures involved, please contact the RTI Project 

Coordinator, Brian Kuhr, at 1–866–676–3274 or via e-mail at nsofas2004@rti.org. You may also direct 

questions to NCES by contacting James Griffith at 1–202–502–7387 (e-mail address: 

James.Griffith@ed.gov) or Linda Zimbler at 1–202–502–7481 (e-mail address: Linda.Zimbler@ed.gov). 

At your earliest convenience, please complete the NSoFaS Designate a Coordinator form online at the 

NSoFaS web site, using the IPEDS UNITID and password printed on the first page of this letter. 

We look forward to your participation in this important study. Thank you for your cooperation and 

prompt completion of the NSoFaS Designate a Coordinator form. 

 

Sincerely, 

C. Dennis Carroll, Ph.D. 

Associate Commissioner 

Postsecondary Studies Division 

Enclosures The NSoFaS Designate a Coordinator form may be completed online at 

 https://surveys.nces.ed.gov/nsofas2004

To access the online form, enter the user name (which is your IPEDS 

UNITID) and password printed on the first page of this letter.
Appendix C. Data Collection Notification Materials 

C-7 

NSoFaS 

Endorsed by 

American Association for 

Higher Education 

American Association of 

Collegiate Registrars and 

Admissions Officers 

American Association of 

Community Colleges 

American Association of 

State Colleges and 

Universities 

American Association of 

University Professors 

American Council on 

Education 

American Federation of 

Teachers 

Association for Institutional 

Research 

Association of American 

Colleges and Universities 

Association of Catholic 

Colleges and Universities 

Career College Association 

The Carnegie Foundation for 

the Advancement of Teaching 

College and University 

Professional Association for 

Human Resources 

The College Board 

The College Fund/UNCF 

Council of Graduate Schools 

The Council of Independent 

Colleges 

Hispanic Association of 

Colleges and Universities 

National Accrediting 

Commission of Cosmetology 

Arts and Sciences 

National Association of 

College and University 

Business Officers 

National Association for 

Equal Opportunity in Higher 

Education 

National Association of 

Independent Colleges and 

Universities 

National Association of State 

Universities and 

Land-Grant Colleges 

National Association of 

Student Financial Aid 

Administrators 

National Education 

Association

INSTITUTION COORDINATOR EARLY CONTACTING LETTER 

<DATE> 

<COORD NAME> 

<ADDR 1> 

<ADDR 2> 

<CITY STATE ZIP> 

Your IPEDS UNITID: 

Your PASSWORD: 

Dear <NAME> 

<INSTITUTION NAME> has been selected to participate in the 2004 National Study of Faculty 

and Students. The Higher Education Act (Sec. 131 (d), as amended in 1998) authorizes the U.S. 

Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) to periodically gather 

information from students, faculty, and instructional staff on two pivotal areas of national 

concern: 

• How do students and their families finance education beyond high school? 

• Who teaches in our colleges and universities, and how do they conduct their work? 

In response to the continuing need for these data, information was collected from students in 

1987, 1990, 1993, 1996, and 2000 as part of the National Postsecondary Student Aid Study 

(NPSAS). Data on full- and part-time faculty and instructional staff were collected for the 

National Study of Postsecondary Faculty (NSOPF) in 1988, 1993, and 1999. NCES has 

contracted with RTI International (RTI) to conduct the next data collection cycle for both studies 

under the 2004 National Study of Faculty and Students (NSoFaS:04) in order to minimize the 

reporting burden to postsecondary institutions. Additional information about our plans for 

NSoFaS:04 is provided in the enclosed materials, which include an NSoFaS brochure and copies 

of the brochures that participating students or faculty will receive. 

The chief administrative officer of your institution has selected you as your institution’s 

coordinator for NSoFaS:04. The enclosed materials detail your role and the role of your 

institution in this study and contain a timetable of major project activities. You will have four 

primary responsibilities for NSoFaS:04: 

• Complete the Coordinator Response Form online at the NSoFaS web site, within the 

next few weeks, using the user name and password printed at the top of this letter. We 

will schedule data collection for your institution based on the information you provide. 

A facsimile of the Coordinator Response Form is included in the attached folder. 

• Oversee the preparation of two data files: (1) a list of faculty and instructional staff and 

(2) an enrollment list of students at your institution. These data files will be used to draw 

samples of faculty/instructional staff and students for participation in NSoFaS:04. 

Sampled faculty and students will be asked to complete a questionnaire on the Internet. 
Appendix C. Data Collection Notification Materials 

C-8 

• Complete a separate web-based program requiring institution record information for a sample of 

students. 

NSoFaS:04 will begin in September 2003. At that time, complete instructions for your institution’s 

participation will be sent directly to you. In the meantime, please review the enclosed materials at your 

earliest convenience. 

We are aware that you and other staff at your institution are confronted with many competing demands 

for your time. We hope that giving you this advance notice of the study will provide you with ample time 

to plan for your school’s participation in NSoFaS:04. A project representative will call you in the next 

few days to ensure that you have received this notification and to answer any questions that you may 

have. You may also call the NSoFaS Help Desk directly at 1–866–NSOFAS4 (1–866–676–3274). 

All responses that relate to or describe identifiable characteristics of individuals may be used only for 

statistical purposes and may not be disclosed, or used, in identifiable form for any other purpose, unless 

otherwise compelled by law. The enclosed materials detail our data collection procedures and provide a 

detailed description of the laws and procedures safeguarding the confidentiality of questionnaire 

responses, contact information, and demographic data. Additional information, including reports based on 

data from previous NSOPF and NPSAS studies, is available on the NSoFaS web site: 

https://surveys.nces.ed.gov/nsofas2004

If you have questions about the study or procedures, please contact the RTI Project Coordinator, Brian 

Kuhr, at 1–866–676–3274 or via e-mail at nsofas2004@rti.org. You may also direct questions to NCES 

by contacting James Griffith at 1–202–502–7387 (e-mail address: James.Griffith@ed.gov) or Linda 

Zimbler at 1–202–502–7481 (e-mail address: Linda.Zimbler@ed.gov). 

At your earliest convenience, please complete Coordinator Response Form online at the NSoFaS web 

site, using the IPEDS UNITID and password printed on the first page of this letter. 

We look forward to your participation in this important study. 

Thank you for your cooperation. 

Sincerely,

C. Dennis Carroll, Ph.D. 

Associate Commissioner 

Postsecondary Studies Division 

Enclosures 

The NSoFaS Coordinator Response Form may be completed 

online at 

https://surveys.nces.ed.gov/nsofas2004

To access the online form, enter the IPEDS UNITID and 

password printed on the first page of this letter. 
Appendix C. Data Collection Notification Materials 

C-9 

NSoFaS 

Endorsed by 

American Association for Higher 

Education 

American Association of 

Collegiate Registrars and 

Admissions Officers 

American Association of 

Community Colleges 

American Association of State 

Colleges and Universities 

American Association of University 

Professors 

American Council on Education 

American Federation of Teachers 

Association for Institutional 

Research 

Association of American Colleges 

and Universities 

Association of Catholic Colleges and 

Universities 

Career College Association 

The Carnegie Foundation for the 

Advancement of Teaching 

College and University Professional 

Association for Human Resources 

The College Board 

The College Fund/UNCF 

Council of Graduate Schools 

The Council of Independent Colleges 

Hispanic Association of Colleges and 

Universities 

National Accrediting Commission of 

Cosmetology 

Arts and Sciences 

National Association of College and 

University Business Officers 

National Association for Equal 

Opportunity in Higher Education 

National Association of Independent 

Colleges and Universities 

National Association of State 

Universities and 

Land-Grant Colleges 

National Association of Student 

Financial Aid Administrators 

National Education Association

INSTITUTION COORDINATOR BINDER LETTER 

<DATE> 

<COORD NAME> 

<ADDR 1> 

<ADDR 2> 

<CITY STATE ZIP> 

Your IPEDS UNITID: 

Your PASSWORD: 

Dear <NAME>: 

As the person designated to be the Institution Coordinator for the 2004 National Study of Faculty and 

Students (NSoFaS:04) at your institution, you are receiving detailed instructions (see enclosed binder) 

to ensure your full participation in both the study’s faculty and student components. We look forward 

to working with you on this important research effort, and are available to answer any questions you 

may have on how to carry out the coordination activities requested of you. 

As described in materials provided during the early notification period of the study this past 

spring/summer, NSoFaS:04 is being conducted for the U.S. Department of Education’s National 

Center for Education Statistics (NCES) by RTI International (RTI). This ongoing study, designed to 

collect data from nationally representative samples of postsecondary students and faculty and 

instruction staff, provides vital information on changes over time in two pivotal areas of national 

concern: 

• How students and their families finance education after high school, and 

• Who teaches in our colleges and universities and how they conduct their work. 

In response to the continuing need for the data provided by NSoFaS, Congress has authorized NCES 

to collect these data periodically. Data on full- and part-time faculty and instructional staff were 

collected through the faculty component—the National Study of Postsecondary Faculty (NSOPF)–in 

1988, 1993, and 1999. Information on students and student financial aid was previously collected in 

1987, 1990, 1993, 1996, and 2000 as part of the student component—the National Postsecondary 

Student Aid Study (NPSAS). 

Your institution has been sampled for participation in both the faculty and student components 

of NSoFaS:04. As the Institution Coordinator, you are asked to oversee the completion of the 

following activities for NSoFaS:04: 

• Completion of the Coordinator Response Form (CRF) online at the NSoFaS web site, 

https://surveys.nces.ed.gov/nsofas2004/, using the IPEDS UNITID and password 

printed at the top of this letter. If you have already completed this document, a copy of the 

form may be printed from the web site after log in. A data collection timeline for your 

institution has been scheduled based on the information you provided. If you have not 

completed the CRF online, please do so at your earliest convenience. For reference, a 

facsimile of the CRF is included in the enclosed binder.
Appendix C. Data Collection Notification Materials 

C-10 

• Preparation of a complete data file listing all full- and part-time faculty, adjunct faculty, and instructional 

staff (including available contact and demographic information). The file should be current as of November 1, 

2003, or the date at your institution when faculty rosters for the fall academic term are complete. [FOR INST THAT 

COMPLETED THE CRF AND HAVE INDICATED DATE OTHER THAN DEC 6]: <Information provided on 

the CRF indicates that you will send your faculty list to RTI on <DATE>[FOR NULL/DEC 6: The NSoFaS help 

desk will call to confirm the date at which we can expect your institution’s list. It is important that we receive your 

institution’s list prior to the end of the fall term, if possible.] 

• Completion of the Institution Questionnaire online at the NSoFaS web site. The questionnaire may be completed 

in multiple sessions; however, Question 1 (which asks for counts of full- and part-time faculty and instructional 

staff at your institution) should be answered at the time you send your list of faculty. A facsimile of the 

questionnaire is included in your binder. Please complete this questionnaire online by December 5, 2003, or by the 

date you submit your faculty list noted above if different. 

• Preparation of a complete data file listing all students enrolled at your institution at any time between July 1, 

2003, and April 30, 2004. Please refer to the enclosed NPSAS materials for a complete set of student eligibility 

criteria. Your list of students enrolled should be transmitted to RTI as early as possible. This data file will be used to 

draw a sample of students for participation in NPSAS. Sampled students will be asked to complete a questionnaire 

on our secured web site over the Internet. It is critical that we allow students ample time to respond before the end 

of the academic year. [FOR INST THAT COMPLETED A CRF: <Information provided on the CRF indicates that 

you will send the student list to RTI on <DATE>. [ NO CRF/ UNKNOWN AFTER DATE: The NSoFaS help desk 

will call to confirm the date at which we can expect your institution’s list.] 

• Completion of a separate web-based computer-assisted data entry (webCADE) program that requires 

institution record information for those students who are sampled. This includes specific information on their 

enrollment status, financial assistance, and demographic characteristics. More details can be found in the enclosed 

binder. 

All responses that relate to or describe identifiable characteristics of individuals may be used only for statistical purposes 

and may not be disclosed or used, in identifiable form, for any other purpose, unless otherwise compelled by law. The 

enclosed materials detail our data collection procedures and provide a detailed description of the laws and procedures 

safeguarding the confidentiality of individual questionnaire responses, contact information, and demographic data. 

Additional sources of information, including reports based on data from previous NSOPF and NPSAS studies, are 

available on the NSoFaS web site: https://surveys.nces.ed.gov/nsofas2004/. 

If you have questions about the study purposes or procedures, please contact either of us or Brian Kuhr, Project 

Coordinator, at 1–866–NSOFAS4 (1–866–676–3274) or via e-mail at nsofas2004@rti.org. You may also direct 

questions to NCES by contacting either James Griffith at 1–202–502–7387 (e-mail address: James.Griffith@ed.gov) or 

Linda Zimbler at 1–202–502–7481 (e-mail address: Linda.Zimbler@ed.gov). 

We look forward to your participation in this important study. Thank you for your cooperation. 

Sincerely,

 

John Riccobono, Ph.D. Margaret Cahalan, Ph.D. 

NPSAS Project Director NSOPF Project Director 

Enclosures 

Your institution’s response to the National Study of Faculty and Students may be completed online at 

https://surveys.nces.ed.gov/nsofas2004/

To upload lists or other data collection forms, go to the login tab found on the home/login page. You 

will be prompted to enter the IPEDS UNITID and password printed on the first page of this letter. 
Appendix C. Data Collection Notification Materials 

C-11 

NSoFaS 

Endorsed by 

American Association for 

Higher Education 

American Association of 

Collegiate Registrars and 

Admissions Officers 

American Association of 

Community Colleges 

American Association of 

State Colleges and 

Universities 

American Association of 

University Professors 

American Council on 

Education 

American Federation of 

Teachers 

Association for Institutional 

Research 

Association of American 

Colleges and Universities 

Association of Catholic 

Colleges and Universities 

Career College Association 

The Carnegie Foundation for 

the Advancement of Teaching 

College and University 

Professional Association for 

Human Resources 

The College Board 

The College Fund/UNCF 

Council of Graduate Schools 

The Council of Independent 

Colleges 

Hispanic Association of 

Colleges and Universities 

National Accrediting 

Commission of Cosmetology 

Arts and Sciences 

National Association of 

College and University 

Business Officers 

National Association for 

Equal Opportunity in Higher 

Education 

National Association of 

Independent Colleges and 

Universities 

National Association of State 

Universities and 

Land-Grant Colleges 

National Association of 

Student Financial Aid 

Administrators 

National Education 

Association

INSTITUTION REFUSAL CONVERSION LETTER 

<DATE> 

<NAME> 

<ADDR 1> 

<ADDR 2> 

<CITY STATE ZIP> 

Your IPEDS UNITID: 

Your PASSWORD: 

Dear <NAME>: 

I am writing to you again to urge your participation in the 2004 National Study of Faculty 

and Students (NSoFaS:04). Because your participation is so important to the success of 

NSoFaS:04, I have authorized assistance to your institution to facilitate its timely 

participation in NSoFaS:04. 

The Higher Education Act (Sec. 131 (d)), as amended by the United States Congress in 

1998, provides the U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education 

Statistics (NCES) with the authority and a mandate to periodically gather data on the 

condition of postsecondary education in the United States. NSoFaS:04 plays an essential 

role in fulfilling this mandate. 

NSoFaS:04 consists of two very important studies conducted by NCES: the 2004 

National Study of Postsecondary Faculty (NSOPF:04) and the 2004 National 

Postsecondary Student Aid Study (NPSAS:04). The nationally representative sample for 

the two studies is selected from among all Title IV eligible institutions. To ensure 

representation of the entire range of postsecondary institutions in the nation, we count on 

cooperation from each of the sampled institutions. We are grateful for the outstanding 

cooperation that we have received in previous cycles of these studies. We urgently 

request your institution’s participation in NSoFaS:04. 

We are well aware that, especially under difficult economic conditions, postsecondary 

institutions have limited staff and resources to devote to participating in research studies, 

regardless of their importance. That is why we have instructed RTI International, NCES’ 

contractor for NSoFaS:04, to provide your institution with the assistance necessary to 

accomplish the following: 

• Provide a list of faculty and instructional staff employed by your institution as of 

November 1, 2003; 

• Complete a brief Institution Questionnaire concerning your institution’s policies 

and procedures regarding faculty; 

• Provide a list of postsecondary students enrolled at your institution between July 

1, 2003 and April 30, 2004; and 

• Complete a student record abstraction form for a small number of students 

selected from the enrollment list. 

To assist your institution in participating in the study, NCES has authorized RTI 

International to provide compensation for the staff and resources required by your 

institution to compile lists of faculty and students and associated documentation.
Appendix C. Data Collection Notification Materials 

C-12 

Moreover, if necessary, RTI will also arrange for one of its specially-trained staff to visit your institution 

and perform the record abstractions for sampled students. 

Data collection for NSoFaS:04 is both authorized and protected by federal confidentiality laws, including 

the Family Education Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA). The small number of faculty and students 

sampled from the lists provided by your institution will be asked to participate in NSoFaS:04 by 

completing a questionnaire online or by telephone in a confidential and secure manner. We encourage 

you to review the additional information available about NSoFaS:04 at the following web site: 

https://surveys.nces.ed.gov/nsofas2004/

Both the Institution Questionnaire and secure uploads for faculty and student lists may be accessed at this 

site. The user name (IPEDS UNITID) and password required to access the forms and procedures for your 

institution are printed at the top of this letter. 

Over the course of the next 2 weeks, a representative from RTI will be contacting you to discuss your needs 

and the best way to facilitate your institution’s participation in NSoFaS:04. You may also contact Brian 

Kuhr, the Project Coordinator at 1-866-676-3274 or by e-mail at nsofas2004@rti.org to confirm your 

participation in the study and to request any necessary assistance in providing the data requested. You may 

direct questions to NCES by contacting James Griffith at 1-202-502-7387 (e-mail address: 

James.Griffith@ed.gov) or Linda Zimbler at 1-202-502-7481 (e-mail address: Linda.Zimbler@ed.gov). 

Once again, thank you for your consideration. 

Sincerely, 

C. Dennis Carroll, Ph.D. 

Associate Commissioner 

Postsecondary Education Division 

The NSoFaS forms may be completed online at 

 https://surveys.nces.ed.gov/nsofas2004/

To access the online form, enter the user name (which is your IPEDS 

UNITID) and password printed on the first page of this letter.
Appendix C. Data Collection Notification Materials 

C-13 

The 2004 National Study of Faculty and Students

(NSoFaS:04)

COORDINATOR RESPONSE FORM (CRF) 

FACSIMILE 

If you completed the CRF in spring/summer 2003, a report can be viewed and/or printed from the web 

site with your responses—specifically, the due dates established for submitting your list of faculty and 

instructional staff and/or list of students enrolled. 

Follow the steps below to connect to the study’s secure web site.

Connect browser to: 

https://surveys.nces.ed.gov/nsofas2004/ 

At the Home/Login page: 

 Enter your unique IPEDS UNITID and password.1

 Select the option View Coordinator Response Form Report. (Click on link.) 

If you did not complete the form in spring/summer 2003, please review this facsimile and complete 

the CRF online as soon as possible upon receipt of this binder. 

Follow the steps below to connect to the study’s secure web site.

Connect browser to: 

https://surveys.nces.ed.gov/nsofas2004/ 

 At the Home/Login page:

 Enter your unique IPEDS UNITID and password.1

 Select the option Coordinator Response Form. (Click on button.) 

If you are unable to complete the CRF online, you may complete the form by telephone. Please 

call the 2004 National Study of Faculty and Students (NSoFaS:04) Help Desk at 1–866–NSOFAS4 

(1–866–676–3274). Staff members are available Monday through Friday, from 9 a.m. to 7 p.m. (Eastern 

Time). You will be able to immediately complete the information with a staff member or schedule an 

appointment to complete it at a more convenient time. 

 

 

1

 Your unique and secure Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System (IPEDS) UNITID and password are printed on the letter 

accompanying this material or they may be obtained by contacting the Help Desk at 1–866–NSOFAS4 (1–866–676–3274).
Appendix C. Data Collection Notification Materials 

C-14 

The 2004 National Study of Faculty and Students

(NSoFaS:04)

Coordinator Response Form 

Your response to these questions will allow RTI to customize some of the systems on the NSoFaS web 

site with characteristics unique to your institution. This will make it easier for you and your staff to move 

through the various study components. 

1. Institutions use different methods to account for a student’s credits—that is, to track 

completion of required curricula, courses, or programs offered at that institution. 

How are course/programs measured at your institution?

Clock hours 

Credit hours 

Both 

2. Institutions use a variety of structures to quantify the hours that are taken by a student during a 

calendar year or school year. 

What calendar system is used at your institution? 

Semesters 

Quarters 

Trimesters 

4-1-4 

Differs by program 

Continuous/Open Enrollment 

No standard terms 
Appendix C. Data Collection Notification Materials 

C-15 

The 2004 National Study of Faculty and Students

(NSoFaS:04)

3. Identify the names of each of the terms/enrollment periods (sometimes referred to as payment 

periods) that a student may enroll in between July 1, 2003, and June 30, 2004. Please include all 

terms, even those that may apply to special types of students (e.g., medical or MBA students). 

NOTE: SOME PORTION OF THE TERM MUST OCCUR BETWEEN JULY 1, 2003, AND JUNE 30, 2004, BUT MAY START 

PRIOR TO JULY 1 OR END AFTER JUNE 30. 

After all the terms are added, please press the Continue button. 

Add Term 

Please add a term. 

Please enter the name of the term and the associated start and end dates. 

Term 

Name: 

Start 

date: 

Month Day Year 

January 1 2003

End 

date: 

January 1 2003

 

THIS IS AN EXAMPLE OF HOW QUESTION 3 MAY BE COMPLETED. 

3. Identify the names of each of the terms/enrollment periods (sometimes referred to as payment 

periods) that a student may enroll in between July 1, 2003, and June 30, 2004. Please include all 

terms, even those that may apply to special types of students (e.g., medical or MBA students). 

NOTE: SOME PORTION OF THE TERM MUST OCCUR BETWEEN JULY 1, 2003, AND JUNE 30, 2004, BUT MAY START 

PRIOR TO JULY 1 OR END AFTER JUNE 30. 

After all the terms are added, please press the Continue button. 

Delete? Term Name Term start date Term end date 

First Summer 6/6/2003 7/15/2003 

Second Summer 7/21/2003 8/8/2003 

Fall 2003 8/28/2003 12/6/2003 

Spring 2004 2/10/2004 5/5/2004 

First Summer 2004 5/6/2004 6/15/2004 

Add Term Delete selected Terms
Appendix C. Data Collection Notification Materials 

C-16 

The 2004 National Study of Faculty and Students

(NSoFaS:04)

4. Identify institution grants and scholarships. Include only those institutional grants and 

scholarships paid out of institutional revenue, including restricted funds that originate from 

private donations or endowments. Do not include grants or scholarships funded by state or 

federal sources, even if the award decisions are made by institution staff. State grant program 

funds that are allocated to and awarded by your institution (instead of a centralized state grant 

system that makes awards to students) should not be included as institutional aid. 

Please list up to 12 names of the most prevalent institution grants and scholarships awarded and 

indicate whether “need,” “merit,” or “both” is considered when making these awards. 

Check here if your institution does not award institution grants or scholarships. Then click on the Continue 

button below. 

Add Aw ard 

 

THIS IS AN EXAMPLE OF HOW QUESTION 4 MAY BE COMPLETED. 

4. Identify institution grants and scholarships. Include only those institutional grants and 

scholarships paid out of institutional revenue, including restricted funds that originate from 

private donations or endowments. Do not include grants or scholarships funded by state or 

federal sources, even if the award decisions are made by institution staff. State grant program 

funds that are allocated to and awarded by your institution (instead of a centralized state grant 

system that makes awards to students) should not be included as institutional aid. 

Please list up to 12 names of the most prevalent institution grants and scholarships awarded and 

indicate whether “need,” “merit,” or “both” is considered when making these awards. 

Delete? Name of Award Basis of Award Decision 

Future Teachers of North Carolina Scholarship BOTH 

Add Aw ard Delete selected Aw ards
Appendix C. Data Collection Notification Materials 

C-17 

The 2004 National Study of Faculty and Students

(NSoFaS:04)

 

NPSAS (STUDENT COMPONENT ONLY) INSTITUTIONS 

WILL AUTOMATICALLY SKIP THIS QUESTION WHEN FORM IS COMPLETED ON 

WEB. 

5. We would like to receive a list of faculty and 

instructional staff employed at your institution as of 

November 1, 2003. The table to the right depicts the 

data elements to be included on the list for each faculty 

and instructional staff member. We'd like to receive the 

list of faculty and instructional staff no later than 

December 5, 2003. 

When will you be able to provide the list of faculty and 

instructional staff? 

On or before December 5, 2003 

After December 5, 2003. (A project staff member 

will call to establish a specific date.) 

 

 

Faculty and Instructional Staff Data Elements 

1. First Name 

2. Middle Initial 

3. Last Name 

4. Name Suffix (e.g., Jr., Sr., III, etc.) 

5. Employee ID 

6. Race/Ethnicity 

7. Gender 

8. Employment Status 

9. Academic Field 

10. Campus Address 1 

11. Campus Address 2 

12. Campus City 

13. Campus State 

14. Campus Zip Code 

15. Campus Telephone Number 

16. Campus e-mail 

17. Home Address 1 

18. Home Address 2 

19. Home City 

20. Home State 

21. Home Zip Code 

22. Home Telephone Number 

23. Home e-mail 
Appendix C. Data Collection Notification Materials 

C-18 

The 2004 National Study of Faculty and Students

(NSoFaS:04)

 

THESE DATES ARE AN EXAMPLE OF HOW THE DATE FILLS IN BASED ON YOUR 

INSTITUTION’S RESPONSE TO QUESTION 4 

( IF ANY TERMS WERE ENTERED) 

6. Please provide a list of all students enrolled at your 

institution. The table to the right depicts the data 

elements to be included on the list for each student. 

We’d like to receive the enrollment list as soon as 

possible. Based on the dates you provided for terms 

during the 2003-04 academic year, February 24, 2004, is 

2 weeks after the beginning of the "Spring 2004" term, 

which is the last term with a start date that is on or 

before April 30, 2004. 

When will you be able to provide the list of all students 

enrolled? 

On or before February 24, 2004 

After February 24, 2004. (A project staff member 

will call to establish a specific date.) 

 

 

Student Data Element 

1. First Name 

2. Middle Initial 

3. Last Name 

4. Name Suffix (e.g., Jr., Sr., III, etc.) 

5. Student ID 

6. Social Security Number 

7. Educational Level 

8. First Time Beginner 

9. Local Address 1 

10. Local Address 2 

11. Local City 

12. Local State 

13. Local ZIP Code 

14. Local Telephone Number 

15. Campus e-mail 

16. Permanent Address 1 

17. Permanent Address 2 

18. Permanent City 

19. Permanent State 

20. Permanent ZIP Code 

21. Permanent Telephone Number 

22. Permanent e-mail 
Appendix C. Data Collection Notification Materials 

C-19 

The 2004 National Study of Faculty and Students

(NSoFaS:04)

7. When RTI receives your list of students enrolled, a random sample will be selected. During the final stage of the 

study, you will enter specific data from sampled students’ records pertaining to enrollment and financial aid status. 

NPSAS webCADE (a computer-assisted data entry Internet application) is the application developed to assist in your 

completing this stage. It will be available on the study web site once the sample has been selected. You will enter 

student data on this site using either Netscape 4.8 or higher or MS Internet Explorer 5.0 or higher with the 

following: 

· 128-bit encryption. You may need to adjust your browser settings or download an update to activate 128-bit 

encryption. 

· JavaScript enabled. JavaScript is the programming language of the interactive sections of our web site and must 

be enabled for many pages to work properly. 

Will it be possible for you to use this software to provide the requested data? 

Yes 

No 

Would like to discuss options with staff 

 

 

OPTIONS AT END OF CRF 

You have reached the end of this form. Please check the option that best describes how you would like us to 

proceed: 

Close completed form: You have completed all the information, including all terms, awards, and dates 

when we can expect your faculty list and your list of students enrolled. Checking this option means that you are 

submitting this form as final. If you later determine that you need to make modifications, please call 1-866-

NSOFAS4 (1-866-676-3274) or e-mail the changes to nsofas2004@rti.org. 

Keep form open for later completion: You have completed all or most of the information, including some 

terms, some awards, and dates when we can expect your faculty list and your list of students enrolled. Checking 

this option will allow you to continue accessing this form on the web until you are entirely satisfied that all 

information has been entered. NSoFaS staff may call you to offer their assistance. 

Provide assistance: You would like NSoFaS staff to call you to schedule a time to complete the items. 

Checking this option forwards an auto e-mail to nsofas2004@rti.org and a staff person will call to set an 

appointment for completing the Response Form with you over the telephone. A facsimile of the form was provided 

with your early notification packet to assist with preparation of your responses at that time. 

 
Appendix C. Data Collection Notification Materials 

C-20 

The 2004 National Postsecondary Student Aid Study

(NPSAS:04)

GUIDANCE FOR PREPARING THE LIST OF 

STUDENTS ENROLLED 

Background 

The list of students enrolled that you provide will be used to randomly select a nationally representative 

sample of students in postsecondary institutions across the nation. To ensure a scientifically valid 

sample, it is extremely important that you follow the instructions provided in this document when 

preparing your institution’s list. Because postsecondary institutions vary widely in their organizational 

structures, we realize that some of the criteria presented below may not apply to your institution. Please 

interpret the instructions and terms according to your institution’s usage. 

Should you have any questions about these instructions, or whether students should or should not be 

included on the list, we urge you to contact the NSoFaS Help Desk at: 

 Phone: 1-866-NSOFAS4 (1-866-676-3274) 

 E-mail: nsofas2004@rti.org

Eligibility Requirements 

Include all students enrolled at your institution at any time between July 1, 2003, and April 30, 2004, who 

satisfy all of the following requirements: 

 The student was enrolled during these dates in at least one term or course of instruction that 

is one of the following (i.e., student considered to be eligible for Title IV aid): 

i. an academic program; 

ii. at least one course for credit that could be applied toward fulfilling the requirements 

for an academic degree; or

iii. an occupational or vocational program that requires at least 3 months or 300 clock 

hours of instruction to receive a degree, certificate, or other formal award. 

 The student was not enrolled concurrently in high school and your institution during this entire

period. (Note: A student enrolled in courses at your institution while also enrolled in high 

school is not eligible. However, if that student completes high school and then enrolls in a 

course of instruction at your institution at some time during the above dates, the student is 

eligible.) 

 The student was not enrolled in your institution during this entire period solely for the purpose 

of earning a general equivalency diploma (GED) or finishing another high school completion 

program. (Note: If the student completes such a program at your institution and then enrolls 

in another course of instruction there at any time during the above dates, the student is 

eligible.) 
Appendix C. Data Collection Notification Materials 

C-21 

The 2004 National Postsecondary Student Aid Study

(NPSAS:04)

 The student was not enrolled in your institution during these dates only for vocational 

purposes, not receiving credit. 

 The student did not drop out of your institution early enough to receive a full refund of their 

tuition. 

 The student did not pay tuition during these dates solely to a different institution. 

Data Elements Required 

For each eligible student on the list we will need the information listed in the accompanying Contact 

Information and File Layout document. If you use other codes or another layout, please provide us with a 

detailed description of the codes and layout of your list. 

File Types 

As detailed on the Contact Information and File Layout document, you may choose to submit your list of 

students enrolled as an ASCII fixed-field file, a comma-delimited file, or an Excel spreadsheet. If you 

choose to use a different file type, please be sure to indicate its type and layout. If you have no option but 

to send your list in paper form, we prefer to receive a single, unduplicated list in which each student’s 

name appears only once. 
Appendix C. Data Collection Notification Materials 

C-22 

The 2004 National Postsecondary Student Aid Study

(NPSAS:04)

CONTACT INFORMATION AND FILE LAYOUT FOR CREATING 

THE LIST OF STUDENTS ENROLLED 

This document is in two sections. In the first section (pages 1–3) we ask you to provide the information 

requested for all individuals responsible for preparing your student list. Please include this information 

when you provide the list. This information will be used only when we need to contact these individuals 

with questions regarding your list. The second section (page 4) provides details of our suggested file 

layout for creating your list. 

You can transmit this document to us via one of the following two modes: 

 Select the option Upload List of Students Enrolled after logging in to the web site at: 

https://surveys.nces.ed.gov/nsofas2004/.

 Federal Express (use the airbill information provided as part of the Transmittal Options document 

that follows this document in this tab). 

Should you have any questions, please call the NSoFaS Help Desk at: 1–866–NSOFAS4 

(1–866–676–3274). 

1. Institution Identification: Please provide the following information about your institution:

Institution Name: ________________________________________________________ 

Institution IPEDS UNITID:

2

 ________________________________________________ 

Date: Please specify the date your student list was prepared (mm/dd/yyyy):____/_____/____ 

Contact Information: Please provide the following information for all individuals responsible for 

preparing your list of students enrolled.

Name Department E-mail address Telephone number

 

 

 

2

 Note that your institution name and Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System (IPEDS) UNITID is printed on the letter that 

accompanies this binder. 
Appendix C. Data Collection Notification Materials 

C-23 

The 2004 National Postsecondary Student Aid Study

(NPSAS:04)

Counts of Eligible Students: Between July 1, 2003, and April 30, 2004, how many students have been 

enrolled in your institution that satisfy all the following requirements?

 The student was enrolled during these dates in at least one term or course of instruction that 

is one of the following (i.e., student considered to be eligible for Title IV aid): 

i. an academic program;

ii. at least one course for credit that could be applied toward fulfilling the 

requirements for an academic degree; or

iii. an occupational or vocational program that requires at least 3 months or 

300 clock hours of instruction to receive a degree, certificate, or other 

formal award. 

 The student was not enrolled concurrently in high school and your institution during this entire

period. (Note: A student enrolled in courses at your institution while also enrolled in high 

school is not eligible. However, if that student completes high school and then enrolls in a 

course of instruction at your institution at some time during the above dates, the student is 

eligible.) 

 The student was not enrolled in your institution during this entire period solely for the purpose 

of earning a general equivalency diploma (GED) or finishing another high school completion 

program. (Note: If the student completes such a program at your institution and then enrolls 

in another course of instruction there at any time during the above dates, the student is 

eligible.) 

 The student was not enrolled in your institution during these dates only for vocational 

purposes, not receiving credit. 

 The student did not drop out of your institution early enough to receive a full refund of their 

tuition. 

 The student did not pay tuition during these dates to a different institution. 

Please provide the total number of eligible students: ________________________ 

5. Electronic File Type and Layout: Using the file layout specifications on the next page, please mark 

which of the following file types you will use to provide your list. If you choose to use a type or layout 

other than what is suggested, please be sure to specify its type and complete layout.

ASCII Fixed-field: Please use the suggested file layout provided on the next page.

Comma-delimited: Please use a blank space for any missing data elements and use the data order 

and codes in the suggested file layout provided on the next page.

Excel spreadsheets: Please properly label all columns and use the order and codes in the 

suggested file layout provided on the next page.
Appendix C. Data Collection Notification Materials 

C-24 

The 2004 National Postsecondary Student Aid Study

(NPSAS:04)

Other (e.g., paper list): Please specify type and layout of your list (use additional pages if 

necessary):

_______________________________________________________________________ 

_______________________________________________________________________ 

_______________________________________________________________________ 

6. Special Comments: In the space provided below, please tell us about any of the requested data 

items that you cannot provide. Also, please provide any additional details that would clarify the layout 

of the student list you are submitting, as well as any information necessary to correctly interpret the 

information provided (e.g., educational level, abbreviations, codes, etc.).

__________________________________________________________________________ 

__________________________________________________________________________ 

__________________________________________________________________________ 
Appendix C. Data Collection Notification Materials 

C-25 

The 2004 National Postsecondary Student Aid Study

(NPSAS:04)

Student List File Specifications 

Student data element Code Starting 

column Ending column

1. First name 1 25 

2. Middle initial 26 26 

3. Last name 27 51 

4. Name suffix (e.g., Jr., Sr., III, etc.) 52 54 

5. Student ID 55 66 

6. Social Security number 67 75 

7. Educational level 

U = Undergraduate student 

M = Master’s student 

D = Doctoral student 

G = Other graduate student 

P = First-professional student1

76 76 

8. First-time beginner2 Y = First-time beginner 

N = Not a first-time beginner 

X = Unknown beginner status 

77 77 

9. Local address 1 78 127 

10. Local address 2 128 177 

11. Local city 178 227 

12. Local state 228 229 

13. Local ZIP code 230 238 

14. Local telephone number 239 248 

15. Campus e-mail 249 298 

16. Permanent address 1 299 348 

17. Permanent address 2 349 398 

18. Permanent city 399 448 

19. Permanent state 449 450 

20. Permanent country (if not U.S.) 451 500 

21. Permanent ZIP code3 501 510 

22. Permanent telephone number3 511 535 

23. Permanent e-mail 536 585 

1

A first-professional student is a student enrolled in any of the following degree programs: chiropractic (D.C. or D.C.M.); 

osteopathic medicine (D.O.); dentistry (D.D.S. or D.M.D.); pharmacy (Pharm.D.); law (L.L.B. or J.D.); podiatry (D.P.M., D.P., 

or Pod.D.); medicine (M.D.); theology (M.Div., M.H.L., B.D., or Ordination); optometry (O.D.); or veterinary medicine (D.V.M.). 2

A first-time beginning student is defined as a student satisfying all of the following conditions: (a) had no transfer credits from 

another postsecondary institution. If you are unable to determine transfer credits, you may ignore transfer credits when 

identifying your first-time beginning students and (b) first term of enrollment at this institution was between July 1, 2003, and 

April 30, 2004, or has not completed a postsecondary class prior to July 1, 2003; (c) was an undergraduate between July 1, 

2003, and April 30, 2004; (d) was freshman or first-year student between July 1, 2003, and April 30, 2004. 3

The field length for permanent ZIP code and telephone number allows for international ZIP codes and telephone numbers, 

respectively. 
Appendix C. Data Collection Notification Materials 

C-26 

The 2004 National Postsecondary Student Aid Study

(NPSAS:04)

TRANSMITTAL OPTIONS FOR THE 

LIST OF STUDENTS ENROLLED

Please submit your list after January 2004 

within 2 weeks following 

the beginning of the last term at your institution 

that begins on or before April 30, 2004. 

This document specifies the different file delivery options you can use to submit the requested list of 

students enrolled for your institution. We strongly encourage you to send us your list as an 

electronic file. However, if you are unable to provide an electronic file, we will accept paper lists as a 

last resort. Please note that information regarding the eligibility definitions and the needed data items can 

be found in the documents: Guidance for Preparing the List of Students Enrolled, Contact Information 

and File Layout for Creating the List of Students Enrolled, and Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs). 

Please select one of the following four transmittal options that is most appropriate for your institution. 

Regardless of the option you select, please also complete and transmit the Contact Information and File 

Layout for Creating the List of Students Enrolled document to provide information about the list(s) you will 

submit. Should you use a different file layout other than what we have suggested, please provide details 

of your file layout. 

I. Upload to the 2004 NSoFaS Web Site

You may upload your files directly to the web site for NSoFaS, located at: 

https://surveys.nces.ed.gov/nsofas2004/. After login, simply click on “Upload List of Students Enrolled” 

and follow the instructions on the screen. You will be instructed to provide the following information: 

 Institution name and IPEDS UNITID; 

 Contact information for the person who prepares the list; and 

 File layout. 

II. Electronic Mail (e-mail to studentlist@rti.org) 

You may choose to send your student list as an attachment via electronic mail. In this case, please send 

your e-mail to RTI at studentlist@rti.org. Please be sure to separately transmit your completed electronic 

copy of the Contact Information and File Layout document for the list that you will be submitting. (See the 

Contact Information and File Layout document for modes to transmit that document.) Please do not 

send questions to this address.
Appendix C. Data Collection Notification Materials 

C-27 

The 2004 National Postsecondary Student Aid Study

(NPSAS:04)

III. Diskette, Zip Disk, or CD-ROM 

You may write your student list to diskette, Zip disk, or CD-ROM and mail it to RTI using the enclosed 

Federal Express airbill, along with a completed copy of the Contact Information and File 

Layout document for each list. Please identify all materials (diskette, Zip Disk, CD-ROM, and file layout) 

that you send to RTI with the IPEDS UNITID for your institution. 

IV. Paper List 

If possible, we would greatly appreciate it if you did not use this option. However, if you cannot provide 

an electronic list of your students, paper lists may be mailed to RTI using the enclosed Federal Express 

airbill. Please identify each list and file layout document that you send to RTI with the IPEDS UNITID for 

your institution. See the following page for Instructions for completing the airbill. 

If you need assistance, please call the NSoFaS Help Desk at: 1–866–NSOFAS4 

(1–866–676–3274). 
Appendix C. Data Collection Notification Materials 

C-28 

The 2004 National Postsecondary Student Aid Study

(NPSAS:04)

When sending a diskette, Zip disk, CD-ROM, or hard copy of the list of students enrolled, use the 

standard Federal Express airbill enclosed in the pocket at the end of this binder. Follow the 

instructions below. 

ITEM 1: 

Fill in Date, Sender’s Name, Phone, Company, Address, City, State, ZIP Code. 

ITEM 2: 

Your Internal Billing Reference Information will 08407.200.310 for the list of students enrolled. 

ITEM 3: 

ON AIRBILL TO BE ENTERED 

Recipient’s Name: Linda Rattelade 

Phone: (919) 541–8984 

Company RTI International 

Address 1000 Parliament Ct., Suite 100 

City Durham 

State: NC 

ZIP Code 27703–8464 

ITEM 4a: 

Please mark FedEx Priority Overnight. 

ITEM 5: 

Indicate the type of package/letter you are shipping. 

ITEM 7: 

Please check Third Party and use FedEx Account No. 159621286.
Appendix C. Data Collection Notification Materials 

C-29 

Pamphlets 

C-31
C-32
C-33
C-34
C-35
C-36
C-37
C-38
Appendix C. Data Collection Notification Materials 

C-39 

Student Contacting Letters and E-Mail 

Appendix C. Data Collection Notification Materials 

C-41 

Initial Letter

NPSAS:04 

Endorsed by

American Association for 

Higher Education 

American Association of 

Collegiate Registrars and 

Admissions Officers 

American Association of 

Community Colleges 

American Association of 

State Colleges and 

Universities 

American Association of 

University Professors 

American Council on 

Education 

American Federation of 

Teachers 

Association for Institutional 

Research 

Association of American 

Colleges and Universities 

Association of Catholic 

Colleges and Universities 

Career College Association 

The Carnegie Foundation for 

the Advancement of 

Teaching 

College and University 

Professional Association for 

Human Resources 

The College Board 

The College Fund/UNCF 

Council of Graduate Schools 

The Council of Independent 

Colleges 

National Accrediting 

Commission of Cosmetology 

Arts and Sciences 

Hispanic Association of 

Colleges and Universities 

National Association of 

College and University 

Business Officers 

National Association for 

Equal Opportunity in Higher 

Education 

National Association of 

Independent Colleges and 

Universities 

National Association of State 

Universities and 

Land-Grant Colleges 

National Association of 

Student Financial Aid 

Administrators 

National Education 

Association 

<DATE> 

<SM NAME> 

<ADDRESS 1> 

<ADDRESS 2> 

<CITY, STATE ZIP> 

Dear <SM NAME>: 

I am writing to ask you to participate in an important study that will help determine 

how students and their families meet the cost of education beyond high school. For 

your participation, I would like for you to complete a questionnaire over the Internet. 

On average, the questionnaire takes about 25 minutes to complete. 

When you access the questionnaire on the Internet, you will be asked questions about 

how you paid for your school expenses during the 2003–2004 school year, including 

whether you received financial aid. If you received financial aid, you will be asked 

whether the amount of aid was enough to meet your educational expenses. If you did 

not receive financial aid, you will be asked about how you met your school expenses. 

Students from all types of institutions and all financial situations have been randomly 

selected to participate in the 2004 National Postsecondary Student Aid Study. Your 

responses along with those of other selected students will represent responses of all 

students enrolled in postsecondary education. Therefore, your participation in this 

study is critical. 

To complete the questionnaire over the Internet: 

Go to: https://surveys.nces.ed.gov/npsas, 

Type the study ID and password (provided below) on the Home/Login page, and 

Press “Enter” or click “Login” to begin the questionnaire. 

RTI International (RTI) of North Carolina is conducting the study for the U.S. 

Department of Education. To express our appreciation, a $10 check will be mailed 

to you, if you complete the questionnaire by <FILL DATE, 2004.> If you are 

unable to complete the survey by that date, an RTI interviewer will call you to 

complete the questionnaire by telephone. 

Participation in this study is voluntary and will not affect any aid or any benefits you 

receive. The enclosed pamphlet answers many common questions about the study 

and contains additional information on laws and procedures that protect the 

confidentiality of your responses. 

If you have questions about the study, you can visit our web site at 

https://surveys.nces.ed.gov/npsas, you can call us toll-free at 1-866-NPSAS04 (1-

866-677- 2704), or you can e-mail us at npsas@rti.org. Persons who are hearing or 

speech-impaired can call us at 1-877-212-7230 (TDD). 

We sincerely appreciate your participation and thank you in advance for helping us 

conduct this very important study. 

Sincerely, 

C. Dennis Carroll, Ph.D. 

Associate Commissioner 

Postsecondary Studies Division 

Enclosures 

Go to: https://surveys.nces.ed.gov/npsas

Your study ID: <ID FILL> 

Your password: <PASSWORD FILL> 
Appendix C. Data Collection Notification Materials 

C-42 

Initial Letter (Spanish Version) 

NPSAS:04 

Aprobado por

American Association for 

Higher Education 

American Association of 

Collegiate Registrars and 

Admissions Officers 

American Association of 

Community Colleges 

American Association of State 

Colleges and Universities 

American Association of 

University Professors 

American Council on 

Education 

American Federation of 

Teachers 

Association for Institutional 

Research 

Association of American 

Colleges and Universities 

Association of Catholic 

Colleges and Universities 

Career College Association 

The Carnegie Foundation for 

the Advancement of Teaching 

College and University 

Professional Association for 

Human Resources 

The College Board 

The College Fund/UNCF 

Council of Graduate Schools 

The Council of Independent 

Colleges 

National Accrediting 

Commission of Cosmetology 

Arts and Sciences 

Hispanic Association of 

Colleges and Universities 

National Association of 

College and University 

Business Officers 

National Association for Equal 

Opportunity in Higher 

Education 

National Association of 

Independent Colleges and 

Universities 

National Association of State 

Universities and 

Land-Grant Colleges 

National Association of 

Student Financial Aid 

Administrators 

National Education 

Association 

Me dirijo a usted para pedirle su participación en un estudio de investigación 

importante que ayudará a determinar la manera en la que los estudiantes y sus 

familias financian el costo de la educación postsecundaria. En lo referente a su 

participación, le estamos pidiendo que complete un cuestionario en el Internet. 

Completar el cuestionario toma un promedio de 25 minutos. 

Una vez que usted tenga acceso al cuestionario en el Internet, se le hacen preguntas 

sobre cómo pagó por sus gastos en el año escolar 2003-2004, incluyendo si es que 

usted recibió ayuda económica. Si recibió ayuda económica, se le pregunta si la 

cantidad de ayuda que recibió fue suficiente para afrontar sus gastos educacionales. 

Si usted no recibió ayuda económica, se le pregunta cómo afronta sus gastos 

educacionales. 

Estudiantes de todo tipo de instituciones y condiciones económicas han sido 

seleccionados al azar para participar en el Estudio Nacional de Ayuda Financiera 

Postsecundaria del 2004. Sus respuestas junto a las de otros estudiantes 

seleccionados representarán a las respuestas de todos los estudiantes matriculados en 

estudios postsecundarios. Por lo tanto, su participación en el estudio es muy valiosa. 

Para completar el cuestionario en el Internet: 

Diríjase a: https://surveys.nces.ed.gov/npsas, 

Escriba en el teclado el código del identificación del estudio y la contraseña (que se 

proporciona abajo) en la página de registro ( o ‘Home/Login’) y 

Oprima la tecla ‘Enter’o seleccione ‘Login’ para comenzar el cuestionario. 

RTI International de Carolina del Norte está llevando acabo este estudio para el 

Departamento de Educación de los Estados Unidos. Si usted completa el 

cuestionario antes del [fill date, 2004], se le enviarán $10 dólares como muestra 

de nuestro agradecimiento. Si no puede completar este cuestionario para esa fecha, 

un entrevistador de RTI le llamará para completar la entrevista por teléfono. 

La participación en este estudio es voluntaria y no afectará a la ayuda o beneficios 

que usted recibe. El folleto adjunto contesta a preguntas frecuentes sobre el estudio y 

contiene información adicional sobre leyes y procedimientos que protegen la 

confidencialidad de sus respuestas. 

Si tiene preguntas sobre el estudio, usted puede visitar nuestro sitio web en: 

https://surveys.nces.ed.gov/npsas, puede llamarnos gratis por teléfono al 1-866-

NPSAS04 (1-866-677-2704), o puede comunicarse con nosotros por correo 

electrónico a npsas@rti.org. Las personas que tengan problemas de audición o de 

habla pueden llamarnos al 1-877-212-7230 (TDD). 

Apreciamos su participación y le agradecemos con anticipación por ayudarnos a 

llevar a cabo este importante estudio. 

Atentamente, 

C. Dennis Carroll, Ph.D. 

Comisionado Asociado 

División de Estudios Postsecundarios 

Anexos 
Appendix C. Data Collection Notification Materials 

C-43 

Web Insert 

HOW TO COMPLETE THE

NPSAS:04 QUESTIONNAIRE

To complete the self-directed web questionnaire: 

1. Go to: https://surveys.nces.ed.gov/npsas

2. At the login and password prompts, enter your study ID and password. 

3. Press “Enter” or click “Login” to begin the questionnaire.

If you need assistance in completing the self-directed web questionnaire or if you would like to complete the 

questionnaire over the phone, please call our Help Desk at 1–866–NPSAS04 (1–866–677–2704) for assistance. 

You may complete the NPSAS web questionnaire at any time during the data collection period. We will also begin 

making calls asking study participants to complete the questionnaire over the phone starting on March 4, 2004. 

For more information about this study visit the web site at: 

https://surveys.nces.ed.gov/npsas

NOTE: The study has been approved by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB). The valid OMB control 

number for this information collection is 1850-0666. The expiration date is 2/28/06. Public reporting burden for 

this information request in its entirety is estimated at 25 minutes per response. You may send comments regarding 

this burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of information, including suggestions for reducing this 

burden, to the U.S. Department of Education, Information Management and Compliance Division, Washington, DC 

20202–4651; and to the Office of Management and Budget, Paperwork Reduction Project 1850–0608, Washington, 

DC 20503. 
Appendix C. Data Collection Notification Materials 

C-44 

Initial E-mail 

E-mail Subject line: U.S. Department of Education Study 

Dear <FNAME> <MNAME> <LNAME>, 

You have been randomly selected to participate in a United States Department of Education study. This 

important study will help determine how students and their families meet the cost of education beyond high 

school. For your participation, I would like for you to complete a questionnaire over the Internet. On average, 

the questionnaire takes about 25 minutes to complete. 

Students from all types of institutions and all financial situations are being asked to participate in the 2004 National 

Postsecondary Student Aid Study. Your responses along with those of selected students will represent responses of 

all students enrolled in postsecondary education. Therefore, your participation in this study is critical. 

To find out more about the study, click the link below. To respond to the questionnaire over the Internet, log in 

using your study ID and password: 

https://surveys.nces.ed.gov/npsas/

Study ID: <STUDYID> 

Password: <PASSWORD> 

The U.S. Department of Education has contracted with RTI International to conduct the study. To respond to the 

questionnaire by telephone or ask questions about the study, please call: 

1-866-NPSAS04 (1-866-677-2704) 

You will need to use Internet Explorer or Netscape as your browser to complete the web version. 

As a small token of our appreciation, if you complete the questionnaire by <DATE28>, you will receive a $10 

check. 

Your responses may be used only for statistical purposes and may not be disclosed, or used, in identifiable form for 

any other purpose, except as required by law. Your responses will be secured behind firewalls and will be 

encrypted during Internet transmission. To learn more about the study and the laws protecting your confidentiality, 

please click on the link above. 

Thank you in advance for your participation in this important study. 

Sincerely, 

John Riccobono, Ph.D. 

NPSAS Project Director 

RTI International 

Note: To ensure that as many sample members as possible receive this message, we also have sent printed materials 

to you via U.S. mail. All the information in the printed materials also is available through the web site listed above. 
Appendix C. Data Collection Notification Materials 

C-45 

Second E-mail 

E-mail Subject line: U.S. Department of Education Study 

Dear <FNAME> <MNAME> <LNAME>, 

We are writing to urge your completion of the questionnaire for the 2004 National Postsecondary Student Aid Study 

(NPSAS:04), sponsored by the U. S. Department of Education. As indicated to you in previous correspondence, this 

important study will help determine how students and their families meet the cost of education beyond high school. 

Students from all types of institutions and all financial situations are being asked to participate in the NPSAS:04 

study and your participation is vital to its success. Your responses along with those of other selected students will 

represent responses of all students enrolled in postsecondary education. The results of this study are useful to 

policymakers interested in improving student financial aid policy and practice; therefore, your participation is 

critical. 

To find out more about the study, click on the link below. To respond to the questionnaire over the Internet, log in 

using your study ID and password: 

https://surveys.nces.ed.gov/npsas/

Study ID: <STUDYID> 

Password: <PASSWORD> 

On average, the questionnaire takes about 25 minutes to complete. The U.S. Department of Education has 

contracted with RTI International to conduct the study. To respond to the questionnaire by telephone (rather than 

over the Internet) or ask questions about the study, please call the RTI Help Desk at: 

1-866-NPSAS04 (1-866-677-2704) 

If you complete the questionnaire by <DATE28>, you will receive a $10 check as a small token of our appreciation. 

Your responses may be used only for statistical purposes and may not be disclosed, or used, in identifiable form for 

any other purpose, except as required by law. Your responses will be secured behind firewalls and will be 

encrypted during Internet transmission. To learn more about the study and the laws protecting your confidentiality, 

please click on the link above. 

Thank you in advance for your participation in this important study. 

Sincerely, 

James Griffith, Ph.D. 

NPSAS Project Officer 

U. S. Department of Education 

John Riccobono, Ph.D. 

NPSAS Project Director 

RTI International 
Appendix C. Data Collection Notification Materials 

C-46 

Third E-mail 

E-mail Subject line: U.S. Dept. of Ed. Study Early-response Period Ends After <Y_WEB_INCENT_EXP_DATE> 

Dear <FNAME> <MNAME> <LNAME>, 

This message is only intended as a reminder to you that the early-response period for the 2004 National 

Postsecondary Student Aid Study (NPSAS:04) is drawing to a close. We hope you will find the time to participate 

in the study soon. If you complete the questionnaire by <DATE28>, you will receive a $10 check as a small token 

of our appreciation. This important study will help determine how students and their families meet the cost of 

education beyond high school. 

To access the questionnaire on the web or to obtain more information about the study, go to 

https://surveys.nces.ed.gov/npsas and log in using your study ID and password: 

Study ID: <CASEID> 

Password: <PASSWORD> 

You will need to use Internet Explorer or Netscape as your browser to complete the web version. Please be assured 

that your responses will be secured behind firewalls and will be encrypted during Internet transmission. If you need 

help accessing the web or if you prefer to complete the questionnaire by telephone, please call our Help Desk at 1-

866-NPSAS04 (1-866-677-2704). 

Thank you in advance for your participation in this very important study. 

Sincerely, 

James Griffith, Ph.D. 

NPSAS Project Officer 

U.S. Department of Education 

John Riccobono, Ph.D. 

NPSAS Project Director 

RTI International 
Appendix C. Data Collection Notification Materials 

C-47 

Nonresponse Letter 

<DATE> 

<NPSASID> 

<FNAME><MNAME><LNAME><SUFFIX> 

<ADDR1> 

<ADDR2> 

<CITY>, <STATE> <ZIP>-<ZIP4> 

Dear <NAME>: 

I am writing to urge you to participate in a U.S. Department of Education study that determines how students and 

their families meet the cost of education beyond high school. Specifically, I would like you to complete a 

questionnaire about your education experiences and how you paid for your education during the past school year. 

Your responses may be used only for statistical purposes, and will be kept confidential and protected to the fullest 

extent allowed by law. 

Your participation in this study is very important, regardless of whether you have received financial aid or not. 

Students from all types of institutions and all financial situations have been randomly selected to participate in the 

2004 National Postsecondary Student Aid Study (NPSAS:04). The U.S. Department of Education has contracted 

with RTI International to conduct NPSAS:04. 

We have been unable to reach you by telephone to complete the interview; therefore, we urge you to contact us by 

calling toll free at 1-866-NPSAS04 (1-866-677-2704), or e-mailing us at npsas@rti.org. If you have questions 

about the study or would rather complete the questionnaire on the Internet, visit our web site at 

https://surveys.nces.ed.gov/npsas. 

You will need to use Internet Explorer or Netscape as your browser to complete the web version. Persons who are 

hearing or speech-impaired call 1-877-212-7230 (TDD). 

Upon completion of the questionnaire, you will receive a <$10/$20/$30> check as a small token of our appreciation. 

Thank you for your time and your willingness to participate in this very important study. 

Sincerely, 

James Griffith, Ph.D. 

NPSAS Project Officer 

U.S. Department of Education 

Go to: https://surveys.nces.ed.gov/npsas

Your study ID: <ID FILL> 

Your password: <PASSWORD FILL> 
Appendix C. Data Collection Notification Materials 

C-48 

Nonresponse Letter (Spanish Version)

En nombre del Departamento de Educación de Estados Unidos, le pedimos su participación en 

un estudio que determina la manera en la que los estudiantes y sus familias financian la 

educación postsecundaria. Me interesa especialmente que complete el cuestionario sobre sus 

experiencias educacionales y como pagó por su educación durante el año escolar anterior. Sus 

respuestas serán usadas con fines estadísticos y se mantendrán en forma confidencial y serán 

protegidas hasta donde sea permitido por ley. 

Su participación en este estudio es muy importante, independientemente de que usted haya o no 

recibido asistencia económica. Se ha seleccionado estudiantes de todo tipo de instituciones y de todo tipo 

de situaciones económicas para participar en Estudio Nacional sobre Asistencia Económica para 

Estudiantes en Escuelas Post-Secundarias del 2004 (NPSAS: 04, por sus siglas en inglés). El 

Departamento de Educación de Estados Unidos tiene un contrato con RTI Internacional para llevar a 

cabo este estudio. 

Como no hemos podido comunicarnos con usted por teléfono para que complete la entrevista, le 

pedimos que se comunique con nosotros llamándonos gratis al 1-866-NPSAS04 (1-866-677-

2704), o por correo electrónico a npsas@rti.org. Si usted tiene preguntas sobre el estudio o 

prefiere completar la entrevista en el Internet, puede visitar nuestro sitio web en 

https://surveys.nces.ed.gov/npsas. 

Usted necesitará usar Internet Explorer o Netscape como su programa de navegación para 

completar la versión del cuestionario el sitio web. Las personas con problemas de audición o de 

habla pueden llamar al 1-877-212-7230 a un aparato de telecomunicación para las personas con 

problemas de audición (TDD, por sus siglas en inglés). 

Después de terminada la entrevista, usted recibirá un cheque por <$10/$20/$30> dólares como 

muestra de nuestro agradecimiento. 

Le agradecemos por su tiempo y participación en este importante estudio. 

Atentamente, 

Dr. James Griffith 

Oficial a cargo del Estudio 

Nacional sobre Asistencia Económica para Estudiantes en Escuelas Post-secundarias. 
Appendix C. Data Collection Notification Materials 

C-49 

Nonresponse E-mail 

E-mail Subject line: U.S. Department of Education Study 

Dear Student, 

We are writing to urge you to participate in a U.S. Department of Education study that determines how students and 

their families meet the cost of education beyond high school. Specifically, we would like you to complete a 

questionnaire about your education experiences and how you paid for your education during the past school year. 

Your responses may be used only for statistical purposes, and will be kept confidential and protected to the fullest 

extent allowed by law. 

Your participation in this study is very important, regardless of whether you have received financial aid or not. 

Students from all types of institutions and all financial situations have been randomly selected to participate in the 

2004 National Postsecondary Student Aid Study (NPSAS:04). The U.S. Department of Education has contracted 

with RTI International to conduct NPSAS:04. 

We have been unable to reach you by telephone to complete the interview; therefore, we urge you to contact us by 

calling toll free at 1-866-NPSAS04 (1-866-677-2704), or e-mailing us at npsas@rti.org. Persons who are hearing 

or speech-impaired call 1-877-212-7230 (TDD). 

To complete the questionnaire on the Internet, you can visit our web site at: 

https://surveys.nces.ed.gov/npsas/

Study ID: <STUDYID> 

Password: <PASSWORD> 

You will need to use Internet Explorer or Netscape as your browser to complete the web version. 

Upon completion of the questionnaire, you will receive a $<10/20> check as a small token of our appreciation. 

Thank you for your time and your willingness to participate in this very important study. 

Sincerely, 

John Riccobono, Ph.D. James Griffith, Ph.D. 

NPSAS Project Director NPSAS Project Officer 

RTI International U.S. Department of Education 

Note: To ensure that as many sample members as possible receive this message, we also have sent printed materials 

to you via U.S. mail. All the information in the printed materials is also available through the web site listed above. 
Appendix C. Data Collection Notification Materials 

C-50 

Refusal Letter 

Date 

NPSAS ID: <NPSASID> 

<FNAME><MNAME><LNAME><SUFFIX> 

<ADDR1> 

<ADDR2> 

<CITY>, <STATE> <ZIP>-<ZIP4> 

Dear <NAME>: 

I understand that you recently spoke with a member of our project staff for the 2004 National Postsecondary 

Student Aid Study (NPSAS:04). I realize that there are many demands for your time and that you have other 

priorities, but I am writing to you again because your participation in this U.S. Department of Education study is so 

very critical to its success. 

Your participation in this study is needed regardless of whether you have received financial aid or not. Students 

from all types of institutions and all financial situations have been randomly selected to participate in NPSAS:04. 

By completing a questionnaire about your education experiences and how you paid for your education during the 

past school year, you have the opportunity to help policymakers better understand and meet the financial needs of 

postsecondary students. Your responses may be used only for statistical purposes, and will be kept confidential and 

protected to the fullest extent allowed by law. 

To complete the questionnaire on the Internet, visit our web site at https://surveys.nces.ed.gov/npsas. You will 

need to use Internet Explorer or Netscape as your browser to complete the web version. 

To complete the questionnaire with a trained interviewer, call toll free 1-866-NPSAS04 (1-866-677-2704). 

Persons who are hearing or speech-impaired can call 1-877-212-7230 (TDD). 

Upon completion of the interview, we will send you a $30 check as a small token of our appreciation. 

Please take the time to participate in this very important study. With input from individuals like you, we can 

improve our ability to help individuals receive an education beyond high school. 

Sincerely, 

James Griffith, Ph.D. 

NPSAS Project Officer 

U.S. Department of Education 

Go to: https://surveys.nces.ed.gov/npsas

Your study ID: <ID FILL> 

Your password: <PASSWORD FILL> 
Appendix C. Data Collection Notification Materials 

C-51 

REFUSAL LETTER (SPANISH VERSION) 

Tengo entendido que usted habló recientemente con un miembro del personal de nuestro proyecto para el Estudio 

Nacional sobre Asistencia Económica para Estudiantes en Escuelas Post-secundarias (NPSAS: 04, por sus siglas en 

inglés). Entendemos que usted tiene muchas obligaciones y otras prioridades, pero le estoy escribiendo nuevamente 

porque su participación en este estudio del Departamento de Educación de los Estados Unidos es esencial para 

nuestro éxito. 

Su participación en este estudio es muy importante, independientemente de que usted haya o no recibido 

asistencia económica. Estudiantes de todo tipo de instituciones y situaciones económicas han sido seleccionados al 

azar para participar en el Estudio Nacional sobre Asistencia Económica para Estudiantes en Escuelas Postsecundarias. Al completar este cuestionario sobre sus experiencias educacionales y la forma en la que pagó sus 

estudios durante el año escolar anterior, ayudará a funcionarios políticos a entender y responder a las necesidades 

económicas de los estudiantes de escuelas postsecundarias. Su respuestas podrán ser usadas únicamente con fines 

estadísticos, se mantendrán en forma confidencial y serán protegidas hasta donde lo permita la ley. 

Para completar este cuestionario en inglés en el Internet, visite nuestro sitio web en: 

https://surveys.nces.ed.gov/npsas. Para completar esa versión del cuestionario, necesitará usar Internet 

Explorer o Netscape como navegador. 

Para completar este cuestionario con un entrevistador preparado, llame por teléfono gratis al 1-866-NPSAS04 

(1-866-677-2704) Las personas con problemas de audición o de habla pueden llamar al 1-877-212-7230 a un 

aparato de telecomunicación para las personas con problemas de audición (TDD, por sus siglas en inglés). 

Después de terminada la entrevista, usted recibirá un cheque por $30 dólares como muestra de nuestro 

agradecimiento. 

Por favor participe en esta importante entrevista. Con la cooperación de individuos como usted, podemos mejorar 

nuestra capacidad de ayudar a personas a recibir una educación post-secundaria. 

Atentamente, 

Dr. James Griffith 

Oficial a cargo del Estudio 

Nacional sobre Asistencia Económica para Estudiantes en Escuelas Post-secundarias. 
Appendix C. Data Collection Notification Materials 

C-52 

Refusal E-mail 

E-mail Subject line: U.S. Department of Education Study 

Dear Student, 

We understand that you recently spoke with a member of our project staff for the 2004 National 

Postsecondary Student Aid Study (NPSAS:04). We realize that there are many demands for your time 

and that you have other priorities, but we are writing to you again because your participation in this U.S. 

Department of Education study is so very critical to its success. 

Your participation in this study is needed regardless of whether you have received financial aid or not. 

Students from all types of institutions and all financial situations have been randomly selected to 

participate in NPSAS:04. By completing a questionnaire about your education experiences and how you 

paid for your education during the past school year, you have the opportunity to help policymakers better 

understand and meet the financial needs of postsecondary students. Your responses may be used only for 

statistical purposes, and will be kept confidential and protected to the fullest extent allowed by law. 

To complete the questionnaire on the Internet, visit our web site at: 

https://surveys.nces.ed.gov/npsas/

Study ID: <STUDYID> 

Password: <PASSWORD> 

You will need to use Internet Explorer or Netscape as your browser to complete the web version. 

To complete the questionnaire with one of our trained interviewers, call us toll free at 

1-866-NPSAS04 (1-866-677-2704). Persons who are hearing or speech-impaired can call us at 1-877-

212-7230 (TDD). 

Upon completion of the interview, we would like to send you a $10 check as a small token of our 

appreciation. 

Please take the time to participate in this very important study. With input from individuals like you, we 

can improve our ability to help individuals receive an education beyond high school. 

Sincerely, 

John Riccobono, Ph.D. James Griffith, Ph.D. 

NPSAS Project Director NPSAS Project Officer 

RTI International U.S. Department of Education 

Note: To ensure that as many sample members as possible receive this message, we also have sent printed 

materials to you via U.S. mail. All the information in the printed materials is also available through the 

web site listed above. 
Appendix C. Data Collection Notification Materials 

C-53 

Will Complete Web E-mail Document 

Subject: National Postsecondary Student Aid Study - Reminder Information 

 

Dear <SM NAME>, 

Thank you for your interest in the National Postsecondary Student Aid Study. This message is being sent 

to you as a follow-up to the telephone conversation in which you indicated your preference to complete 

the survey via the web. 

To respond to the questionnaire over the Internet, log in using your study ID and password: 

https://surveys.nces.ed.gov/npsas/

 Study ID: 

 Password: 

You will need to use Internet Explorer or Netscape as your browser to complete the web version. If you 

need help accessing the web or if you decide to complete the questionnaire by telephone, please call the 

RTI help desk at: 1-866-NPSAS04 (1-866-677-2704). 

Sincerely, 

NPSAS Project Staff 
Appendix C. Data Collection Notification Materials 

C-54 

Postcard 

NPSAS FS27/<ADDR_ID> 

______________________________________________________________________________ 

Dear <FNAME><MNAME><LNAME><SUFFIX>:

Data collection in the U.S. Department of Education’s National Postsecondary Student Aid Study is 

coming to a close. If you recently completed the interview, we sincerely appreciate your participation – 

you should receive your incentive soon. 

If, however, you have not yet completed the interview let me remind you that your participation is critical 

to the success of the study. The study is being conducted for the U.S. Department of Education 

(https://surveys.nces.ed.gov/npsas) and the information you provide will help develop policy related to 

higher education and financial aid—We don’t want to lose your input! 

In recent weeks, you may have received other letters regarding your participation in the National 

Postsecondary Student Aid Study. You were sent this post card to inform you that you will receive $30 

for completing the NPSAS interview. The top half of this card explains that the 25 minute interview 

may be completed with a professionally trained telephone interviewer or by logging on and completing an 

interview over our secured Website. We thank you in advance for your participation in this important 

study. 

If you have any questions or concerns about the study, please contact the NPSAS Project Director or 

Project Officer: 

RTI Project Director: NCES Project Officer: 

 Dr. John Riccobono Dr. James Griffith 

 877-225-8470 202-502-7387 

NATIONAL POSTSECONDARY STUDENT AID STUDY (NPSAS:2004) 

Complete your FINAL NPSAS interview and earn 

$30 for your time. 

To complete a telephone interview, call 1-866-677-2704

or

To complete a Web interview over our secured Website: 

https://surveys.nces.ed.gov/npsas

Your Study ID is: «caseid» 

Your Password is: «password»

Thank you for your participation in NPSAS.
Appendix C. Data Collection Notification Materials 

C-55 

Final Letter 

 <DATE> 

<ADDRESS_NAME> 

<FNAME><MNAME><LNAME><SUFFIX> 

<ADDR1> 

<ADDR2> 

<CITY>, <STATE> <ZIP>-<ZIP4> 

Dear <NAME>: 

On behalf of the U.S. Department of Education, we would like you to complete a questionnaire 

about your education experiences and how you paid for your education during the past school 

year. You have been randomly selected to participate in the 2004 National Postsecondary 

Student Aid Study (NPSAS:04). The U.S. Department of Education has contracted with RTI 

International to conduct NPSAS:04. 

Your participation in this study is very important, regardless of whether you have received 

financial aid or not. By participating, you have the opportunity to help policymakers better 

understand and meet the financial needs of postsecondary students. Be assured that your 

responses will be kept confidential and protected to the fullest extent allowed by law. Your 

responses may be used only for statistical purposes. 

Data collection for NPSAS is coming to a close, so we urge you to contact us this week, by 

calling toll free at 1-866-NPSAS04 (1-866-677-2704), or e-mailing us at npsas@rti.org. If you 

have questions about the study or would rather complete the questionnaire on the Internet, you 

can visit our web site at https://surveys.nces.ed.gov/npsas. 

You will need to use Internet Explorer or Netscape as your browser to complete the web version. 

Persons who are hearing or speech-impaired can call us at 1-877-212-7230 (TDD). Upon 

completion of the questionnaire, you will receive a <$20/$30> check as a token of our 

appreciation. 

Please take the time to participate in this very important study. With input from individuals like 

you, we can improve our ability to help individuals receive an education beyond high school. 

Sincerely, 

John Riccobono, Ph.D. 

NPSAS Project Director 

RTI International 

Go to: https://surveys.nces.ed.gov/npsas

Your study ID: «caseid» 

Your password: «password»
Appendix C. Data Collection Notification Materials 

C-56 

Final Letter (Spanish Version) 

En nombre del Departamento de Educación de Estados Unidos, le pedimos su participación en 

una entrevista del Estudio Nacional sobre Asistencia Económica para Estudiantes en Escuelas 

Post-secundarias (NPSAS, por sus siglas en inglés). El objetivo de este estudio es determinar la 

manera en la que los estudiantes y sus familias financian la educación postsecundaria. 

Su participación en este estudio es muy importante, independientemente de que usted haya o 

no recibido asistencia económica. Al completar el cuestionario del estudio, en el que se pregunta 

sobre sus experiencias y opiniones, usted ayudará al congreso a desarrollar políticas más 

efectivas relacionadas con la manera que los estudiantes y sus familias financian la educación 

superior. Tenga la completa seguridad que sus respuestas se mantendrán en forma confidencial y 

serán protegidas hasta donde está permitido por ley. 

El tiempo asignado a la recolección de datos para NPSAS está por terminar, por 

consiguiente, le pedimos que por favor se comunique con nosotros esta semana llamándonos 

gratis al 1-866-NPSAS04 (1-866-677-2704), o por correo electrónico a npsas@rti.org. Si usted 

tiene preguntas sobre el estudio o prefiere completar la entrevista en el Internet, puede visitar 

nuestro sitio web en https://surveys.nces.ed.gov/npsas. Las personas con problemas de audición 

o de habla pueden llamar al 1-877-212-7230 a un aparato de telecomunicación para las personas 

con problemas de audición (TDD, por sus siglas en inglés). Después de terminada la entrevista, 

usted recibirá un cheque por <$20/$30 dólares> como muestra de nuestro agradecimiento. 

Le agradecemos por su tiempo y participación. 

Atentamente, 

Dr. John Riccobono, Ph.D. 

NPSAS Project Director 

RTI International 
Appendix C. Data Collection Notification Materials 

C-57 

Final E-mail 

E-mail Subject line: U.S. Department of Education Study 

Dear Student, 

On behalf of the U.S. Department of Education, we would like you to complete a questionnaire 

about your education experiences and how you paid for your education during the past school 

year. You have been randomly selected to participate in the 2004 National Postsecondary 

Student Aid Study (NPSAS:04). The U.S. Department of Education has contracted with RTI 

International to conduct NPSAS:04. 

Your participation in this study is very important, regardless of whether you have received 

financial aid or not. By participating, you have the opportunity to help policymakers better 

understand and meet the financial needs of postsecondary students. Be assured that your 

responses will be kept confidential and protected to the fullest extent allowed by law. Your 

responses may be used only for statistical purposes. 

Data collection for NPSAS is coming to a close, so we urge you to contact us this week, by 

calling toll free at 1-866-NPSAS04 (1-866-677-2704), or e-mailing us at npsas@rti.org. Persons 

who are hearing or speech-impaired can call us at 1-877-212-7230 (TDD). 

If you have questions about the study or would rather complete the questionnaire on the Internet, 

you can visit our web site at: 

https://surveys.nces.ed.gov/npsas/

Study ID: <STUDYID> 

Password: <PASSWORD> 

You will need to use Internet Explorer or Netscape as your browser to complete the web version. 

Upon completion of the questionnaire, you will receive a $20 check as a token of our 

appreciation. 

Please take the time to participate in this very important study. With input from individuals like 

you, we can improve our ability to help individuals receive an education beyond high school. 

Sincerely, 

John Riccobono, Ph.D. James Griffith, Ph.D. 

NPSAS Project Director NPSAS Project Officer 

RTI International U.S. Department of Education 

Note: To ensure that as many sample members as possible receive this message, we also have 

sent printed materials to you via U.S. mail. All the information in the printed materials is also 

available through the web site listed above. 
Appendix C. Data Collection Notification Materials 

C-58 

Incentive Letter 

<DATE> 

Dear Student: 

On behalf of the Department of Education and the RTI Project Staff, I would like to thank you for participating in 

the 2004 National Postsecondary Student Aid Study (NPSAS:04). Your input into this study is important to our 

ultimate success. 

Enclosed you will find a check for <$10/$20/$30> as a small token of appreciation for completing the interview. 

Please do not hesitate to contact me at 1-800-334-8571 ext. 3598 if I can provide any additional information or 

assistance about the study or your interview. 

Thank you again for your time and willingness to participate. 

Sincerely, 

David James Roe, M.A. 

NPSAS Project Staff 

RTI International 
D-1 

Appendix D 

Endorsements 

Appendix D. Endorsements 

D-3 

The 2004 National Study of Faculty and Students

(NSoFaS:04)

ENDORSEMENTS 

 

The following professional associations have endorsed the research efforts of the 2004 

National Study of Faculty and Students (NSoFaS:04) being conducted at a sample of 

postsecondary institutions in the United States and Puerto Rico. 

American Association for Higher Education 

American Association of Collegiate Registrars and Admissions Officers

American Association of Community Colleges 

American Association of State Colleges and Universities 

American Association of University Professors 

American Council on Education 

American Federation of Teachers 

Association for Institutional Research 

Association of American Colleges and Universities 

Association of Catholic Colleges and Universities 

Career College Association 

The Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching 

College and University Professional Association for Human Resources 

The College Board 

The College Fund/UNCF 

Council of Graduate Schools 

The Council of Independent Colleges 

Hispanic Association of Colleges and Universities 

National Accrediting Commission of Cosmetology Arts and Sciences (NPSAS only) 

National Association of College and University Business Officers 

National Association for Equal Opportunity in Higher Education 

National Association of Independent Colleges and Universities 

National Association of State Universities and Land-Grant Colleges 

National Association of Student Financial Aid Administrators 

National Education Association 
Appendix D. Endorsements 

D-4 
E-1 

Appendix E 

Facsimiles 

Student Record Abstraction (CADE)...........................................................................................E-3

Student Interview.......................................................................................................................E-15 

Student Interview–Abbreviated Version....................................................................................E-53 

E-3 

Student Record Abstraction (CADE) 
Appendix E. Facsimile 

E-4 

For each eligible sampled student, please provide the following data. 

I. FINANCIAL AID INFORMATION

Question 

Number Description

A. Financial Aid Awards

Question 1. Did the student receive any financial aid, such as: 

• assistantships 

• grants 

• scholarships 

• loans 

• fellowships 

• work study 

• tuition waivers or discounts 

• tuition aid from employers 

• veterans benefits 

• other financial aid 

for terms or courses in which they were enrolled between July 1, 2003, and June 30, 2004? [y/n] 

(Some portion of the term must occur between these dates but may start prior to July 1 or end 

after June 30. ) 

NOTE: Please do not include any information on state prepaid or savings plans in this section. 

You may enter that information at the end of the Tuition section.

IF NO, YOU HAVE COMPLETED THIS SUBSECTION 

Question 2. Did the student receive any federal aid, such as those program listed below? [y/n] 

Question 3. Please enter the amounts of federal financial aid received by the student within each program. 

 Federal Aid Programs

1. Pell Grant program 

2. Stafford Loan - subsidized (FFEL or Direct) 

3. Stafford Loan - unsubsidized (FFEL or Direct) 

4. PLUS parent loan (FFEL or Direct) 

5. Perkins loan 

6. Federal SEOG grant 

7. Federal work-study (FWS) 

8. Robert Byrd honors scholarship 

9. Federal health professions loans (Nursing, HPSL, Primary Care, Disadvantaged) 

10. Federal health professions Disadvantaged Student Scholarships (SDS) 

Question 4. Did the student receive any state aid, such as those programs listed below? [y/n] 
E-5 

I. FINANCIAL AID INFORMATION (continued)

Question 

Number Description

A. Financial Aid Awards (continued) 

Question 5. [If yes, enter amounts.]

State Aid Programs (List up to 12 awards)

 A. Customized for each state

 B. Customized for each state

 C. Customized for each state

 D. Customized for each state

 E. Customized for each state

 F. Customized for each state

 G. Customized for each state

 H. Customized for each state

 I. Customized for each state

 J. Customized for each state 

 K. Customized for each state 

 L. Customized for each state 

Question 6. Did the student receive any institutional aid, such as those programs listed below? [y,n] 

Question 7. [If yes, enter amounts.] 

Institutional Financial Aid

 A. Customized for each institution

 B. Customized for each institution

 C. Customized for each institution 

 D. Customized for each institution

 E. Customized for each institution 

 F. Customized for each institution

 G. Customized for each institution

 H. Customized for each institution 

 I. Customized for each institution 

 J. Customized for each institution 

 K. Customized for each institution 

 L. Customized for each institution 

 M. Other grants and scholarships: need-based 

 N. Other grants and scholarships: merit-based only 

 O. Other grants and scholarships: both need and merit 

 P. Athletic scholarship 

 Q. Undergraduate Tuition waivers for faculty/staff, family 

 R. Tuition waivers and discounts for other undergraduates 

 S. Undergraduate institutional loan 

 T. Undergraduate institutional work-study 

 U. Undergraduate resident assistants, tutors, or advisor stipends 

NOTE: Preloaded customized list has been expanded from a maximum of 3 aid programs to 12. 

List shown on screen will shrink and expand as necessary to show the preloaded institution aid for 

that institution, and it will probably be on two screens.
Appendix E. Facsimiles 

E-6 

I. FINANCIAL AID INFORMATION (continued)

A. Financial Aid Awards (continued) 

Question 

Number Description

Question 8. [If DEGREE <= 4 then skip the following graduate aid questions. Go to “other aid” (Q10).] 

Did the student receive any graduate aid, such as those programs listed below? [y,n] 

Question 9. [If yes, enter amounts.] 

Graduate Institutional Financial Aid

A. Graduate fellowship or scholarship 

B. Federal fellowship (NSF, NASA, NIH, USDA, etc.) 

C. Federal traineeship 

D. Teaching assistantships/stipends 

E. Research assistantships/stipends 

F. Other graduate assistant, tutor, or reader stipends 

G. Tuition waivers for graduate students (including assistants) 

H. Tuition waivers for faculty/staff, spouse, or children 

I. Institutional work-study 

J. Institutional loan 

Question 10. Did the student receive any other aid, such as those programs listed below? [y/n] 

Question 11. [If yes, enter amounts.] 

A. Scholarships/grants from private organizations, foundations, unions 

B. Employer-paid tuition 

C. Veteran benefits 

D. ROTC and grants for Armed Forces personnel 

E. WIA, other job training, vocational rehabilitation 

F. Bureau of Indian Affairs grants 

G. Scholarships/grants from state agencies in other states 

H. Private or commercial loans (including Law, Medical, TERI, Nellie Mae) 

Question 12. List of Other Financial Aid

Please also report any other financial aid awarded to the student. Provide 

1. the name of the award 

2. the type of award (Use key below) 

1. Grant/scholarship: need-based 

2. Grant/scholarship: merit-based 

3. Grant/scholarship: both need and merit 

4. Tuition waiver 

5. Loan 

6. Work-study or assistantship 

7. Other 

3. the source of the award (Use key below) 

1. Institution 

2. State 

3. Federal 

4. Other 

4. the amount of the award 

Summary Screen

The final screen in the Financial Aid subsection lists all of the aid programs for which the user 

entered amounts. The user can then click on the types of aid to go back to that screen to make any 

necessary changes, or can accept those amounts and continue. 
E-7 

I. FINANCIAL AID INFORMATION (continued)

B. Need Analysis

Question 

Number Description

Question 1. Is there financial aid budget information or a Federal Expected Family Contribution (EFC) value 

available for the student? [y/n] 

IF NO, Skip to Question 8.

Question 2. What was the student’s dependency status during the study year for federal financial aid purposes? 

(Use key below) 

1. Dependent 

2. Independent 

Question 3. For purposes of determining the student’s financial aid budget, was the student’s local residence...? 

(Use key below) 

1. On-campus or school-owned housing 

2. Off-campus without parents 

3. Off-campus with parents 

Question 4. Please enter or update the Federal Expected Family Contribution (EFC) amount for the student. 

Question 5. Is there a Cost of Attendance or Student Expense Budget available for this student? [y/n] 

Question 6 Please provide line-item budget amounts (if only a total budget amount is available, please provide 

the total amount; line-item amounts are preferred over a total amount). 

1. Tuition and fees 

2. Books and supplies 

3. Room and board 

4. Transportation 

5. Computer technology fees 

6. All other expenses 

OR

 Total Cost of Attendance 

Question 7 For what period does this budget apply? (Use key below) 

1. Full time, full year 

2. Full time, one term 

3. Part time, full year 

4. Part time, one term 

5. 5. Other 

Question 8 [If the institution is located in one of the 12 states with representative samples and the student is an 

undergraduate, ask this question. Base student status first on DEGREE <5, but if the DEGREE 

variable is blank, then use the preloaded student type.] 

Is there a [fill with preloaded state EFC name] value available for this student? [y/n] 

[If yes] Please enter the amount: 

[NOTE: We will obtain the specific names of the state EFC values from each of the 12 states prior 

to data collection and preload the correct name based on the state in which the institution is 

located.] 

C. Institution Student Information Record 

[only students who did not match to CPS prior to CADE get this section] 

Question 1 Is there an Institution Student Information Record (ISIR) or computerized ISIR data available for 

this student (y/n)? 

Question 2 Student’s Social Security number from the ISIR. 

Question 3 Student’s last name from ISIR. 
Appendix E. Facsimiles 

E-8 

II. REGISTRATION/ADMISSIONS

A. Locating Information Subsection

Question 

Number

Description

Question 1. Student’s PERMANENT phone number [area code + prefix + number] 

 Student’s PERMANENT International phone number [country code + number] 

[NOTE: Provide only if no US phone number available.] 

 Student’s PERMANENT address 

 Student’s PERMANENT city 

 Student’s PERMANENT state 

 Student’s PERMANENT zip code 

 Student’s PERMANENT country (if not USA) 

 Student’s permanent e-mail address 

[NOTE: If available, permanent e-mail address from the enrollment list will be preloaded and can 

be edited or confirmed.]

Question 2. Is the LOCAL address the same as the PERMANENT address? [y/n] 

Question 3. Student’s LOCAL phone number [area code + prefix + number] 

 Student’s LOCAL International phone number [country code + number] 

[NOTE: Provide only if no US phone number available.]

 Student’s LOCAL address 

 Student’s LOCAL city 

 Student’s LOCAL state 

 Student’s LOCAL zip code 

 Student’s campus e-mail address 

[NOTE: If available, campus e-mail address from the enrollment list will be preloaded and can be 

edited or confirmed.] 

Question 4. Is the LOCAL address the same as the PERMANENT address? [y/n] 

Question 5. FIRST NAME, MIDDLE initial, LAST NAME, and SUFFIX of parent for whom locating 

information is available. 

Question 6. Is address/phone information available for parents of the student? [y/n] 

Question 7. Is PARENT’S address same as student’s LOCAL or PERMANENT or DIFFERENT? 

[NOTE: May choose one of the previously entered addresses or if different continue with Q8.] 

Question 8. For parent named in Question 5. 

(You will get the option of choosing student’s address for the parent’s address.)

 PARENT’S phone number [area code + number] 

 PARENT’S International phone number [country code + number] 

[NOTE: Provide only if no US phone number available.]

 PARENT’S address 

Question 8. PARENT’S city 

 PARENT’S state 

 PARENT’S zip code 

 PARENT’S country (if not USA) 

Question 9. Is other phone/address information (DIFFERENT from what was previously entered) available for 

another parent, a relative, or a friend of the student? [y/n] 

Question 10. FIRST NAME, MIDDLE Initial, LAST NAME, and SUFFIX of parent or relative/friend for 

whom locating information is available. 

Question 11. Relationship of parent or relative/friend to STUDENT. 

1. FATHER 7. AUNT 

2. MOTHER 8. GRANDFATHER 

3. SPOUSE 9. GRANDMOTHER 

4. BROTHER 10. FRIEND 

5. SISTER 11. CO-WORKER 

6. UNCLE 12. OTHER (SPECIFY) 
E-9 

II. REGISTRATION/ADMISSIONS (continued)

A. Locating Information Subsection (continued)

Question 

Number

Description

Question 12. For parent or relative/friend, please provide: 

 Last Name, First Name, Middle Initial 

 Phone number [area code + number] 

[NOTE: Provide International number only if no US phone number available.]

 Address 

 City 

 State 

 Zip Code 

 Country 

B. Student Characteristics Section

Question 1. Student’s LAST name 

Student’s FIRST name 

Student’s MIDDLE initial 

Student’s suffix (e.g., Jr., III) 

Question 2. Student’s Social Security number 

Question 3. Student’s date of birth 

Question 4. Student’s gender (Use key below) 

1. Male 

2. Female 

Question 5. Student’s driver’s license number and state. 

Question 6. Student’s marital status (Use key below) 

1. Not married (single, widowed, divorced) 

2. Married 

3. Separated 

4. Don't know 

If married and female, please also provide: 

Student’s maiden name 

If married, please also provide: 

Spouse’s name (Last, First, Middle) 

Question 7. [If student is not an undergraduate then go to question 8. Determine student type by first checking 

the degree program in the enrollment section (DEGREE <=4) and if that is blank, use the 

preloaded student type.] 

Student’s high school degree (Use key below) 

1. High school diploma 

2. GED or other equivalency 

3. Certificate of high school completion 

4. Foreign high school 

5. No high school degree or certificate 

Question 7a. [If Question 7 above = 5, then skip to Question 8.] 

Year Student Received High School Diploma/GED/Certificate 

Question 7b. [If age >=30 then go to question 8. Age calculated based on date of birth as of January 1 of the 

interview year.] 

Is the high school located in <INSTITUTION STATE>? [Y/N/DK] 

[If NO:] 

Where is the high school located? <give drop-down list of states>

Question 8. What is the student’s ethnicity? (Use key below) 

1=Hispanic or Latino 

2=Not Hispanic or Latino 
Appendix E. Facsimiles 

E-10 

II. REGISTRATION/ADMISSIONS (continued)

B. Student Characteristics Section

Question 

Number

Description

Question 9. What is the student’s race? (Choose one or more) 

1. White 

2. Black or African American 

3. Asian 

4. American Indian or Alaska Native 

5. Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander 

Question 10. What is the student’s citizenship status? (Use key below) 

1. U.S. citizen or U.S. National 

2. Resident alien 

3. Foreign/International student or non-resident alien 

Question 11. [Students with a DOB year prior to 1983 get this question. If it is skipped due to age, insert a 0 for 

NO into the database.] 

Is the student a veteran of the U.S. Armed Forces? [y/n] 

C. Admissions Information Section 

For Undergraduates: 

 

Question 1. Is an SAT I score available? [y/n] 

If yes: Student’s SAT I verbal score 

 Student’s SAT I math score 

Question 2. Is an ACT score available? [y/n] 

If yes: Student’s composite ACT score 

For Graduate, Doctoral, and First-Professional Students

Question 1. Are scores from the Graduate Record Exam (GRE) available for this student? [y/n] 

If yes: Student’s GRE verbal score 

 Student’s GRE quantitative score 

 Student’s GRE analytic score 
E-11 

III. ENROLLMENT/TUITION SECTION

A. Enrollment Term Subsection [MUST BE COMPLETED BEFORE TUITION SUBSECTION]

Question 

Number

Description

 If student was enrolled in a course for credit at any time during the study period (July 1, 2003, 

through June 30, 2004) list all terms for which the student was enrolled and provide the following 

information for each term: 

 Name of term or payment period [EX: Fall, 2003] 

 Start date of that term/period [mm/yyyy] 

 End date of that term/period [mm/yyyy] 

 Attendance status (use key below): 

 1 = Full-time (12 or more credits) 

 2 = Half-time (6 to 11 credits) 

 3 = Less than Half-time (5 or less credits) 

 [If school is not a clock-hour school:]

 Credit hours [number] 

Question 1. 

This item is 

referred to as 

DEGREE 

throughout 

this 

document. 

During [LAST TERM ENROLLED], in what type of degree program was the student enrolled 

(Use key below): 

1 = Bachelor’s degree 

2 = Associate’s degree 

3 = Undergraduate certificate or diploma (occupational or technical program) 

4 = Undergraduate, not in a degree program 

5 = Master’s degree program 

6 = First-professional degree (law, medicine, chiropractic, pharmacy, ordination) 

7 = Doctoral degree program 

8 = Post-baccalaureate certificate program (including teaching credential) 

[skip next item, advanced degree, and code it as 28] 

9 = Graduate, not in a degree program 

[skip next item, advanced degree, and code it as 29] 

Question 1a. [if DEGREE=2 then] 

What type of Associate’s degree? 

1 = AA,AS, general education or transfer program 

2 = AAS, occupational or technical program 

Question 2. [Only applicable to students in Master’s Degree program. If DEGREE=5]

Which of the following Master’s degrees was the student working toward during [LAST TERM 

ENROLLED]? (Use key below) 

1 = Master of Science (MS) 

2 = Master of Arts (MA) 

3 = Master of Education (MEd) or Teaching (MAT) 

4 = Master of Business Administration (MBA) 

5 = Master of Public Administration (MPA) 

6 = Master of Social Work (MSW) 

7 = Master of Fine Arts (MFA) 

8 = Master of Public Health (MPH) 

9 = Master of Divinity (MDiv) 

[code as 19] 

10 = Other master’s degree programs not listed 
Appendix E. Facsimiles 

E-12 

III. ENROLLMENT/TUITION SECTION (continued)

A. Enrollment Term Subsection (continued) [MUST BE COMPLETED BEFORE TUITION SUBSECTION]

Question 

Number Description

Question 2. [Only applicable to students in Doctoral or FP program. If DEGREE=6 or 7]

Which of the following doctoral or first professional degrees was the student working toward 

during [LAST TERM ENROLLED]? (Use key below) 

 DOCTORAL DEGREES 

11 = Doctor of Philosophy (PhD) 

12 = Doctor of Education (EdD) 

13 = Doctor of Science (DSc/ScD) or Engineering (DEng) 

14 = Doctor of Psychology (PsyD) 

15 = Doctor of Business or Public Administration (DBA, DPA) 

16 = Doctor of Fine Arts (DFA) 

17 = Doctor of Theology (ThD) 

18 = Other doctoral degrees not listed 

FIRST PROFESSIONAL DEGREES 

19 = Ministry or Divinity (MDiv, DMin, MHL, BD, ordination) 

20 = Law (JD, LLB) 

21 = Medicine or Osteopathic Medicine (MD, DO) 

22 = Dentistry (DDS, DMD) 

23 = Chiropractic (DC, DCM) 

24 = Pharmacy (PharmD) 

25 = Optometry (OD) 

26 = Podiatry (DPM, DP, PodD) 

27 = Veterinary medicine (DVM) 

Question 3. During [LAST TERM ENROLLED], what was this student’s class level? (Use key below) 

[If the student is in an undergraduate degree program, the user will see only the undergraduate 

levels below. If the student is in a graduate/first professional degree program, the user will see 

only the graduate/professional levels below.] 

1 = 1st Year/Freshman 

2 = 2nd Year/Sophomore 

3 = 3rd Year/Junior 

4 = 4th Year/Senior 

5 = 5th Year or Higher Undergraduate 

6 = Undergraduate (unclassified) 

7 = Student with advanced degree taking undergraduate courses 

8 = 1st year Graduate/professional 

9 = 2nd year Graduate/professional 

10 = 3rd year Graduate/professional 

11 = Beyond 3rd year Graduate/professional 

Question 3a. [Only applicable to graduate and first professional students. If DEGREE > 4:] 

You have indicated that this student is enrolled as a graduate or first professional student. When 

did this student obtain a Baccalaureate degree? 

Month/Year: 

Student does not have a Baccalaureate degree. 

[NOTE: User can give the month and year or the “Student does not have a BA degree” option can 

be selected.] 

Question 4. [If the school does not have GPA’s, skip to Question 5.] 

Cumulative GPA 

Question 5. What is the student’s current or most recent major or field of study? 

(In some cases, this will be filled automatically filled based on type of Masters, doctoral, or firstprofessional degree program, but the user can still edit it.)
E-13 

III. ENROLLMENT/TUITION SECTION (continued)

A. Enrollment Term Subsection (continued) [MUST BE COMPLETED BEFORE TUITION SUBSECTION]

Question 

Number Description

Question 6. [Only applicable to undergraduate students. If DEGREE <= 4 or “student does not have a 

baccalaureate degree” option was selected in question 3a:] 

Was this student ever enrolled in this institution prior to July 1, 2003? [y/n] 

[If YES:] 

When did this student FIRST enroll at [INSTITUTION NAME]? [mm/yr] 

Question 7. [Only applicable to undergraduate students. If DEGREE <= 4 or “student does not have a 

baccalaureate degree” option was selected in question 3a:] 

Did the student transfer any credits from another postsecondary institution? [y/n] 

Question 8. [Only applicable to undergraduate students. If DEGREE <= 4 or “student does not have a 

baccalaureate degree” option was selected in question 3a:] 

Is this student classified as a first-time, first-year degree-seeking student for IPEDS reporting 

purposes? [y/n] 

Question 9. [Ask of all students] 

Is the student expected to have completed the requirements for the [DEGREE] on or before June 

30, 2004? [y/n] 

For CLOCK HOUR Institutions ONLY.

Question 10. What is the total length of the program in clock/contact hours? [Specify hours] 

Question 11. How many hours (lab and classroom) are required per week? [Specify hours] 

B. Tuition Charges

Question 1. For each term attended by the student (those terms identified in the Enrollment/Term subsection 

above), specify amounts of tuition and fees charged. Please provide separate amounts for each 

term, if available. 

[User can enter tuition amounts by term or total.] 

Question 2. Total tuition and fees charged for all terms. [automatically computed if user entered tuition by 

term.]

Question 3. [If the institution is public:] 

For tuition purposes, this student was classified as: (Use key below) 

1. In jurisdiction (e.g., in-state, in-district, etc.) 

2. Out-of-jurisdiction (e.g., out-of-state, out-of-district, etc.) 

Question 4. Was any of the tuition paid by a state prepaid or savings plan such as those listed below? [y/n] 

Question 4a. [If yes] 

Please enter the amount received by the student within each plan. 

A. Customized for each state

 B. Customized for each state 

C. Plan from another state 

[NOTE: We will preload the names of the one or two state prepaid or savings plans for that state. 

If there is only one, then the “plan from another state” will move up to slot B on the screen.]

Appendix E. Facsimile 

E-15 

Student Interview 

Appendix E. Facsimile 

E-17 

Section A: Eligibility and Enrollment 

N4ELIG 

NPSAS enrollment during NPSAS year 

Have you been enrolled at [NPSAS] at any time since 

July 1, 2003? 

0 = No 

1 = Yes, currently enrolled 

2 = Yes, but not currently enrolled 

3 = Have been enrolled, but still enrolled in high 

school 

Applies to: All respondents. 

TCURENRL 

Current enrollment flag 

Internal variable 

Current enrollment is defined as any respondent who 

indicates that they are currently enrolled at the time of 

the interview. If respondents were never enrolled at 

NPSAS, are still in high school, or were enrolled at 

NPSAS before the time of the interview, then they are 

considered not currently enrolled. 

If N4ELIG=1 then TCURENRL=1 else 

TCURENRL=0. 

0 = Not currently enrolled 

1 = Currently enrolled 

Applies to: All respondents.

N4DRPMY 

Date left NPSAS 

When did you last attend [NPSAS]? 

Applies to: Respondents who have been enrolled since 

July 1, 2003 but were not enrolled at NPSAS during 

the time of the interview.

CATI Code: N4ELIG=2 

N4DRPTM 

Left NPSAS with a completed term 

[If N4DRPMY is blank] 

When you last attended [NPSAS], did you leave at the 

end of the term, or did you leave before the term 

ended? 

[else] 

Is that date [N4DRPMY] at the end of the term, or did 

you leave before the term ended? 

1 = Left at the end of the term 

2 = Left before the term ended 

Applies to: Respondents who have been enrolled since 

July 1, 2003 but were not enrolled at NPSAS during 

the time of the interview.

CATI Code: N4ELIG=2 

N4DRPRF 

Received full tuition refund 

Did you receive a full refund of your tuition when you 

left? 

0 = No 

1 = Yes 

Applies to: Respondents who left NPSAS before the 

end of the term.

CATI Code: N4ELIG=2 and N4DRPTM in (2, -9) 

N4DRPCMP 

Completed previous course/term 

Have you completed a course or term at [NPSAS] at 

any time since July 1, 2003? 

0 = No 

1 = Yes 

Applies to: Respondents who left NPSAS before 

completing a term and received a full tuition refund. 

CATI Code: N4ELIG=2 and N4DRPTM in (2, -9) and 

N4DRPRF in (1, -9) 

N4STAT 

Student status at NPSAS 

For all questions about your 2003–2004 enrollment at 

[NPSAS], please refer to your most recent term of 

enrollment at the school. 

[If TCURENRL=1] 

In your most recent term at [NPSAS], have you been 

enrolled as an undergraduate or graduate student, or 

have you been taking courses without being enrolled 

in a degree program? 

[else] 

In your most recent term at [NPSAS], were you 

enrolled as an undergraduate or graduate student, or 

were you taking courses without being enrolled in a 

degree program? 

1 = Undergraduate student (includes associate’s and 

bachelor’s degrees, postsecondary diplomas and 

certificates at the undergraduate level, as well 

as professional degrees that do not require a 

bachelor’s degree)) 

2 = Graduate student (includes master’s and doctoral 

degrees, and post-baccalaureate and postmaster’s certificates, as well as professional 

degrees that may be pursued after obtaining a 

bachelor’s degree)) 

3 = Taking classes without being enrolled in a 

degree program 

Applies to: All respondents.
Appendix E. Facsimiles 

E-18 

N4DGUG 

Undergraduate degree type 

What undergraduate degree or certificate {[if 

TCURENRL=1] are you [else] were you} working on 

at [NPSAS] during the 2003–2004 school year? 

Note: An internally assigned value of 99 was used for 

cases that said N4DGUG=11, N4DGPR=28, and came 

back to N4DGUG=11 again to avoid getting stuck in 

loop. 

1 = Bachelor’s degree 

2 = Associate’s degree 

3 = Undergraduate certificate or diploma 

(occupational or technical program) 

4 = Undergraduate student, not in a degree program 

8 = Post-baccalaureate certificate 

11 = Professional degree (only includes the 

following degree programs: chiropractic, 

dentistry, law, medicine, optometry, osteopathic 

medicine, pharmacy, podiatry, 

divinity/theology, or veterinary medicine) 

99 = Misclassified professional 

Applies to: Undergraduate respondents. 

CATI Code: N4STAT in (1, -9) 

N4DGGR 

Graduate degree type 

What graduate degree or certificate were you working 

on at [NPSAS] during the 2003–2004 school year? 

If you are enrolled in more than one program, enter the 

highest. For example, if you are working on both a 

doctoral degree and a professional degree, enter a 

doctoral degree. 

Note: An internally assigned value of 99 was used for 

cases that said N4DGUG=11, N4DGPR=28, and came 

back to N4DGUG=11 again to avoid getting stuck in 

loop. 

6 = Master’s degree 

7 = Doctoral degree 

8 = Post-baccalaureate certificate 

9 = Graduate student, not in a degree program 

10 = Post-master’s certificate 

11 = First professional degree (only includes the 

following degree programs: chiropractic, 

dentistry, law, medicine, optometry, 

osteopathic medicine, pharmacy, podiatry, 

divinity/theology, or veterinary medicine) 

99 = Misclassified first professional 

Applies to: Graduate respondents.

CATI Code: N4STAT=2 

N4CLSLV 

Mainly undergraduate or graduate classes 

During the 2003–2004 school year, have you been 

taking mainly undergraduate or graduate classes at 

[NPSAS]? 

1 = Mainly undergraduate classes 

2 = Mainly graduate classes 

3 = An equal mix of undergraduate and graduate 

classes 

Applies to: Respondents who were not enrolled in a 

degree program during the 2003–2004 school year.

CATI Code: N4STAT in (3, -9) 

N4CKHOUR 

Clock hour requirement 

Did your program of study require at least 3 months or 

300 clock hours of instruction in order for a certificate 

to be awarded? 

0 = No 

1 = Yes 

Applies to: Undergraduate respondents who were 

working on a diploma or certificate during the 2003–

2004 school year.

CATI Code: N4STAT in (1, -9) and N4DGUG in (3, -

9) 

N4ASSOC 

Type of associate’s degree 

What type of associate’s degree were you working on 

at [NPSAS]? 

1 = AA, AS, general education or transfer program 

2 = AAS, occupational or technical program 

Applies to: Undergraduate respondents who were 

working on an associate’s degree during the 2003–

2004 school year.

CATI Code: N4DGUG in (2, -9) 

N4DGD 

Type of doctoral degree 

What specific degree were you working toward in 

your most recent term in the 2003–2004 school year? 

Doctoral degree 

11 = Doctor of Philosophy (PhD) 

12 = Doctor of Education (EdD) 

13 = Doctor of Science (DSc/ScD) or Engineering 

(DEng) 

14 = Doctor of Psychology (PsyD) 

15 = Doctor of Business or Public Administration 

(DBA/DPA) 

16 = Doctor of Fine Arts (DFA) 

17 = Doctor of Divinity/Theology (ThD) 

18 = Other doctoral degree not listed 

Applies to: Respondents who were working on a 

doctoral degree. 

CATI Code: N4DGGR in (7, -9) 
Appendix E. Facsimiles 

E-19 

N4DGMS 

Type of master’s degree 

What specific degree were you working toward in 

your most recent term in the 2003–2004 school year? 

Master’s degree 

1 = Master of Science (MS) 

2 = Master of Arts (MA) 

3 = Master of Education (MEd) or Teaching (MAT) 

4 = Master of Business Administration (MBA) 

5 = Public administration (MPA) 

6 = Master of Social Work (MSW) 

7 = Master of Fine Arts (MFA) 

8 = Master of Public Health (MPH) 

9 = Other master’s degree program not listed 

19 = Master of Divinity (MDiv) 

Applies to: Respondents who were working on a 

master’s degree. 

CATI Code: N4DGGR in (6, -9) 

N4DGPR 

Type of first professional degree 

What specific degree were you working toward in 

your most recent term in the 2003–2004 school year? 

First professional degree 

19 = Ministry or Divinity 

(MDiv/DMin/MHL/BD/ordination) 

20 = Law (JD/LLB) 

21 = Medicine (MD) or Osteopathic medicine (DO) 

22 = Dentistry (DDS/DMD) 

23 = Chiropractic (DC/DCM) 

24 = Pharmacy (PharmD) 

25 = Optometry (OD) 

26 = Podiatry (DPM/DP/PodD) 

27 = Veterinary medicine (DVM) 

28 = Other undergraduate degree not listed 

29 = Other graduate degree not listed 

Applies to: Respondents who were working on a first 

professional degree. 

CATI Code: (N4STAT=1 and N4DGUG in (11, 99)) 

or (N4STAT=2 and N4DGGR in (11, 99)) 

N4PRBA 

Earned BA while a first professional student 

Which of the following describes your most recent 

enrollment at [NPSAS]? 

If you are/were enrolled in more than one program, 

enter the highest. For example, if you are/were 

working on both a bachelor’s degree and a 

professional degree, enter the professional degree. 

1 = Enrolled in a first professional degree program, 

but have not yet earned a bachelor’s degree 

2 = Have already earned a bachelor’s degree and 

was/now enrolled for a first professional degree 

at the graduate level 

Applies to: Respondents who were working on a first 

professional degree. 

CATI Code: (N4STAT=1 and N4DGUG in (11, 99)) 

or (N4STAT=2 and N4DGGR in (11, 99)) 

TSTAT 

Internal variable: student status 

Internal variable 

TSTAT represents student status and corrects for any 

inconsistencies in the reported data: undergraduate, 

graduate 

if N4STAT = 1 then 

 TSTAT = 1 

if N4STAT = 1 and N4DGUG = 8 then 

 TSTAT = 2 

if N4STAT = 2 then 

 TSTAT = 2 

if (N4DGUG = 11 or N4DGGR = 11) and N4PRBA = 

1 and 

(N4DGPR = 19 or N4DGPR = 20 or N4DGPR = 21 or 

N4DGPR = 22 or 

N4DGPR = 23 or N4DGPR = 24 or N4DGPR = 25 or 

N4DGPR = 26 or 

N4DGPR = 27) then 

 TSTAT = 1 

if (N4DGUG = 11 or N4DGGR = 11) and N4PRBA = 

2 and 

(N4DGPR = 19 or N4DGPR = 20 or N4DGPR = 21 or 

N4DGPR = 22 or 

N4DGPR = 23 or N4DGPR = 24 or N4DGPR = 25 or 

N4DGPR = 26 or 

N4DGPR = 27) then 

 TSTAT = 2 

if N4STAT = 2 and N4DGPR = 28 and (N4DGUG = 1 

or N4DGUG = 2 

or N4DGUG = 3 or N4DGUG = 4) then 

 TSTAT = 1 

if N4STAT = 2 and N4DGPR = 28 and N4DGUG = 8 

then 

 TSTAT = 2 

if N4STAT = 1 and N4DGPR = 29 and (N4DGGR = 6 

or N4DGGR = 7 

or N4DGGR = 8 or N4DGGR = 9 or N4DGGR = 10) 

then 

 TSTAT = 2 

if N4STAT = 3 and (N4CLSLV = 1 or N4CLSLV = 3) 

then 

 TSTAT = 1 

if N4STAT = 3 and N4CLSLV = 2 then 

 TSTAT = 2 

if TSTAT = -9 then 

 TSTAT = 1 

1 = Undergraduate 

2 = Graduate 

Applies to: All respondents.
Appendix E. Facsimiles 

E-20 

TDEGREN 

Numeric degree 

Internal variable 

TDEGREN = -9; 

if N4STAT = 3 then do; 

 if TSTAT = 1 then TDEGREN = 4; 

 if TSTAT = 2 then TDEGREN = 9; 

end; 

else if TSTAT = 1 then do; 

 if N4DGUG = 1 then TDEGREN = 1; 

 else if N4DGUG = 2 then TDEGREN = 2; 

 else if N4DGUG = 3 then TDEGREN = 3; 

 else if N4DGUG = 4 then TDEGREN = 4; 

 else if N4DGUG = 8 then TDEGREN = 8; 

 else if N4DGUG in (11,99) then TDEGREN = 5; 

 else if N4DGGR in (11,99) then TDEGREN = 5; 

 else if N4DGUG = -9 then TDEGREN = 4; 

end; 

else if TSTAT = 2 then do; 

 if N4DGGR = 6 then TDEGREN = 6; 

 else if N4DGGR = 7 then TDEGREN = 7; 

 else if N4DGGR = 8 then TDEGREN = 8; 

 else if N4DGUG = 8 then TDEGREN = 8; 

 else if N4DGGR = 9 then TDEGREN = 9; 

 else if N4DGGR = 10 then TDEGREN = 10; 

 else if N4DGGR in (11,99) then TDEGREN = 11; 

 else if N4DGUG in (11,99) then TDEGREN = 11; 

 else if N4DGGR = -9 then TDEGREN = 9; 

end; 

1 = Bachelor’s degree 

2 = Associate’s degree 

3 = Undergraduate certificate/diploma 

4 = Undergraduate, not in a degree program 

5 = Undergraduate first professional 

6 = Master’s degree 

7 = Doctoral degree 

8 = Post-baccalaureate certificate 

9 = Graduate, not in a degree program 

10 = Post-master’s certificate 

11 = Graduate first professional 

Applies to: All respondents.

N4ELCRD 

Enrolled for transferable credit 

For all questions about your 2003–2004 enrollment at 

[NPSAS], please refer to your most recent term of 

enrollment at the school. In your most recent term at 

[NPSAS], were you enrolled in a course for credit that 

could be transferred to another school? 

0 = No 

1 = Yes 

Applies to: All respondents.

Recode Note: If TDEGREN not in (4, 9) then 

N4ELCRD=1. 

N4NPELG 

NPSAS eligibility flag 

Coding Flag 

Internal variable 

NPSAS eligibility 

If (((N4HSYR > 0 and N4HSYR < begyear) or 

N4CMP <> 1) and 

(N4ELIG = 1 or N4DRPTM = 1 or N4DRPRF = 0 or 

N4DRPCMP = 1)) 

AND 

(((N4STAT = 1 or N4STAT = -9) 

 and 

 ((N4DGUG = 3 and N4CKHOUR = 1) 

 or ((N4DGUG = 4 or N4DGUG = -9) and 

N4ELCRD = 1) 

 or (N4DGUG = 1 or N4DGUG = 2 or N4DGUG = 

8 or 

 N4DGUG = 11 or N4DGUG = 99))) 

or (N4STAT = 2 

 and 

 (((N4dggr = 9 or N4dggr = -9) and N4ELCRD = 1) 

 or (N4dggr = 6 or N4dggr = 7 or N4dggr = 8 or 

N4dggr = 10 

 or N4dggr = 11 or N4dggr = 99))) 

or (N4STAT = 3 and N4ELCRD = 1)) 

then N4NPELG = 1 

else N4NPELG = 0 

0 = Not eligible 

1 = Eligible 

Applies to: All respondents.

N4UGYR 

Undergraduate level last term 

What was your year or level during your most recent 

term at [NPSAS] in the 2003–2004 school year? 

1 = First year or freshman 

2 = Second year or sophomore 

3 = Third year or junior 

4 = Fourth year or senior 

5 = Fifth year or higher undergraduate 

6 = Unclassified undergraduate 

7 = Graduate student taking undergraduate classes 

Applies to: Undergraduate respondents who were 

working on a degree during the 2003–2004 school 

year.

CATI Code: TSTAT=1 and N4DGUG in (not = 4, -9) 
Appendix E. Facsimiles 

E-21 

N4GRYR 

Graduate level last term 

[If N4DGPR > 0 then] 

What year of your professional program were you in 

during your most recent term at [NPSAS] in the 2003–

2004 school year? 

[else] 

What year of your graduate program were you in 

during your most recent term at [NPSAS] in the 2003–

2004 school year? 

8 = First year 

9 = Second year 

10 = Third year 

11 = Fourth year 

12 = Fifth year 

13 = Sixth year or higher 

Applies to: Graduate respondents who were working 

on a degree. 

CATI Code: TSTAT=2 and TDEGREN not in (4, 9) 

N4BGMY 

Beginning date at NPSAS during NPSAS year 

Internal variable 

N4BGMY indicates the beginning date at NPSAS 

during the NPSAS year. The beginning date is 

derived from the enrollment string (N4NEN01-

N4NEN13). 

Applies to: All respondents. 

N4EMY 

Ending date at NPSAS during NPSAS year 

Internal variable 

N4EMY indicates the ending date at NPSAS during 

the NPSAS year. The ending date is derived from the 

enrollment string (N4NEN01-N4NEN13). 

Applies to: All respondents. 

N4DBLMAJ 

Major declared/undeclared 

Have you declared a major yet? 

0 = Not in a degree program 

1 = Declared major 

2 = Declared double major 

3 = Not yet declared 

Applies to: All respondents.

Recode Note: If TDEGREN in (4,9) then 

N4DBLMAJ=0. 

If TSTAT=2 and TDEGREN not in (4,9) then 

N4DBLMAJ=1. 

N4CLTYA–N4CLTYL, N4CLTYX 

Types of classes 

What types of classes have you been taking during the 

2003–2004 school year? 

(Please check all that apply.) 

0 = No 

1 = Yes 

N4CLTYA—Business 

N4CLTYB—Health 

N4CLTYC—Education 

N4CLTYD—Engineering and Engineering 

Technology 

N4CLTYE—Computer and Information Sciences 

N4CLTYF—Social Sciences 

N4CLTYG—Natural Sciences and Mathematics 

N4CLTYH—Arts and Humanities 

N4CLTYI—Communications 

N4CLTYJ—Vocational Programs 

N4CLTYK—University Transfer 

N4CLTYL—General Education 

N4CLTYX—Other 

Applies to: Respondents who were not enrolled in a 

degree program during the 2003–2004 school year.

CATI Code: TDEGREN in (4, 9) 

N4GPA1 

GPA measured on 4.00 scale 

Is your grade point average (GPA) measured on a 4.00 

scale? 

1 = Yes 

2 = No, it is measured on another grading scale 

3 = No, the school does not award grades 

4 = Yes, but no GPA yet 

Applies to: All respondents.

Recode Note: If N4GPA= -5 then N4GPA1=4. 

N4GPA 

Cumulative GPA 

What was your cumulative GPA at [NPSAS] through 

the end of your most recent term in the 2003–2004 

school year? 

Range: 0.00 to 4.00 

Applies to: Respondents whose GPA was measured on 

a 4.0 scale. 

CATI Code: N4GPA1 in (1, -9) 
Appendix E. Facsimiles 

E-22 

N4GPAEST 

Estimate of GPA 

Which of the following would you say best describes 

your grade point average at [NPSAS]? 

1 = Mostly A’s (3.75 and above) 

2 = A’s and B’s (3.25-3.74) 

3 = Mostly B’s (2.75-3.24) 

4 = B’s and C’s (2.25-2.74) 

5 = Mostly C’s (1.75-2.24) 

6 = C’s and D’s (1.25-1.74) 

7 = Mostly D’s or below (below 1.24) 

8 = Don’t know 

Applies to: Respondents whose GPA was on a 4.0 

point scale and did not know their numeric GPA, or 

who were on a grading scale other than a 4.0 point 

scale. 

CATI Code: (N4GPA1 in (1, -9) and N4GPA= -9.00) 

or (N4GPA1=2)) 

N4DGBMY 

Date first began NPSAS ever 

In what month and year did you first attend [NPSAS] 

after completing high school requirements? 

Applies to: Undergraduate respondents. 

CATI Code: TSTAT=1 

N4CMPDGN 

Completed requirements for degree 

Have you completed all the requirements for your 

[TDEGREN]? 

0 = No 

1 = Yes 

Applies to: Respondents in a degree program. 

Cati Code: TDEGREN not in (4, 9) 

Recode Note: If TCURENRL=1 and TDEGREN not 

in (4, 9) then N4CMPDGN=0. 

If TCURENRL=0 and (N4GRYR=8 and TDEGREN 

in (5, 7, 11) or (N4UGYR in (1, 2) and TDEGREN=1) 

then N4CMPDGN=0. 

N4GRMY 

Date began graduate studies 

When did you begin your [TDEGREN] at [NPSAS]? 

Applies to: Graduate respondents who were working 

on a degree. 

CATI Code: TSTAT=2 and TDEGREN not = 9 

N4GRST 

Graduate enrollment status 

Earlier you told us about your enrollment status for the 

2003–2004 school year. Now we’d like to ask about 

your enrollment since you began your graduate 

program. Since you started working on your 

[TDEGREN], have you been enrolled mainly as a fulltime student or a part-time student? 

1 = Mainly full-time 

2 = Mainly part-time 

3 = Mix of full- and part-time 

Applies to: Graduate respondents who were working 

on a degree. 

CATI Code: TSTAT=2 and TDEGREN not =9 

N4EXNMY 

Date expect degree at NPSAS 

In what month and year do you expect to complete the 

requirements for your [TDEGREN]? 

Applies to: Respondents who were working toward a 

degree at NPSAS who expect to complete it. 

CATI Code: TDEGREN not in (4, 9) and 

N4CMPDGN not =1 and N4EXPN not =1 

N4EXPN 

Date expect degree: will not complete 

In what month and year do you expect to complete the 

requirements for your [TDEGREN]? 

Will not finish the [TDEGREN] 

0 = No 

1 = Yes 

Applies to: Respondents who are working toward a 

degree at NPSAS but have not completed it. 

CATI Code: TDEGREN not in (4,9) and 

N4CMPDGN not =1 

N4DGNMY 

Date awarded degree at NPSAS 

In what month and year did you complete your 

[TDEGREN] at [NPSAS]? 

Applies to: Respondents who completed a degree at 

NPSAS. 

CATI Code: N4CMPDGN in (1, -9) 

N4ENRPLN 

Plan to be enrolled next year at NPSAS 

Do you plan to be enrolled at [NPSAS] during the 

2004-2005 school year? 

0 = No 

1 = Yes 

Applies to: Respondents who are not currently 

enrolled at NPSAS and have not completed a degree. 

CATI Code: TCURENRL=0 and N4CMPDGN not 

=1 
Appendix E. Facsimiles 

E-23 

N4EXPNP 

Highest level of education expected at NPSAS 

[If TCURENRL = 1 then] 

What is the highest level of education you expect to 

complete at [NPSAS]? 

[else] 

What was the highest level of education you expected 

to complete at [NPSAS]? 

0 = No degree/certificate 

1 = Bachelor’s degree 

2 = Associate’s degree 

3 = Undergraduate certificate or diploma 

(occupational or technical program) 

6 = Master’s degree 

7 = Doctoral degree (such as the Ph.D., Ed.D., etc.) 

8 = Post-baccalaureate certificate 

10 = Post-master’s certificate 

12 = Professional degree (only includes the 

following degree programs: chiropractic, 

dentistry, law, medicine, optometry, 

osteopathic medicine, pharmacy, podiatry, 

divinity/theology, or veterinary medicine) 

Applies to: All respondents except those who did not 

plan on being enrolled at NPSAS in 2004-2005. 

CATI Code: N4ENRPLN not = 0 

Recode Note: If N4DGGR=7 then N4EXPNP=7. 

N4NEW1-5 

Attended other schools (1–5) during NPSAS year 

Have you attended any other schools besides [NPSAS] 

since July 1, 2003? 

0 = No 

1 = Yes 

Applies to: All respondents.

N4NUMSCH 

Total schools attended 

Derived variable 

N4NUMSCH is calculated based on enrollment 

history during the 2003–2004 school year and 

respondents’ reporting of attendance at other 

institutions. 

If no other schools attended, N4NUMSCH=1; 

If 1 other school attended, N4NUMSCH=2; 

If 2 other school attended, N4NUMSCH=3; 

If 3 other school attended, N4NUMSCH=4; 

If 4 other school attended, N4NUMSCH=5; 

If 5 other school attended, N4NUMSCH=6; 

Observed range: 1 - 6 

Applies to: All respondents.

NEWNUMSC 

Revised number of schools attended during NPSAS 

year 

Internal variable 

This variable represents the number of institutions the 

respondent attended during the NPSAS year, 

correcting for duplicate entries as well as institutions 

that were coded after data collection. 

Observed range: 1 - 6 

Applies to: All respondents.

N4ENSTCT 

Number of valid enrollment strings 

Internal variable 

This variable holds the number of valid enrollment 

strings we have for each respondent. 

0 = 0 

1 = 1 

2 = 2 

3 = 3 

4 = 4 

5 = 5 

6 = 6 

Applies to: All respondents.

TMULTPL 

Indicator of multiple enrollment during NPSAS year 

Internal variable 

TMULPTL is calculated from the number of valid 

IPEDS codes. 

If N4NUMSCH>1 then TMULTPL=1 (Attended 

additional schools) 

else TMULTPL=0 (Only attended NPSAS) 

0 = No 

1 = Yes 

Applies to: All respondents.
Appendix E. Facsimiles 

E-24 

N4EMX 

Monthly enrollment indicators-all schools 

N4EMX is the overall enrollment string. It shows 

enrollment during the NPSAS year regardless of 

school. Therefore, it is a combination enrollment 

string for all schools attended. 

Each month is designated by a character in the 12 

month (12 character) enrollment string. The string 

runs from July 2003-June 2004. Within each character 

space, we allow the following designators for type of 

enrollment: 

<1> Mostly Full-time 

<3> Mostly Part-time 

<4> Equal mix of Full-time and Part-time 

<9> Enrolled, status unknown 

<0> None 

<-1> Don’t know 

<-9> Missing 

For example, If the respondent was enrolled part time 

for the first half of the year, and then mixed for the 

2nd half of the year then N4EMX = 333333444444. 

If the respondent attended more than one school 

during the NPSAS year, there is an order of 

precedence for each character space: 

1st=Full time 

2nd=Mixed 

3rd=Part time 

Therefore, if the respondent was enrolled as at fulltime 

student at one school during December, and also as a 

part time student somewhere else in December, we 

mark “full time”. 

Further examples: 

a) If the respondent has 2 schools and N4NEMX = 

101010101010 and N41EMX = 111111111111, then 

N4EMX = 111111111111. 

b) If the respondent has 2 schools and N4NEMX = 

111111222222 and N41EMX = 111111111111, then 

N4EMX = 111111111111. 

Applies to: All respondents.

N4EMXFLG 

N4EMX flag 

Coding Flag 

N4EMXFLG indicates the following values for the 

enrollment string (N4EMX): 

-1: entire string is -1 (don’t know) 

-9: entire string is -9 (missing) 

1: entire string is valid (no -1 nor -9) 

2: mixed with valid strings (1-4, -1, -9) 

Examples: 

a) A value of 1 in N4EMXLFG means that the overall 

enrollment string, N4EMX, is made up of enrollment 

strings that are all valid strings. For example, if the 

respondent has 2 schools and N4NEMX = 

101010101010 and N41EMX = 111111111111, then 

N4EMX = 111111111111 and N4EMXFLG = 1. 

b) A value of 2 means that N4EMX is made up of 

some valid strings and some not valid strings (i.e. -9, -

1). For example, if the respondent has 2 schools and 

N4NEMX = 101010101010 and N41EMX = -9, then 

N4EMX = 101010101010 and N4EMXFLG = 2. 

1 = Entire string is valid: no -1 or -9 

2 = Mixed with valid strings 

Applies to: All respondents.

N4NFST 

NPSAS was first school attended after high school 

Was [NPSAS] the first college or trade school you 

enrolled in after completing your high school 

requirements? 

0 = No 

1 = Yes 

Applies to: Undergraduate respondents. 

CATI Code: TSTAT=1 

N4FSTMY 

Date attended first school 

In what month and year did you first attend any 

college, university, or trade school after high school? 

Applies to: Respondents for whom NPSAS was not the 

first school after high school. 

CATI Code: N4NFST in (0, -9) 

N4CMPCLS 

Completed postsecondary course after high school 

Did you complete one or more postsecondary classes 

(at a college or trade school) toward a degree or formal 

award between the time you completed high school 

and July 1, 2003? 

0 = No 

1 = Yes 

Applies to: Undergraduates who first enrolled at a 

postsecondary institution prior to July 1, 2003 and are 

either in the first or second year of a degree program, 

or not in a degree program. 

CATI Code: ((TSTAT=1) and ((N4NFST=1 and 

N4DGBMY<200307) or (N4NFST not = 1 and 

N4FSTMY < 200307)) and ((N4DGUG = 4) or 

((N4DGUG not = 4) and (N4UGYR in (1, 2, 6,-3, -

9)))) 
Appendix E. Facsimiles 

E-25 

N4TRNSFR 

Transferred to NPSAS 

Did you transfer to [NPSAS] from another school at 

any time during 2003-2004? 

0 = No 

1 = Yes 

Applies to: Undergraduate respondents who went to 

multiple schools during the 2003–2004 school year 

and NPSAS was not their first school. 

CATI Code: TSTAT=1 and TMULTPL=1 and 

N4NFST in (0, -9) 

N4TRNCRD 

Transferred credits to NPSAS 

Did [NPSAS] accept all, some, or none of the credits 

you wanted to transfer? 

0 = None 

1 = All 

2 = Some 

Applies to: Undergraduate respondents who 

transferred to NPSAS from another school during the 

2003–2004 school year. 

CATI Code: TSTAT=1 and TMULTPL=1 and 

N4NFST in (0, -9) and N4TRNSFR in (1, -9) 

N4TRNAWY 

Transferred from NPSAS 

Did you transfer from [NPSAS] to another school at 

any point during, 2003-2004? 

0 = No 

1 = Yes 

Applies to: Undergraduates who were not enrolled at 

NPSAS during the time of the interview and were 

enrolled at multiple schools during the 2003–2004 

school year.

CATI Code: TSTAT=1 and N4ELIG not =1 and 

TMULTPL=1 

N4TRNPLN 

Plan to transfer from NPSAS 

Do you plan to transfer from [NPSAS] to another 

school? 

0 = No 

1 = Yes 

Applies to: Undergraduates who were either currently 

enrolled, or not currently enrolled but who planned to 

be enrolled at NPSAS in 2004-2005, and did not 

complete a degree and had not transferred away from 

NPSAS. 

CATI Code: TSTAT=1 and (TCURENRL=1 or 

(TCURENRL=0 and N4ENRPLN in (1, -9))) and 

N4CMPDGN not = 1 and N4TRNAWY not = 1 

N4PRDG 

Earned prior degree/certificates 

[If TDEGREN in (4, 9)] 

Have you earned any degrees or certificates since you 

left high school? 

[else] 

Other than the [TDEGREN] that you [are working 

on/earned] at [NPSAS], have you earned any other 

degrees or certificates since you left high school? 

0 = No 

1 = Yes 

Applies to: All respondents.

Recode note: If N4CMPCLS=0 then N4PRDG=0. 

N4PRCHKA 

Prior degree check: bachelor’s degree 

Have you earned a bachelor’s degree? 

0 = No 

1 = Yes 

Applies to: Respondents who worked on a master’s, 

post master’s or doctoral degree at NPSAS and 

reported not completing a prior degree. 

CATI Code: TDEGREN in (7, 6, 10) and N4PRDG 

not = 1 

N4PRCHKB 

Prior degree check: master’s degree 

Have you earned a master’s degree? 

0 = No 

1 = Yes 

Applies to: Respondents who worked on a master’s, 

post master’s or doctoral degree at NPSAS and 

reported not completing a prior degree. 

CATI Code: (TDEGREN in 7, 6, 10) and N4PRDG 

not = 1 

N4OTDGA–N4OTDGH 

Degrees earned 

What degrees or certificates have you already earned? 

(Please check all that apply.) 

0 = No 

1 = Yes 

N4OTDGA—Bachelor’s degree 

N4OTDGB—Associate’s degree 

N4OTDGC—Undergraduate certificate/diploma 

N4OTDGD—Post-baccalaureate certificate 

N4OTDGE—Master’s degree 

N4OTDGF—Post-master’s certificate 

N4OTDGG—First professional degree 

N4OTDGH—Doctoral degree 

Applies to: Respondents who have earned other 

degrees or certificates.

CATI Code: N4PRDG in (1, -9) 
Appendix E. Facsimiles 

E-26 

N4PRDGMY 

Bachelor’s degree completed date 

In what month and year was your bachelor’s degree 

awarded? 

Applies to: Respondents who have earned a bachelor’s 

degree. 

CATI Code: N4OTDGA in (1, -9) 

N4EXPEVR 

Highest level of education expected 

What is the highest level of education you ever expect 

to complete? 

0 = No degree/certificate 

1 = Bachelor’s degree 

2 = Associate’s degree 

3 = Undergraduate certificate or diploma 

(occupational or technical program) 

6 = Master’s degree 

7 = Doctoral degree (such as the PhD, EdD, etc.) 

8 = Post-baccalaureate certificate 

10 = Post-master’s certificate 

12 = Professional degree (includes the following 

degree programs: chiropractic, dentistry, law, 

medicine, optometry, osteopathic medicine, 

pharmacy, podiatry, divinity/theology, or 

veterinary medicine) 

Applies to: All respondents.

Recode Note: If N4DGGR=7 or N4EXPNP=7 then 

N4EXPEVR=7. 

N4EVRCC 

Ever attended community college 

Have you ever taken classes at a community college? 

0 = No 

1 = Yes 

Applies to: All respondents.

Recode Note: If (Y_NPLEVL = 2 and Y_NPCTRL = 

1) or (N4LEVL1 = 2 and N4CTRL1 = 1) or 

(N4LEVL2 = 2 and N4CTRL2 = 1) or (N4LEVL3 = 2 

and N4CTRL3 = 1) or (N4LEVL4 = 2 and N4CTRL4 

= 1) or (N4LEVL5 = 2 and N4CTRL5 = 1) then 

N4EVRCC=1. 

N4RSNA–N4RSNG 

Reason for attending NPSAS 

What were your main reasons for enrolling at 

[NPSAS]? 

(Please check all that apply.) 

0 = No 

1 = Yes 

N4RSNA—Learn job skills/prepare for job

N4RSNB—Transfer to a 2-year school 

N4RSNC—Transfer to a 4-year school 

N4RSND—Transfer but not known where 

N4RSNE—Personal interest or enrichment 

N4RSNF—Complete an undergraduate certificate 

or diploma 

N4RSNG—Complete an associate’s degree 

Applies to: Respondents enrolled in a less-than-4-year 

institution and respondents enrolled in a 4-year 

institution who are not working on a degree. 

CATI Code: Y_NPLEVL gt 1 or (Y_NPLEVL = 1 and 

TDEGREN in (4, 9)) 

N4EVR4YR 

Ever attended 4-year school 

Have you ever attended a 4-year school? 

0 = No 

1 = Yes 

Applies to: All respondents.

Recode Note: If (Y_NPLEVL=1 or N4LEVL1=1 or 

N4LEVL2=1 or N4LEVL3=1 or N4LEVL4=1 or 

N4LEVL5=1) then N4EVR4YR=1. 

N4GENDR 

Gender 

So that the rest of this interview may be customized 

for you, please answer the following questions. 

What is your gender? 

1 = Male 

2 = Female 

Applies to: All respondents.

N4DOBMY 

Date of birth 

[If N4GENDR = -3 then] 

So that the rest of this interview may be customized 

for you, please answer the following questions. 

In what month and year were you born? 

[else] 

In what month and year were you born? 

Applies to: All respondents.

N4LT30 

Age: less than 30 

What is your age? Are you... 

1 = Under 24 

2 = 24-29 

3 = 30 or over 

Applies to: Respondents who did not provide a date of 

birth. 

CATI Code: N4DOBYY= -9 
Appendix E. Facsimiles 

E-27 

TAGE 

Age as of January 1, 2004 

Internal Variable 

Calculate age as of January 1, 2004 based on N4DOB. 

IF N4DOBYY=blank and N4LT30=1 THEN 

TAGE=1; 

IF N4DOBYY=blank and N4LT30=2 THEN 

TAGE=2; 

IF N4DOBYY=blank and N4LT30=3 THEN 

TAGE=99; 

Applies to: All respondents.

N4MARR 

Current marital status 

What is your current marital status? 

1 = Single, never married 

2 = Married 

3 = Separated 

4 = Divorced 

5 = Widowed 

Applies to: All respondents.

N4DIPL 

Type of high school completion 

Which of the following best describes your high 

school completion? 

1 = Received a high school diploma 

2 = Passed a GED (General Educational 

Development) test 

3 = Received a high school completion certificate 

4 = Attended a foreign high school 

5 = Did not complete high school or a high school 

equivalency program 

6 = I was home schooled 

Applies to: Undergraduate respondents. 

CATI Code: TSTAT=1 

N4HSYR 

Date completed high school 

When did you complete high school? 

[If N4DIPL=4] 

When did you last attend high school? 

[If N4DIPL=1] 

When did you receive your high school diploma? 

[If N4DIPL=3] 

When did you receive your high school certificate? 

[If N4DIPL=2] 

When did you receive your GED? 

Year 

Applies to: Undergraduate respondents. 

CATI Code: TSTAT=1 

Recode Note: If N4DIPL=5 then N4HSYR=0. 

TDELAY 

One year delay after high school 

Internal variable 

TDELAY calculates the amount of time between first 

enrollment in postsecondary education and high 

school completion. 

If [N4SCHSTR-N4HSYR]>0 THEN TDELAY=1 

else if N4NFST not = 1 THEN 

If [N4FSTYY-N4HSYR]>0 THEN TDELAY=1; 

else TDELAY=0; 

0 = No delay 

1 = Delay 

Applies to: All respondents.

N4CMP 

Currently completing high school requirements 

Were you completing high school requirements for the 

entire time you were enrolled at [NPSAS] between 

July 1, 2003 and June 30, 2004? 

0 = No 

1 = Yes 

Applies to: Undergraduates who completed high 

school during 2004, or who did not provide a date for 

high school graduation, or who had not completed 

high school during the time of the interview. 

CATI Code: TSTAT=1 and N4HSYR in (2004, 0, -9) 
Appendix E. Facsimiles 

E-28 

N4HSST 

High school state 

In what state did you last attend high school? 

1 = Alabama 31 = New Jersey 

2 = Alaska 32 = New Mexico 

3 = Arizona 33 = New York 

4 = Arkansas 34 = North Carolina 

5 = California 35 = North Dakota 

6 = Colorado 36 = Ohio 

7 = Connecticut 37 = Oklahoma 

8 = Delaware 38 = Oregon 

9 = District of 

 Columbia 

39 = Pennsylvania 

40 = Rhode Island 

10 = Florida 41 = South Carolina 

11 = Georgia 42 = South Dakota 

12 = Hawaii 43 = Tennessee 

13 = Idaho 44 = Texas 

14 = Illinois 45 = Utah 

15 = Indiana 46 = Vermont 

16 = Iowa 47 = Virginia 

17 = Kansas 48 = Washington 

18 = Kentucky 49 = West Virginia 

19 = Louisiana 50 = Wisconsin 

20 = Maine 51 = Wyoming 

21 = Maryland 52 = Puerto Rico 

22 = Massachusetts 54 = American Samoa 

23 = Michigan 55 = Guam 

24 = Minnesota 

25 = Mississippi 

56 = Fed State 

 Micronesia 

26 = Missouri 57 = Marshall Islands 

27 = Montana 58 = Northern Mariana Isl 

28 = Nebraska 59 = Palau 

29 = Nevada 60 = Virgin Islands 

30 = New Hampshire 63 = FOREIGN 

 COUNTRY 

Applies to: Undergraduate respondents who were not 

enrolled in a foreign high school. 

CATI Code: TSTAT=1 and N4DIPL not = 4 

N4HSTYP 

Type of high school attended 

Was your high school public or private? 

1 = Public 

2 = Private 

3 = Attended a foreign high school 

Applies to: Undergraduate respondents who received 

a high school diploma, completion certificate, 

attended a foreign high school, or were home 

schooled. 

CATI Code: TSTAT=1 and N4DIPL not = (2, 5, 6) 

Recode Note: If N4DIPL=4 then N4HSTYP=3 

N4BPSELG 

BPS eligibility flag 

Coding Flag 

Internal Variable 

N4BPSELG determines eligibility for inclusion in the 

BPS cohort. 

N4BPSELG=1 if: 

An undergraduate freshman or first-year student 

between July 1, 2003 and June 30, 2004, had not 

completed any prior degrees, and had not completed at 

least one postsecondary class toward a degree or 

formal award since completing high school. 

0 = Not BPS eligible 

1 = BPS eligible-NPSAS 

2 = BPS eligible-not NPSAS 

Applies to: All respondents 

.
Appendix E. Facsimile 

E-29 

Section B: Financial Aid 

N4TASST, N4RASST, N4GFEL, 

N4TRNSHP, N4GASST 

Graduate teaching assistantship 

For the 2003–2004 school year, which of the 

following did you have? 

(Please check all that apply.) 

(If you did not receive any of the following types of 

aid, choose None and then hit continue.) 

0 = No 

1 = Yes 

N4TASST—A graduate teaching assistantship

N4RASST—Graduate research assistantship

N4GFEL—Graduate fellowship 

N4TRNSHP—Traineeship

N4GASST—Graduate assistantship

Applies to: Graduate respondents.

CATI Code: TSTAT=2 

N4TASSM, N4RASSM, N4GFELM, 

N4TRNSM, N4GASSM 

Teaching assistantship amount 

For the 2003–2004 school year, which of the 

following did you have? 

(Please check all that apply.) 

(If you did not receive any of the following types of 

aid, choose None and then hit continue.) 

N4TASSM—Graduate teaching assistantship 

amount

N4RASSM—Graduate research assistantship 

amount 

N4GFELM—Graduate fellowship amount

N4TRNSM—Traineeship amount 

N4GASSM—Other graduate assistantship 

amount 

N4NONE 

No graduate assistantship 

For the 2003–2004 school year, which of the 

following did you have? 

(Please check all that apply.) 

(If you did not receive any of the following types of 

aid, choose None and then hit continue.) 

None 

0 = No 

1 = Yes 

Applies to: Graduate respondents.

CATI Code: TSTAT=2 

N4TUITN 

Tuition paid by assistantship 

Did you receive a tuition waiver or any other form of 

full or partial tuition assistance through your 

assistantship? 

0 = No 

1 = Yes 

Applies to: Graduate respondents with a teaching or 

research assistantship. 

CATI Code: TSTAT=2 and N4TASST in (1,-9) or 

N4RASST in (1,-9) 

N4HINS 

Health insurance with assistantship 

As part of your [teaching assistantship/research 

assistantship], did you receive health insurance? 

0 = No 

1 = Yes 

Applies to: Graduate respondents with a teaching or 

research assistantship.

CATI Code: TSTAT=2 and N4TASST in (1,-9) or 

N4RASST in (1,-9) 

N4CLSHRS, N4DISHRS, N4LABHRS, 

N4GRAHRS, N4MSGHRS, N4OFFHRS 

TA duties 

Which of the following activities did you perform as a 

teaching assistant during the 2003–2004 school year? 

(Please check all that apply.) 

[If TCURENRL=1] 

0 = No 

1 = Yes 

N4CLSHRS—Assumed teaching responsibility 

for one or more courses 

N4DISHRS—Led discussion sections for facultytaught courses 

N4LABHRS—Supervised lab sections for 

faculty-taught courses 

N4GRAHRS—Assisted faculty with grading or 

other instruction-related activities 

N4MSGHRS—Assisted faculty with answering 

student e-mail messages 

N4OFFHRS—Held office hours 

Applies to: Graduate respondents with a teaching 

assistantship. 

CATI Code: TSTAT=2 and N4TASST in (1,-9) 
Appendix E. Facsimiles 

E-30 

N4WKST 

School job: work study 

[If TCURENRL=1] 

During the 2003–2004 school year, have you 

participated in either work study or a paid 

assistantship? (Please check all that apply.) 

[else] 

During the 2003–2004 school year, did you participate 

in either work study or a paid assistantship? (Please 

check all that apply.) 

Work-study 

0 = No 

1 = Yes 

Applies to: Undergraduate respondents. 

CATI Code: TSTAT=1 

N4ASST 

School job: assistantship 

[If TCURENRL=1] 

During the 2003–2004 school year, have you 

participated in either work study or a paid 

assistantship? (Please check all that apply.) 

[else] 

During the 2003–2004 school year, did you participate 

in either work study or a paid assistantship? (Please 

check all that apply.) 

Assistantship 

0 = No 

1 = Yes 

Applies to: Undergraduate respondents. 

CATI Code: TSTAT=1 

N4JOBNON 

School job: none 

[If TCURENRL=1] 

During the 2003–2004 school year, have you 

participated in either work study or a paid 

assistantship? (Please check all that apply.) 

[else] 

During the 2003–2004 school year, did you participate 

in either work study or a paid assistantship? (Please 

check all that apply.) 

None of the above 

0 = No 

1 = Yes 

Applies to: Undergraduate respondents. 

CATI Code: TSTAT=1 

N4WSMAJR 

Work study: related to major 

Would you say your [work study job/assistantship] 

was related to your major or field of study at 

[NPSAS]? 

0 = No 

1 = Yes 

Applies to: Undergraduate respondents who had a 

work study job or assistantship. 

CATI Code: TSTAT=1 and (N4WKST in (1,-9) or 

N4ASST in (1,-9)) 

Recode Note: If ((N4WKST in (1,-9) orN4ASST in 

(1,-9)) and N4DBLMAJ in (0, 3) then 

N4WSMAJR=0. 

N4WSONOF 

Work study: on/off campus 

Was your [work study job/assistantship] located 

primarily on or off campus? 

1 = On campus 

2 = Off campus 

3 = Both on and off campus 

Applies to: Undergraduate respondents who had a 

work study job or an assistantship. 

CATI code: TSTAT=1 and (N4WKST in (1,-9) or 

N4ASST in (1,-9)) 

N4WSEMP 

Work study: for school 

Was your work study job for [NPSAS] or for another 

institution or organization? 

1 = [NPSAS] 

2 = Another institution or organization 

Applies to: Undergraduate respondents who had a 

work study job or an assistantship. 

CATI code: TSTAT=1 and (N4WKST in (1,-9) or 

N4ASST in (1,-9)) 

N4WSTDY 

Work-study: community service 

Was your work study job part of a community service 

project? 

0 = No 

1 = Yes 

Applies to: Undergraduate respondent who had a 

work study job. 

CATI Code: TSTAT=1 and N4WKST in (1,-9) 

N4LTRCY 

Work study: tutoring 

Was your work study job involved with literacy 

education or tutoring? 

0 = No 

1 = Yes 

Applies to: Undergraduate respondents who had a 

work study job. 

CATI Code: TSTAT=1 and N4WKST in (1,-9) 
Appendix E. Facsimiles 

E-31 

N4WAAMT 

Work study: earnings 

How much did you earn from your 

[assistantship/fellowship/traineeship/work study job] 

while you were enrolled during the 2003–2004 school 

year? 

Applies to: All respondents.

Recode note: If TSTAT=1 and (n4wkst=0 and 

n4asst=0) then N4WAAMT=0. 

If TSTAT=2 and (N4TASST=0 and N4RASST=0 and 

N4TRNSHP=0 and N4GASST=0) then 

N4WAAMT=0. 

N4WAERNT 

Work study: time period for earnings 

How much did you earn from your 

[assistantship/fellowship/traineeship/work study job] 

while you were enrolled during the 2003–2004 school 

year? 

Per 

1 = Year 

2 = Term/semester 

3 = Month 

4 = Week 

Applies to: All respondents.

Recode note: If TSTAT=1 and (n4WKST=0 and 

n4ASST=0) then N4WAERNT=1. 

If TSTAT=2 and (N4TASST=0 and N4RASST=0 and 

N4TRNSHP=0 and N4GASST=0) then 

N4WAERNT=1. 

N4WAERNS 

Work study: number of terms/months/weeks/hours 

worked 

Between July 2003 and June 2004, how many 

[terms/months/weeks] will you have worked in your 

[assistantship/fellowship/traineeship/work study job]?

 

Applies to: All respondents.

Recode note: If TSTAT=1 and (N4WKST=0 and 

N4ASST=0) then N4WAERNS=0. 

If TSTAT=2 and (N4TASSM gt0 or N4RASSM gt 0 

or N4TRNSM gt 0 or N4GASSM gt 0) then 

N4WAERNS=1. 

N4WTOTEN 

Work study: total earnings 

Derived variable 

Total earnings for school jobs 

N4WAAMT=work-study earnings 

N4WAERNT=work-study time period for earnings 

N4WAERNS=Number of terms/months/weeks/hrs 

worked 

N4WTOTEN - combine and convert into amount per 

year N4WAAMT and N4WAERNT 

if N4WAERNT=1 then 

 N4WTOTEN = N4WAAMT; 

else if N4WAERNT gt 1 then do; 

 if N4WAAMT gt 0 and N4WAERNS gt 0 then 

 N4WTOTEN = N4WAAMT * N4WAERNS; 

 else if N4WAAMT in (-9,-6) then 

 N4WTOTEN = N4WAAMT; 

 else if N4WAERNS in (-9,-6) then 

 N4WTOTEN = N4WAERNS; 

end; 

else if N4WAERNT in (-3,-4,-9,-7,-6) then 

 N4WTOTEN = N4WAERNT; 

Applies to: All respondents.

Recode note: If TSTAT=1 and (N4WKST=0 and 

N4ASST=0) then N4WTOTEN=0. 

If TSTAT=2 and (N4TASST=0 and N4RASST=0 and 

N4TRNSHP=0 and N4GASST=0) then 

N4WTOTEN=0. 

N4WAHRS 

Work study: hours worked per week 

During the 2003–2004 school year, how many hours 

did you work per week in your 

[assistantship/fellowship/traineeship/work study job]? 

Applies to: All respondents.

Recode note: If TSTAT=1 and (N4WKST=0 and 

N4ASST=0) then N4WAHRS=0. 

If TSTAT=2 and (N4TASST=0 and N4RASST=0 and 

N4TRNSHP=0 and N4GASST=0) then 

N4WAHRS=0. 

N4WAWEEK 

Work study: weeks worked 

For your [assistantship/fellowship/traineeship/work 

study job], would you say you worked during all the 

weeks you were enrolled, most of them, half of them, 

or less than half? 

0 = 0 

1 = All 

2 = Most 

3 = Half 

4 = Less than half 

Applies to: Respondents except those who reported the 

number of weeks worked.

CATI Code: N4WAERNT not =4 and N4WAERNS gt 

0 

Recode note: If TSTAT=1 and (N4WKST=0 and 

N4ASST=0) then N4WAWEEK=0. 

If TSTAT=2 and (N4TASST=0 and N4RASST=0 and 

N4TRNSHP=0 and N4GASST=0) then 

N4WAWEEK=0. 
Appendix E. Facsimiles 

E-32 

N4RCVAID 

Received financial aid 

[If N4WKST = 1 or N4ASST = 1 or N4TASST = 1 

or N4RASST = 1 or N4GASST = 1] 

Besides your [work study/assistantship] did you 

receive any other financial aid - such as grants, loans, 

or scholarships during the 2003–2004 school year? 

[else] 

Did you receive financial aid - such as grants, loans, or 

scholarships during the 2003–2004 school year? 

0 = No 

1 = Yes 

Applies to: All respondents.

N4APPAID 

Applied for financial aid 

Did you apply for financial aid for the 2003–2004 

school year? 

0 = No 

1 = Yes 

Applies to: All respondents.

Recode Note: If N4RCVAID=1 then N4APPAID=1. 

N4FEDLN 

Received federal loans 

Did you receive a federal Stafford student loan for the 

2003–2004 school year? 

0 = No 

1 = Yes 

Applies to: Respondents who received financial aid. 

CATI Code: N4RCVAID in (1,-9) 

N4PELL 

Received Pell grant 

Did you receive a Pell grant for the 2003–2004 school 

year? 

0 = No 

1 = Yes 

Applies to: Undergraduate respondents who received 

financial aid. 

CATI Code: TSTAT=1 and N4RCVAID in (1,-9) 

N4STGRT, N4INGRT 

Received state/school grant/scholarship 

Did you receive any scholarships or grants from your 

school or from a state grant program during the 2003–

2004 school year? 

0 = No 

1 = Yes 

N4STGRT—State grant or scholarship

N4INGRT—College grant or scholarship

Applies to: Respondents who received financial aid. 

CATI Code: N4RCVAID in (1,-9) 

N4STAMT, N4INAMT 

State/school grant/scholarship amount 

Did you receive any scholarships or grants from your 

school or from a state grant program during the 2003–

2004 school year? 

N4STAMT—State grant/scholarship amount

N4INAMT—School grant/scholarship amount

Applies to: Respondents who received financial aid. 

CATI Code: N4RCVAID in (1,-9) 

N4STNONE 

Did not receive state or college aid 

Did you receive any scholarships or grants from your 

school or from a state grant program during the 2003–

2004 school year? 

Did not receive state or college aid 

0 = No 

1 = Yes 

Applies to: Respondents who received financial aid. 

CATI Code: N4RCVAID in (1,-9) 

N4ADNEMP, N4ADNPRV, N4ADNVET, 

N4ADNPMP 

Did you receive any financial aid during the 2003–

2004 school year that did not come from the financial 

aid office? 

Did you receive...? 

0 = No 

1 = Yes 

N4ADNEMP—Tuition reimbursement from your 

employer 

N4ADNPRV—Grants or scholarships from a 

private organization 

N4ADNVET—Veteran’s or DoD (Department of 

Defense) benefits 

N4ADNPMP—Aid from your parent’s employer 

Applies to: All respondents. 

N4AMNEMP, N4AMNPRV, 

N4AMNVET, N4AMNPMP 

Did you receive any financial aid during the 2003–

2004 school year that did not come from the financial 

aid office? 

Did you receive...? 

N4AMNEMP—Amount of employer aid

N4AMNPRV—Amount of private organization 

aid 

N4AMNVET—Amount of veteran’s benefits

N4AMNPMP—Amount of parent’s employer aid

Applies to: Respondents who received employer aid. 

CATI code: 
Appendix E. Facsimiles 

E-33 

N4ADNON 

No other aid 

Did you receive any financial aid during the 2003–

2004 school year that did not come from the financial 

aid office? 

Did you receive...? 

None 

0 = Had other aid 

1 = No other aid 

Applies to: All respondents.

N4PRVLN 

Receive alternative loan 

Did you receive any type of commercial or private 

loan (such as TERI, Excel, or Access loans) from a 

bank or private organization for your enrollment 

during the 2003–2004 school year? 

0 = No 

1 = Yes 

Applies to: All respondents.

N4PRVAMT 

Amount of alternative loan 

How much did you borrow in commercial or private 

loans during the 2003–2004 school year? 

Applies to: All respondents.

Recode Note: If N4PRVLN=0 then N4PRVAMT=0. 

N4SCHRES 

Residence while enrolled 

While you were enrolled during the 2003–2004 school 

year, did you live on campus, with your parents or 

guardians, or some place else? 

(If you lived in more than one residence, choose the 

place were you lived for the longest period of time.) 

1 = On-campus 

2 = With parents or guardians 

3 = Some place else (off campus) 

Applies to: Undergraduate respondents. 

CATI Code: TSTAT=1 

N4PARPA–N4PARF 

Help from parents 

Which of the following do your parents/guardians help 

you pay? 

(Please check all that apply.) 

0 = No 

1 = Yes 

N4PARPA—Tuition and fees 

N4PARPB—Other educational expenses such as 

books and supplies 

N4PARPC—Housing such as rent or dorm cost 

and utilities 

N4PARPD—Other living expenses such as food 

and transportation 

N4PARPE—None of the above - no financial 

assistance from parents 

N4PARPF—Parents deceased 

Applies to: Respondents under 30. 

CATI Code: TAGE lt 30 

N4RNTAMT 

Monthly mortgage/rent amount 

[If TCURENRL=1] 

Since you have been enrolled during the 2003–2004 

school year, how much (on average) have you paid in 

rent or mortgage payments each month? 

[else] 

While you were enrolled during the 2003–2004 school 

year, how much was your monthly rent or mortgage 

payment? 

Applies to: Respondents under 30 who did not live 

with their parents/guardians during the 2003–2004 

school year.

CATI Code: TAGE lt 30 and N4SCHRES in (3, -9) 

N4OTHRES 

Lived with parents while not enrolled 

Did you live with your parents/guardians when you 

were not in school during the 2003–2004 school year? 

0 = No 

1 = Yes 

Applies to: Undergraduate respondents under 30 

except those who indicated their parents are deceased. 

CATI Code: TSTAT=1 and TAGE lt 30 and 

N4PARPF in (1, -9) 

N4OUTST 

Out-of-state tuition/fees 

[If TCURENRL = 1 then ] 

At [NPSAS], are you charged for out-of-state or outof-district tuition or fees? 

[else] 

At [NPSAS], were you charged for out-of-state or outof-district tuition or fees? 

0 = No 

1 = Yes 

Applies to: Respondents who attended a public 

institution. 

CATI Code: Y_NPCTRL=1 
Appendix E. Facsimiles 

E-34 

N4ALWNC 

Received allowance 

Did you receive a regular allowance from your 

parents/guardians while you were enrolled at [NPSAS] 

during the 2003–2004 school year? 

0 = No 

1 = Yes 

Applies to: Undergraduate respondents under 30 

except those who did not receive parental support or 

indicated their parents are deceased. 

CATI Code: TSTAT=1 and TAGE lt 30 and 

N4PARPE not =1 and N4PARPF not =1. 

N4ALWN2 

Allowance amount 

[If TCURENRL=1] 

How much (on average) is your was your allowance? 

[else] 

How much (on average) was your allowance? 

Applies to: Undergraduate respondents under 30 

except those who did not receive parental support or 

whose parents were deceased. 

CATI Code: TSTAT=1 and TAGE lt 30 and 

N4PARPE not =1 and N4PARPF not =1. 

Recode Note: If N4ALWNC=0 then N4ALWN2=0. 

N4ALWN3 

Time period for allowance 

[If TCURENRL=1] 

How much (on average) is your was your allowance? 

[else] 

How much (on average) was your was your 

allowance? 

1 = Week 

2 = Month 

3 = Semester/term 

4 = Year 

Applies to: Undergraduate respondents under 30 who 

received an allowance. 

CATI Code: TSTAT=1 and TAGE lt 30 and 

N4ALWNC in (1,-9). 

N4DEP03 

Claimed as a dependent 

Did anyone claim you as a dependent on their 2003 

taxes? 

0 = No 

1 = Yes, parents/guardians 

2 = Yes, another individual 

3 = Don’t know 

Applies to: Respondents under 30. 

CATI Code: TAGE lt 30 

N4HOPE, N4DEDUCT, N4LFLNG 

Claim Federal Hope scholarship 

[If compdate < April 15, 2004 then] 

 [if TAGE >= 30 then] 

When you file your 2003 taxes, will you claim any of 

the following federal education tax benefits? 

 [else if TAGE < 30 and (N4DEP03 = 1 or 

N4DEP03 = 3) then] 

Will your parents/guardians claim any of the following 

federal education tax benefits when they file their 

2003 taxes? 

 [else if TAGE < 30 and N4DEP03 = 2 then] 

Earlier you said that you were claimed as a dependent 

by another individual. Will that person claim any of 

the following federal education tax benefits when they 

file their 2003 taxes? 

 [else if TAGE < 30 and (N4DEP03 = 0 or 

N4DEP03 = -9) then] 

When you file your 2003 taxes, will you claim any of 

the following federal education tax benefits? 

[If compdate > April 15, 2004 then] 

 [if TAGE >= 30 then] 

When you filed your 2003 taxes, did you claim any of 

the following federal education tax benefits? 

 [else if TAGE < 30 and (N4DEP03 = 1 or 

N4DEP03 = 3) then] 

Did your parents/guardians claim any of the following 

federal education tax benefits when they filed their 

2003 taxes? 

 [else if TAGE < 30 and N4DEP03 = 2 then] 

Earlier you said that you were claimed as a dependent 

by another individual. Did that person claim any of the 

following federal education tax benefits when they 

filed their 2003 taxes? 

 [else if TAGE < 30 and (N4DEP03 = 0 or 

N4DEP03 = -9) then] 

When you filed your 2003 taxes, did you claim any of 

the following federal education tax benefits? 

0 = No 

1 = Yes 

2 = Don’t know 

N4HOPE—Federal Hope scholarship tax credit

N4DEDUCT—Tax deduction for tuition

N4LFLNG—Lifetime learning tax credit

Applies to: All respondents.
Appendix E. Facsimiles 

E-35 

N4UGLN 

Amount borrowed for undergraduate loans 

[If TSTAT=1] 

How much have you already borrowed in student 

loans for your undergraduate education? (Please do 

not include any money borrowed from family or 

friends.) 

[else] 

How much did you borrow in student loans for your 

undergraduate education? (Please do not include any 

money borrowed from family or friends.) 

Applies to: All respondents.

Recode Note: IF N4BPSELG in (1,2) and 

N4FEDLN=0 and N4PRVLN=0 then N4UGLN=0. 

N4UGOWE 

Amount owed for undergrad education 

How much of that amount do you still owe? 

Applies to: All respondents.

Recode Note: If N4UGLN=0 then N4UGOWE=0. 

N4GRLN 

Amount borrowed for graduate loan 

How much did you borrow in student loans for your 

graduate education? (Please do not include any money 

borrowed from family or friends). 

Applies to: Graduate respondents.

CATI Code: TSTAT=2 

N4GROWE 

Amount owed for graduate loan 

How much of that amount do you still owe? 

Applies to: Graduate respondents.

CATI Code: TSTAT=2 

Recode Note: If N4GRLN=0 then N4GROWE=0. 
Appendix E. Facsimile 

E-36 

Section C: Employment and Finances 

N4NUMJOB 

Number of jobs during NPSAS year 

[If (N4TAASST = 0 and N4RASST = 0 and N4GASST 

= 0 and N4GFEL = 0 and N4TRNSHP = 0) then] 

How many jobs for pay did you have while you were 

enrolled? 

[else] 

Earlier you told us about your [school job] at [NPSAS]. 

The next questions are about any other jobs you had 

while you were enrolled during the 2003–2004 school 

year.

How many other jobs for pay did you have while you 

were enrolled at [NPSAS] during the 2003–2004 school 

year? 

Applies to: All respondents.

N4ONOFF 

Job on or off campus 

Was your job located primarily on or off campus? 

(If you had more than one job, please refer to the one at 

which you worked the most hours when answering the 

next few questions.) 

1 = On campus 

2 = Off campus 

3 = Both on and off campus 

Applies to: Respondents who worked while enrolled. 

CATI Code: N4NUMJOB in (gt 0, -9) 

N4EMPTYP 

Type of employer 

In your job, did you work for... 

1 = [NPSAS] 

2 = A for-profit company 

3 = A nonprofit organization 

4 = A local, state, or federal government 

5 = The military (including civilian employees of the 

military) 

6 = Self-employed 

Applies to: Respondents who worked while enrolled. 

CATI Code: N4NUMJOB in (gt 0, -9) 

N4RELMAJ 

Job related to major 

Would you say your job was related to your major or 

field of study at [NPSAS]? 

0 = No 

1 = Yes 

Applies to: Respondents working on a degree, who have 

declared a major, and who worked while enrolled. 

CATI Code: TDEGREN not = (4, 9) and N4DBLMAJ in 

(1, 2, -9) and N4NUMJOB in (gt 0, -9) 

N4RELCRS 

Job related to coursework 

Would you say your job was related to your coursework 

at [NPSAS]? 

0 = No 

1 = Yes 

Applies to: Respondents who worked while enrolled in 

classes but either had not declared a major or who were 

not enrolled in a degree program. 

CATI Code: N4NUMJOB in (gt 0, -9) and N4DBLMAJ 

in (0, 3) 

N4PREMP 

Had job prior to enrollment at NPSAS 

Did you have this job before you enrolled at [NPSAS]? 

0 = No 

1 = Yes 

Applies to: Respondents who worked while enrolled. 

CATI Code: N4NUMJOB in (gt 0, -9) 

N4ERNAMT 

Amount earned during school year 

[Not including your [work study job/assistantship/ 

fellowship/traineeship], how/How] much did you earn 

from [your job/all your jobs] you held while you were 

enrolled during the 2003–2004 school year? Please 

exclude summer earnings if you were not enrolled during 

the summer. 

Applies to: All respondents. 

Recode Note: If N4NUMJOB = 0 then N4ERNAMT=0. 

N4EARNT 

Time frame for school year earnings 

[Not including your [work study 

job/assistantship/fellowship/traineeship], how/How] 

much did you earn from [your job/all your jobs] you held 

while you were enrolled during the 2003–2004 school 

year? Please exclude summer earnings if you were not 

enrolled during the summer. 

1 = For the entire school year 

2 = Per term/semester 

3 = Per month 

4 = Per week 

Applies to: Respondents who worked while enrolled. 

CATI Code: N4NUMJOB in (gt 0, -9) 
Appendix E. Facsimiles 

E-37 

N4EARNS 

Time frame for school year earnings other than yearly 

[If TCURENRL = 0 and (N4TAASST = 1 or N4RASST 

= 1 or N4GASST = 1 or N4GFEL = 1 or N4TRNSHP = 

1) then] 

Not including your work study/ assistantship/fellowship, 

how many terms/months/weeks did you work while you 

were enrolled during the 2003–2004 school year? 

[If TCURENRL = 1 and (N4TAASST = 1 or N4RASST 

= 1 or N4GASST = 1 or N4GFEL = 1 or N4TRNSHP = 

1) then] 

Not including your work study/ assistantship/fellowship, 

how many terms/months/weeks will you have worked 

while you were enrolled during the 2003–2004 school 

year? 

[If TCURENRL = 0 and (N4TAASST = 0 and 

N4RASST = 0 and N4GASST = 0 and N4GFEL = 0 and 

N4TRNSHP = 0) then] 

How many terms/months/weeks did you work while you 

were enrolled during the 2003–2004 school year? 

[If TCURENRL = 1 and (N4TAASST = 0 and 4RASST 

= 0 and N4GASST = 0 and N4GFEL = 0 and 

N4TRNSHP = 0) then] 

How many terms/months/weeks will you have worked 

while you were enrolled during the 2003–2004 school 

year? 

Applies to: All respondents.

Recode note: If N4NUMJOB = 0 then N4EARNS=0. 

If N4EARNT = 1 then N4EARNS=1. 

N4TOTERN 

Total amount earned during the school year 

Derived variable 

This is an internally derived variable of total amount 

earned during the school year. This variable was 

calculated based on earnings from other employment and 

the time frame associated with these reported earnings. 

N4ERNAMT=Amount earned during school year 

N4EARNT=Time frame for school year earnings 

N4EARNS=Time frame for school year earnings other 

than yearly 

N4TOTERN=combine and convert into amount per year 

N4ERNAMT and N4EARNT 

If N4EARNT eq 1 then 

 N4TOTERN = N4ERNAMT; 

else if N4EARNT gt 1 then do; 

 if N4ERNAMT gt 0 and N4EARNS gt 0 then 

 N4TOTERN = N4ERNAMT * N4EARNS; 

 else if N4ERNAMT in (-9,-6,-7) then 

 N4TOTERN = N4ERNAMT; 

 else if N4EARNS in (-9,-6,-7) then 

 N4TOTERN = N4EARNS; 

end; 

else if N4EARNT in (-3,-4,-9,-7,-6,-1) then 

 N4TOTERN = N4EARNT; 

Applies to: All respondents.

Recode note: If N4NUMJOB = 0 then N4TOTERN=0. 

N4HOURS 

Hours worked weekly during the school year 

[Not including your [work study job/assistantship/ 

fellowship/traineeship, how/How many hours did you 

work per week (on average) while you were enrolled 

during the 2003–2004 school year? 

Please exclude summer hours if you were not enrolled 

during the summer. 

Applies to: All respondents.

Recode note: If N4NUMJOB=0 then N4HOURS=0. 

N4WKSWK 

Weeks worked while enrolled 

Would you say you worked during all the weeks you 

were enrolled, most of them, half of them, or less than 

half? 

1 = All 

2 = Most 

3 = Half 

4 = Less than half 

Applies to: Respondents who worked while enrolled and 

did not provide weekly earnings, or respondents who 

worked while enrolled and provided a timeframe for 

weekly earnings less than or equal to 0 or greater than 

52. 

CATI Code: (N4NUMJOB in (gt 0, -9) and N4EARNT 

not = 4) or (N4NUMJOB in (gt 0, -9) and N4EARNT=4 

and (N4EARNS in (0, -9) or N4EARNS gt 52) 

N4ENRWRK 

Working student/employee taking classes 

While you were enrolled at [NPSAS] and working, 

would you say you were primarily... 

1 = A student working to meet expenses 

2 = An employee who decided to enroll in school 

Applies to: Respondents who worked while enrolled. 

CATI Code: N4NUMJOB in (gt 0, -9) 

N4WRKRSN 

Main reason for working 

What was your main reason for working while you were 

enrolled? Was it to... 

1 = Earn spending money 

2 = Pay tuition, fees, or living expenses or 

3 = Gain job experience 

4 = Other 

Applies to: Respondents who were primarily students 

who worked. 

CATI Code: N4NUMJOB in (gt 0, -9) and N4ENRWRK 

in (1, -9) 
Appendix E. Facsimiles 

E-38 

N4EXPWRK 

Parents expect you to have a job 

[If TCURENRL=1] 

Do your parents/guardians expect you to have a job for 

pay while you are enrolled? 

[else] 

Did your parents/guardians expect you to have a job for 

pay while you were enrolled during the 2003–2004 

school year? 

0 = No 

1 = Yes 

Applies to: Respondents who were primarily students 

who worked while enrolled and who were 

undergraduates under age 30 with parents/guardians. 

CATI Code: N4NUMJOB in (gt 0, -9) and N4ENRWRK 

in (1, -9) and TSTAT=1 and TAGE lt 30 and N4PARPF 

not =1 

N4AFFORD 

Afford school without working 

Could you have afforded to attend school if you had not 

worked? 

0 = No 

1 = Yes 

Applies to: Respondents who were primarily students 

who worked. 

CATI Code: N4NUMJOB in (gt 0, -9) and N4ENRWRK 

in (1, -9) 

N4HLPCLS, N4HLPCAR, N4RSTRCT, 

N4LIMCLS, N4LIMSCH, N4LIMLIB, 

N4JOBSCX 

Effect of job 

Did having a job while you were going to school... 

(Please check all that apply.) 

0 = No 

1 = Yes 

N4HLPCLS—Help you with class work 

N4HLPCAR—Help you with career preparation 

N4RSTRCT—Restrict your choice of classes 

N4LIMCLS—Limit the number of classes you 

could take 

N4LIMSCH—Limit the class schedule you could 

have 

N4LIMLIB—Limit your access to campus facilities 

or services 

N4JOBSCX—None of the above 

Applies to: Respondents who were primarily students 

who worked. 

CATI Code: N4NUMJOB in (gt 0, -9) and N4ENRWRK 

in (1, -9) 

N4EFFGRD 

Effect of job on grades 

Would you say that working while you were going to 

school had a positive effect, a negative effect, or no 

effect on the grades you earned? 

1 = Positive effect 

2 = Negative effect 

3 = No effect 

Applies to: Respondents who were primarily students 

who worked. 

CATI Code: N4NUMJOB in (gt 0, -9) and N4ENRWRK 

in (1, -9) 

N4CLSOUT, N4MODSCH, N4TKDIS, 

N4NOCOMB 

Combine school and work 

How did you combine school and work? 

(Please check all that apply.) 

0 = No 

1 = Yes 

N4CLSOUT—Took classes outside of work time 

N4MODSCH—Modified work schedule 

N4TKDIS—Took distance education courses 

N4NOCOMB—None of the above 

Applies to: Employees who decided to enroll in school. 

CATI Code: N4NUMJOB in (gt 0, -9) and 

N4ENRWRK=2 

N4SUMMR 

Work during summer 2003 

Did you work for pay during the summer of 2003? 

0 = No 

1 = Yes 

Applies to: Undergraduate respondents under 30. 

CATI Code: TAGE lt 30 and TSTAT=1 

N4SMRSAV 

Amount saved from summer earnings 

In dollars, about how much of your summer earnings 

would you estimate you saved for the 2003–2004 school 

year? 

Applies to: Undergraduate respondents under 30 who 

worked during the Summer of 2003. 

CATI Code: TAGE lt 30 and TSTAT=1 and 

N4SUMMR in (1, -9) 
Appendix E. Facsimiles 

E-39 

N4INCOM 

Earnings in 2003 

[If N4WAAMT>0 or N4TASSM > 0 or N4RASSM > 0 

or N4GFELM > 0 or N4TRNSM > 0 or N4GASSM > 0 

then] 

Earlier, you told us about the money you earned while 

you were enrolled. Now we need to find out about your 

income for the calendar year. 

What was your income from all sources (including 

income from work, investment income, alimony, etc.) 

prior to taxes and deductions in 2003? [IF N4MARR=(2-

5)(Please exclude spouse’s income.)] 

[else] 

What was your income from all sources (including 

income from work, investment income, alimony, etc.) 

prior to taxes and deductions in calendar year 2003? [IF 

N4MARR=(2-5)(Please exclude spouse’s income.)] 

1 = No income 

2 = Less than $1,000 

3 = $1,000-$2,499 

4 = $2,500-$4,999 

5 = $5,000-$9,999 

6 = $10,000-$14,999 

7 = $15,000-$19,999 

8 = $20,000-$29,999 

9 = $30,000-$49,999 

10 = $50,000 and above 

Applies to: All respondents.

N4INCSP 

Spouse’s earnings in 2003 

How much would you estimate your spouse earned from 

all sources prior to taxes and deductions in 2003? 

1 = No income 

2 = Less than $1,000 

3 = $1,000-$2,499 

4 = $2,500-$4,999 

5 = $5,000-$9,999 

6 = $10,000-$14,999 

7 = $15,000-$19,999 

8 = $20,000-$29,999 

9 = $30,000-$49,999 

10 = $50,000 and above 

Applies to: Married respondents. 

CATI Code: N4MARR in (2, -9) 

N4UNTAX 

Received untaxed benefits in 2003 

[If N4MARR = 2 then] 

Since July 1, 2003, have you or your spouse received 

any untaxed income or benefits, such as TANF (AFDC), 

Social Security, worker’s compensation, disability 

payments, or child support? 

[else] 

Since July 1, 2003, have you received any untaxed 

income or benefits, such as TANF (AFDC), Social 

Security, worker’s compensation, disability payments, or 

child support? 

0 = No 

1 = Yes 

Applies to: All respondents.

N4TANF, N4SOCSEC, N4WRKCMP, 

N4DISAB, N4STMPS, N4CHILD, 

N4TAXTYX 

Type of untaxed benefits 

Since July 2003, which of the following did you receive? 

(Please check all that apply.) 

0 = No 

1 = Yes 

N4TANF—TANF (AFDC) 

N4SOCSEC—Social Security benefits 

N4WRKCMP—Worker’s compensation 

N4DISAB—Disability payments 

N4STMPS—Food stamps 

N4CHILD—Child support 

N4TAXTYX—None of the above 

Applies to: Respondents who received untaxed benefits. 

CATI Code: N4UNTAX in (1, -9) 

N4HOME 

Own home 

Do you own your home or pay a mortgage on a home? 

0 = No 

1 = Yes 

Applies to: Respondents age 24 and over who lived off 

campus. 

CATI Code: TAGE in (ge 24, -9) and N4SCHRES in (3, 

-9, -3, -8) 

N4INVT 

Own investments, business or farm over $10,000 

Do you own a business, farm, or have other investments 

worth more than $10,000 combined? 

0 = No 

1 = Yes 

Applies to: Respondents 24 or older. 

CATI Code: TAGE in (gt 24, -9) 
Appendix E. Facsimiles 

E-40 

N4PARNC 

Parents income in 2003 

What was your parents’/guardians’ income in 2003? 

1 = Under $30,000 

2 = $30,000 to $59,999 

3 = $60,000 to $89,999 

4 = $90,000 and above 

5 = Don’t know 

Applies to: Undergraduate respondents who were under 

30 and have parents/guardians. 

CATI Code: TSTAT=1 and TAGE lt 30 and N4PARPF 

in (0, -9) 

N4PARHOM 

Parents own home 

Do your parents/guardians own their home or pay a 

mortgage on a home? 

0 = No 

1 = Yes 

Applies to: Undergraduate respondents who were under 

30 and have parents/guardians. 

CATI Code: TSTAT=1 and TAGE lt 30 and N4PARPF 

in (0, -9) 

N4PARNV 

Parents own other real estate 

Do your parents/guardians own a business, farm, or have 

other investments worth more than $10,000 combined? 

0 = No 

1 = Yes 

Applies to: Undergraduate respondents who were under 

30 and have parents/guardians. 

CATI Code: TSTAT=1 and TAGE lt 30 and N4PARPF 

in (0, -9) 

N4NUMCRD 

Number of credit cards in own name 

How many credit cards do you have in your 

own name that are billed to you? 

Applies to: Undergraduate respondents who were under 

30. 

CATI Code: TSTAT=1 and TAGE lt 30 

N4CRDTUI 

Use credit to pay for tuition 

[If N4NUMCRD=1 then] 

Did you use your credit card to pay any portion of your 

2003–2004 tuition? 

[else] 

Did you use your credit cards to pay any portion of your 

2003–2004 tuition? 

0 = No 

1 = Yes 

Applies to: Undergraduate respondents under 30 with 

credit cards. 

CATI Code: TSTAT=1 and TAGE lt 30 and 

N4NUMCRD in (gt 0, -9) 

N4PAYOFF 

Payoff or carry credit balance 

[If N4NUMCRD=1] 

Do you usually pay off your credit card balance each 

month, or carry the balance over from month to month? 

[else] 

Do you usually pay off your credit card balances each 

month, or carry balances over from month to month? 

1 = Payoff balances 

2 = Carry balances 

Applies to: Undergraduate respondents under 30 with 

credit cards. 

CATI Code: TSTAT=1 and TAGE lt 30 and 

N4NUMCRD in (gt 0, -9) 

N4CRDBAL 

Balance due on all credit cards 

What was the balance on your credit card according to 

your last statement? 

Applies to: Undergraduate respondents under 30 with 

credit cards. 

CATI Code: TSTAT=1 and TAGE lt 30 and 

N4NUMCRD gt 0 

Recode note: If N4PAYOFF = 1 then N4CRDBAL in (0, 

-9) 

N4CRDPAR 

Parents help pay credit bills 

[If N4NUMCRD=1] 

Do your parents/guardians help you pay your credit card 

bill? 

[else] 

Do your parents/guardians help you pay your credit card 

bills? 

0 = No 

1 = Yes 

Applies to: Undergraduate respondents under 30 who 

have parents/guardians and who have credit cards. 

CATI Code: TSTAT=1 andTAGE lt 30 and N4PARPF 

in (0, -9) and N4NUMCRD in (gt 0, -9) 
Appendix E. Facsimile 

E-41 

Section D: Education Experiences 

N4REMEVR 

Ever taken remedial courses 

Since you completed high school, have you taken 

remedial or developmental courses to improve your 

basic skills, such as in mathematics, reading, writing, or 

study skills? 

0 = No 

1 = Yes 

Applies to: Undergraduate respondents. 

CATI Code: TSTAT=1 

N4REMSY 

Took remedial courses this school year 

Did you take any remedial or developmental courses 

during the 2003–2004 school year? 

0 = No 

1 = Yes 

Applies to: Undergraduate respondents in their first or 

second year who have taken remedial classes at some 

point. 

CATI Code: TSTAT=1 and N4REMEVR in (1, -9) and 

N4UGYR in (1, 2, -3) 

N4READ, N4WRITE, N4MATH, 

N4STUDY, N4ENGLIS 

Took remedial course 

In what area(s) did you take remedial or developmental 

courses? 

(Please check all that apply.) 

0 = No 

1 = Yes 

N4READ—Reading 

N4WRITE—Writing 

N4MATH—Mathematics 

N4STUDY—Study skills 

N4ENGLIS—English language skills 

Applies to: Undergraduate respondents in their first or 

second year who have taken remedial classes in the 

2003–2004 school year. 

CATI Code: TSTAT=1 and N4REMEVR in (1, -9) and 

N4UGYR le 2 and N4REMSY in (1,-9) 

N4ACTSAT 

Took SAT or ACT college exams 

Did you take the SAT or ACT college entrance exam? 

0 = No 

1 = Yes, SAT 

2 = Yes, ACT 

3 = Yes, both the SAT and ACT 

Applies to: BPS eligible respondents. 

CATI Code: N4BPSELG in (1,2). 

N4FRQGRA, N4FRQLEC, N4FRQESS, 

N4FRQWRI 

Undergraduate experiences 

During the 2003–2004 school year at [NPSAS], please 

indicate whether you did the following never, sometimes 

or often? 

Attend classes taught by graduate students 

1 = Never 

2 = Sometimes 

3 = Often 

N4FRQGRA—Attend classes taught by graduate 

students 

N4FRQLEC—Attend large lecture classes 

N4FRQESS—Write essay answers as part of exams 

N4FRQWRI—Write papers for courses 

Applies to: BPS eligible respondents who were enrolled 

in a 4-year institution. 

CATI Code: N4BPSELG in (1,2) and Y_NPLEVL=1. 

N4ADVSR, N4ACDMTG, N4SOCIAL, 

N4STDYGP, N4CLUBS, N4ARTS, 

N4VARSPT 

Undergraduate experiences - 2 

During the 2003–2004 school year at [NPSAS], please 

indicate whether you did the following never, sometimes 

or often. 

1 = Never 

2 = Sometimes 

3 = Often 

N4ADVSR—Talk with faculty about academic 

matters, outside of class time 

(including e-mail) 

N4ACDMTG—Meet with advisor concerning 

academic plans 

N4SOCIAL—Have informal or social contacts with 

faculty members outside of 

classrooms and offices 

N4STDYGP—Attend study groups outside of the 

classroom 

N4CLUBS—Participate in school clubs 

N4ARTS—Attend music, choir, drama, or other 

fine arts activities 

N4VARSPT—Participate in varsity, intramural, or 

club sports 

Applies to: BPS eligible respondents except those who 

attended a less-than-2-year institution.

CATI Code: N4BPSELG in (1,2) and Y_NPLEVL not = 

3. 
Appendix E. Facsimiles 

E-42 

N4DSTED 

Distance education: took courses 

During the 2003–2004 school year, did you take any 

courses for credit that were distance education courses? 

(Distance education courses are primarily delivered off 

campus using live, interactive TV or audio, pre-recorded 

TV or video, CD-ROM, or a computer-based system 

such as the Internet. Distance education does not include 

correspondence courses.) 

0 = No 

1 = Yes 

Applies to: All respondents.

N4ENTPGM 

Distance education: entire program 

[If TCURENRL=1] 

Is your entire program taught through distance 

education? 

[else] 

Was your entire program taught through distance 

education? 

0 = No 

1 = Yes 

Applies to: Respondents who took distance education 

course(s) in the 2003–2004 school year. 

CATI Code: N4DSTED in (1,-9) 

N4NMDSED 

Distance education: number of courses 

During the 2003–2004 school year, how many distance 

education courses did you take? 

Applies to: All respondents.

Recode Note: If N4DSTED=0 then N4NMDSED=0. 

N4DSLOC 

Distance education: location of course(s) 

Was this course/Were these courses offered through 

[NPSAS], somewhere else, or both? 

1 = NPSAS 

2 = Somewhere else 

3 = Both 

Applies to: Respondents who took distance education 

course(s) in the 2003–2004 school year. 

CATI Code: N4DSTED in (1,-9) 

N4LIVE, N4RECORD, N4NET 

Distance education 

Did the distance education classes you took during the 

2003–2004 school year use any of the following? 

(Please check all that apply.) 

0 = No 

1 = Yes 

N4LIVE—Live, interactive TV or audio 

N4RECORD—Pre-recorded TV or audio 

N4NET—The Internet 

Applies to: Respondents who took distance education 

course(s) in the 2003–2004 school year. 

CATI Code: N4DSTED in (1,-9) 

N4CMPSAT 

Distance education: satisfaction 

Compared to other courses you have taken, are you more 

satisfied or less satisfied with the quality of instruction 

you received in your distance education courses? 

1 = More satisfied with the distance education courses 

2 = Liked both the same 

3 = Less satisfied with the distance education courses 

Applies to: Respondents who took distance education 

course(s) in the 2003–2004 school year. 

CATI Code: N4DSTED in (1,-9) 

N4GRDRAT, N4SAFETY, N4JOBRAT, 

N4CONSN 

School considerations 

Before choosing [NPSAS], did you get information 

about any of the following? 

(Please check all that apply.) 

0 = No 

1 = Yes 

N4GRDRAT—The graduation rate

N4SAFET—Campus safety 

N4JOBRAT—The job placement rate

N4CONSN—None of the above

Applies to: Undergraduate respondents. 

CATI Code: TSTAT=1 

N4PUB 

Selecting college from published list 

Before selecting a college, did you consult a published 

list of college rankings? 

0 = No 

1 = Yes 

Applies to: BPS eligible respondents. 

CATI Code: N4BPSELG in (1, 2) 

N4NUMAPP 

Number of colleges applied to other than NPSAS 

Other than [NPSAS], how many colleges, universities, 

and trade schools did you apply to? 

Applies to: BPS eligible respondents. 

CATI Code: N4BPSELG in (1, 2) 

N4NUMACC 

Number colleges of accepted to other than NPSAS 

How many of those schools accepted you? 

Applies to: BPS eligible respondents who applied to 

more than one institution. 

CATI Code: N4BPSELG in (1, 2) and N4NUMAPP=-9 

or gt 1 
Appendix E. Facsimiles 

E-43 

N4FIRST 

NPSAS was first choice 

Was [NPSAS] your first choice? 

0 = No 

1 = Yes 

Applies to: BPS eligible respondents except those who 

only applied to the NPSAS institution. 

CATI Code: N4BPSELG in (1, 2) and N4NUMAPP in (-

9 or gt 1) 

N4NOFIRS 

Accepted at first choice school 

Were you accepted at your first choice of schools? 

0 = No 

1 = Yes 

Applies to: BPS eligible respondents who were admitted 

to fewer schools than they applied and indicated that the 

NPSAS school was not their first choice. 

CATI Code: N4BPSELG in (1, 2) and N4NUMAPP not 

= 1 and N4FIRST=0 and (N4NUMACC le 

N4NUMAPP) 

N4NOWHB–N4NOWHE, N4NOWHX 

Did not attend first choice 

Why did you not attend the school that was your first 

choice? 

(Please check all that apply.) 

0 = No 

1 = Yes 

N4NOWHB—Too expensive 

N4NOWHC—Did not receive enough financial aid 

N4NOWHD—Location 

N4NOWHE—Personal reasons 

N4NOWHX—Other 

Applies to: BPS eligible respondents for whom NPSAS 

was not their first choice, but were accepted at their 

first choice school and did not go there. 

CATI Code: N4BPSELG in (1, 2) and N4FIRST in (0, -

9) and (N4NOFIRS in (1, -9, -3) or 

(N4NUMACC=N4NUMAPP)) 

N4ATTDA–N4ATTDE, N4ATTDX 

Reason chose school 

Why did you decide to attend [NPSAS]? 

(Please check all that apply.) 

0 = No 

1 = Yes 

N4ATTDA—Program of study 

N4ATTDB—Reputation (of program, faculty, or 

school) 

N4ATTDC—Cost (affordability or other financial 

reasons) 

N4ATTDD—Location 

N4ATTDE—Personal or family reasons 

N4ATTDX—Other 

Applies to: BPS eligible respondents. 

CATI Code: N4BPSELG in (1, 2) 

N4COLLCR 

During high school earned college credit 

While you were in high school, did you take any courses 

at a college or university for which you earned college 

credit? 

0 = No 

1 = Yes 

Applies to: BPS eligible respondents. 

CATI Code: N4BPSELG in (1, 2) 

N4AP 

Advanced placement credit 

When you first enrolled in college, did you have any 

advanced placement (AP) credits that were accepted by 

[NPSAS]? 

0 = No 

1 = Yes 

Applies to: BPS eligible respondents. 

CATI Code: N4BPSELG in (1, 2) 

N4ENSOPH 

Credit to enter as sophomore 

Did you earn enough credits to enter college as a 

sophomore? 

0 = No 

1 = Yes 

Applies to: BPS eligible respondents who earned college 

credit before enrolling in NPSAS institution or who 

earned credit through AP classes. 

CATI Code: N4BPSELG in (1, 2) and (N4AP in (1, -9) 

or N4COLLCR in (1,-9)) 

N4MATHA–N4MATHF 

High school math 

Which of the following math courses did you complete 

while in high school? 

(Please check all that apply.) 

0 = No 

1 = Yes 

N4MATHA—Algebra 2 

N4MATHB—Algebra III/Trigonometry 

N4MATHC—Pre-calculus/analytic geometry 

N4MATHD—Calculus 

N4MATHE—Statistics 

N4MATHF—None of the above 

Applies to: BPS eligible respondents. 

CATI Code: N4BPSELG in (1, 2) 
Appendix E. Facsimiles 

E-44 

N4POSTA–N4POSTE, N4POSTX 

Post high school 

What kinds of things did you do before you started your 

postsecondary education (after high school)? 

(Please check all that apply.) 

0 = No 

1 = Yes 

N4POSTA—Worked 

N4POSTB—Served in the military 

N4POSTC—Got married or raised a family 

N4POSTD—Cared for health of self or others 

N4POSTE—Traveled or pursued other interests 

N4POSTX—Other 

Applies to: BPS eligible respondents who had at least a 

one year delay after high school and before enrolling at 

their first postsecondary institution. 

CATI Code: N4BPSELG in (1, 2) and TDELAY=1 

N4DROPA–N4DROPG, N4DROPX 

Drop 

You indicated earlier that you are no longer enrolled at 

[NPSAS]. 

Why did you decide to leave [NPSAS]? 

(Please check all that apply.) 

0 = No 

1 = Yes 

N4DROPA—Academic problems 

N4DROPB—Classes not available/scheduling not 

convenient 

N4DROPC—Dissatisfaction with 

program/school/campus/faculty 

N4DROPD—Financial reasons 

N4DROPE—Family responsibilities 

N4DROPF—Personal reasons 

N4DROPG—Finished taking desired classes 

N4DROPX—Other 

Applies to: BPS eligible respondents who were not 

currently enrolled, left NPSAS before the term ended, did 

not transfer away from NPSAS, did not plan to transfer, 

and did not plan on being enrolled in 2004-2005. 

CATI Code: N4BPSELG in (1, 2) and TCURENRL=0 

and N4DRTPM not =1 and N4TRNAWY not =1 and 

N4TRNPLN not =1 and N4ENRPLN not =1. 

N4TRNRA– N4TRNRH, N4TRNRX 

Transfer: academic problems 

[If N4TRNPLN=1] 

Earlier you indicated that you plan to transfer out of 

NPSAS. 

What are your reasons for deciding to leave? 

[if N4TRNSFR=1] 

Earlier you indicated that you transferred to NPSAS. 

What were your reasons for deciding to leave your first 

school? 

[else if TRNAWY=1] 

Earlier you indicated that you transferred out of NPSAS. 

What were your reasons for deciding to leave? 

(Please check all that apply.) 

0 = No 

1 = Yes 

N4TRNRA—Academic problems 

N4TRNRB—Classes not available /scheduling not 

convenient 

N4TRNRC—Dissatisfaction with 

program/school/campus/faculty 

N4TRNRD—Pursue Bachelor’s degree at a 4-year 

college 

N4TRNRE—Financial reasons 

N4TRNRF—Family responsibilities 

N4TRNRG—Personal reasons 

N4TRNRH—Finished taking desired classes 

N4TRNRX—Other 

Applies to: BPS eligible respondents who planned to 

transfer or did transfer either out of or to the NPSAS 

institution. 

CATI Code: N4BPSELG in (1, 2) and (N4TRNPLN in 

(1, -9, -3) or N4TRNAWY in (1, -9, -3) or N4TRNSFR 

in (1, -9)) 

N4PLNTCH 

Plan on teaching K-12 

Do you plan on becoming a teacher at the K-12 

(Kindergarten-grade 12) level? 

1 = Definitely Yes 

2 = Probably Yes 

3 = Probably Not 

4 = Definitely Not 

Applies to: BPS eligible respondents. 

CATI Code: N4BPSELG in (1, 2) 
Appendix E. Facsimiles 

E-45 

N4PLINF, N4WLOFF, N4STEADY, 

N4LEADR, N4CLSFAM, N4AREA, 

N4LEISUR, N4KIDS 

Please indicate which of the following personal goals are 

very important to you. 

(Please check all that apply.) 

0 = No 

1 = Yes 

N4PLINF—Influencing the political structure 

N4WLOFF—Being very well-off financially 

N4STEADY—Being able to find steady work 

N4LEADR—Being a leader in the community 

N4CLSFAM—Living close to parents and relatives 

N4AREA—Getting away from the area where you 

grew up 

N4LEISUR—Having leisure time to enjoy interests 

N4KIDS—Having children 

Applies to: BPS eligible respondents. 

CATI Code: N4BPSELG in (1, 2) 
Appendix E. Facsimile 

E-46 

Section E: Background

N4STATE 

State of legal residence 

What is your state of legal residence? 

1 = Alabama 31 = New Jersey 

2 = Alaska 32 = New Mexico 

3 = Arizona 33 = New York 

4 = Arkansas 34 = North Carolina 

5 = California 35 = North Dakota 

6 = Colorado 36 = Ohio 

7 = Connecticut 37 = Oklahoma 

8 = Delaware 38 = Oregon 

9 = District of 

 Columbia 

39 = Pennsylvania 

40 = Rhode Island 

10 = Florida 41 = South Carolina 

11 = Georgia 42 = South Dakota 

12 = Hawaii 43 = Tennessee 

13 = Idaho 44 = Texas 

14 = Illinois 45 = Utah 

15 = Indiana 46 = Vermont 

16 = Iowa 47 = Virginia 

17 = Kansas 48 = Washington 

18 = Kentucky 49 = West Virginia 

19 = Louisiana 50 = Wisconsin 

20 = Maine 51 = Wyoming 

21 = Maryland 52 = Puerto Rico 

22 = Massachusetts 54 = American Samoa 

23 = Michigan 55 = Guam 

24 = Minnesota 

25 = Mississippi 

56 = Fed State 

 Micronesia 

26 = Missouri 57 = Marshall Islands 

27 = Montana 58 = Northern Mariana Isl 

28 = Nebraska 59 = Palau 

29 = Nevada 60 = Virgin Islands 

30 = New Hampshire 63 = FOREIGN 

 COUNTRY 

Applies to: All respondents.

N4DISTNC 

Distance from NPSAS school to home 

How far (in miles) is [NPSAS] from your permanent 

home? 

Applies to: All respondents.

N4HISP 

Respondent of Hispanic/Latino origin 

Are you of either Hispanic or Latino origin? 

0 = No 

1 = Yes 

Applies to: All respondents.

N4HISA–N4HISD 

Hispanic type 

Are you of... 

(Please check all that apply.) 

0 = No 

1 = Yes 

N4HISA—Cuban descent 

N4HISB—Mexican, Mexican-American, or 

Chicano descent 

N4HISC—Puerto Rican descent 

N4HISD—Some other Spanish, Hispanic or Latino 

origin 

Applies to: Respondents of Hispanic or Latino origin. 

CATI Code: N4HISP in (1, -9) 

N4RACEA–N4RACEE, N4RACEX 

What is your race? 

Check all that apply. 

0 = No 

1 = Yes 

N4RACEA—White 

N4RACEB—Black or African American 

N4RACEC—Asian 

N4RACED—American Indian or Alaska Native 

N4RACEE—Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific 

Islander 

N4RACEX—Other 

Applies to: All respondents.

N4TRIBE 

State/federally recognized tribe 

Are you enrolled in a state- or federally-recognized 

tribe? 

0 = No 

1 = Yes 

Applies to: Respondents who were American Indian or 

Alaska Native. 

CATI Code: N4RACED in (1, -9) 

N4LANG 

English as primary language 

When you were growing up, was English the language 

you spoke most often at home? 

0 = No 

1 = Yes 

Applies to: All respondents.
Appendix E. Facsimiles 

E-47 

N4DEPS 

Has dependent children 

[If TCURENRL=1 and N4MARR=2] 

Do you or your spouse have any children that you 

support financially? 

[If TCURENRL=1 and N4MARR not = 2] 

Do you have any children that you support financially? 

[If TCURENRL=0 and N4MARR=2] 

While you were enrolled in the 2003–2004 school year, 

did you or your spouse have any children that you 

supported financially? 

[If TCURENRL=0 and and N4MARR not = 2] 

While you were enrolled in the 2003–2004 school year, 

did you have any children that you supported 

financially? 

0 = No 

1 = Yes 

Applies to: All respondents.

N4DEP2 

Number of dependent children 

How many? 

Applies to: All respondents.

Recode note: If N4DEPS = 0 then N4DEP2=0. 

N4DAGE01–N4DAGE10 

Age of dependent child 

[If N4DEP2 = 1 then] 

How old is your child? 

[else] 

What are the ages of your children? 

0–24 (corresponds to age of child) 

N4DAGE01—Age of child 1 

N4DAGE02—Age of child 2 

N4DAGE03—Age of child 3 

N4DAGE04—Age of child 4 

N4DAGE05—Age of child 5 

N4DAGE06—Age of child 6 

N4DAGE07—Age of child 7 

N4DAGE08—Age of child 8 

N4DAGE09—Age of child 9 

N4DAGE10—Age of child 10 

Applies to: Respondents with at least one dependent 

child. 

CATI Code: N4DEP2 in (ge 1, -9) 

DEPAGE01– DEPAGE 10 

Child age less than 12 

Derived variable 

This is a dichotomous variable used for analysis 

purposes which indicates if a dependent is less than 12 or 

12 and older. 

0 = Less than one year 

1 = Less than 12 

2 = 12 or older 

DEPAGE01—Child 1 

DEPAGE02—Child 2 

DEPAGE03—Child 3 

DEPAGE04—Child 4 

DEPAGE05—Child 5 

DEPAGE06—Child 6 

DEPAGE07—Child 7 

DEPAGE08—Child 8 

DEPAGE09—Child 9 

DEPAGE10—Child 10 

Applies to: Respondents with at least one dependent 

child. 

CATI Code: N4DEP2 in (ge 1, -9) 

N4CARE1 

Number of children in daycare 

How many of your dependent children are in daycare? 

Observed range: 1 - 10 

Applies to: Respondents with dependents under 12. 

CATI Code: N4DEPS=1 and N4DEP2 gt 0 and 

(N4DAGE01<12 or N4DAGE02<12 or N4DAGE03<12 

or N4DAGE04<12 or N4DAGE05<12 or 

N4DAGE06<12 or N4DAGE07<12 or N4DAGE08<12 

or N4DAGE09<12 or N4DAGE10<12). 

N4DAYCST 

Monthly daycare costs 

During the most recent term you were enrolled in the 

2003–2004 school year, how much (on average) did you 

pay each month for childcare? 

Applies to: Respondents who had dependents enrolled in 

daycare during the 2003–2004 school year.

CATI Code: N4CARE1 in (ge 0, -9) 
Appendix E. Facsimiles 

E-48 

N4OTDEPS 

Supporting anyone else 

[If N4MARR = 2 or N4DEP2 >= 1 then] 

 Other than 

[if N4MARR = 2 then] 

 your spouse 

[if N4MARR = 2 then] 

 [if N4DEP2 = 1 then] 

 and your child 

 [else if N4DEP2 > 1 then] 

 and your children 

[else] 

 [if N4DEP2 = 1 then] 

 your child 

 [else if N4DEP2 > 1 then] 

 your children 

[if TCURENRL = 1 and (N4MARR = 2 or N4DEP2 >= 

1) then], have you been supporting anyone else while 

enrolled in the 2003–2004 school year? 

[else if TCURENRL <> 1 and (N4MARR = 2 or 

N4DEP2 >= 1) then], were you supporting anyone else 

while enrolled in the 2003–2004 school year? 

[else if TCURENRL = 1 and N4MARR <> 2 and 

N4DEP2 < 1 then] 

Have you been supporting anyone else while enrolled in 

the 2003–2004 school year? 

[else if TCURENRL <> 1 and N4MARR <> 2 and 

N4DEP2 < 1 then 

Were you supporting anyone else while enrolled in the 

2003–2004 school year? 

0 = No 

1 = Yes 

Applies to: All respondents.

N4PARST 

Parents marital status 

What is your parents’ marital status? 

(See help text for additional information) 

1 = Married/remarried 

2 = Single 

3 = Divorced/separated 

4 = Widowed 

Applies to: Undergraduates under 30 with 

parent/guardians. 

CATI Code: TSTAT=1 and TAGE in (lt 30, -9) and 

N4PARPF in (ne 1, -9) 

N4PRHSD 

Number of people supported by parents 

[If TCURENRL=1] 

Not including yourself, how many people have your 

parents/guardians been supporting financially during the 

2003–2004 school year? 

[else] 

Not including yourself, how many people did your 

parents/guardians support financially during the 2003–

2004 school year? 

Applies to: Undergraduates under 30 with 

parent/guardians. 

CATI Code: TSTAT=1 and TAGE in (lt 30, -9) and 

N4PARPF in (ne 1, -9) 

N4DPNUM 

Number of other dependents in college 

Not including yourself, how many of those people were 

enrolled in college or trade school during 2003–2004 

school year? 

Observed range: 1 - 10 

Applies to: Undergraduates under 30 with 

parent/guardians. 

CATI Code: TSTAT=1 and TAGE in (lt 30, -9) and 

N4PARPF in (ne 1, -9) 

Recode note: If N4PRHSD = 0 then N4DPNUM=0. 

N4SIBCOL 

Siblings in college 

Do you have any brothers or sisters in college now? 

0 = No 

1 = Yes 

Applies to: Undergraduates under age 30. 

CATI Code: TSTAT=1 and TAGE in (lt 30, -9) 

N4SIBCL 

Siblings in college before respondent 

Did any of your brothers and sisters go to college before 

you did? 

0 = No 

1 = Yes 

Applies to: Undergraduates under age 30. 

CATI Code: TSTAT=1 and TAGE in (lt 30, -9) 

N4PRCOL 

Parents taking college courses in 2003-2004 

Were your parents/guardians taking any courses at a 

postsecondary institution (college, university, or trade 

school) during the 2003–2004 school year? 

0 = No 

1 = Yes, full-time 

2 = Yes, part-time 

Applies to: Undergraduates under 30 with 

parent/guardians. 

CATI Code: TSTAT=1 and TAGE in (lt 30, -9) and 

N4PARPF in (ne 1, -9) 
Appendix E. Facsimiles 

E-49 

N4SPCOL 

Spouse in college 

Did your spouse attend college or graduate school during 

the 2003–2004 school year? 

0 = No 

1 = Yes, full-time 

2 = Yes, part-time 

Applies to: Married respondents. 

CATI Code: N4MARR in (2, -9) 

N4KIDCOL 

Dependent children in college 

How many of your children were in college during the 

2003–2004 school year? 

Applies to: Respondents with dependent children over 

16. 

CATI Code: N4DAGE01 in (gt 16, -9) or N4DAGE02 in 

(gt 16, -9) or N4DAGE03 in (gt 16, -9) or N4DAGE04 

in (gt 16, -9) or N4DAGE05 in (gt 16, -9) or 

N4DAGE06 in (gt 16, -9) or N4DAGE07 in (gt 16, -9) 

or N4DAGE08 in (gt 16, -9) or N4DAGE09 in (gt 16, -

9) or N4DAGE10 in (gt 16, -9) 

N4DADED 

Father’s education 

What is the highest level of education your father 

completed? 

1 = Did not complete high school 

2 = High school diploma or equivalent

3 = Vocational/technical training 

4 = Less than 2 years of college 

5 = Associate’s degree 

6 = 2 or more years of college but no degree 

7 = Bachelor’s degree 

8 = Master’s degree or equivalent 

9 = Professional degree (only includes the following 

degree programs: chiropractic, dentistry, law, 

medicine, optometry, osteopathic medicine, 

pharmacy, podiatry, divinity/theology, or 

veterinary medicine) 

10 = Doctoral degree (PhD, EdD, etc) or equivalent 

11 = Don’t know 

Applies to: All respondents.

N4MOMED 

Mother’s education 

What is the highest level of education your mother 

completed? 

1 = Did not complete high school 

2 = High school diploma or equivalent 

3 = Vocational/technical training 

4 = Less than 2 years of college 

5 = Associate’s degree 

6 = 2 or more years of college but no degree 

7 = Bachelor’s degree 

8 = Master’s degree or equivalent 

9 = Professional degree (only includes the following 

degree programs: chiropractic, dentistry, law, 

medicine, optometry, osteopathic medicine, 

pharmacy, podiatry, divinity/theology, or 

veterinary medicine) 

10 = Doctoral Degree (PhD, EdD, etc) or equivalent 

11 = Don’t know 

Applies to: All respondents.

N4USBORN 

Respondent born in the U.S. 

Were you born in the United States? 

0 = No 

1 = Yes 

Applies to: All respondents.

N4PARUS 

Parents born in the U.S. 

Were your parents born in the United States? 

0 = No 

1 = Yes, one parent 

2 = Yes, both parents 

Applies to: All respondents.

N4CITZN 

Citizenship status 

Are you a U.S. citizen? 

1 = Yes 

2 = No - Resident alien, permanent resident, or other 

eligible non-citizen; hold a temporary resident’s 

card or other eligible non-citizen temporary 

resident’s card 

3 = No - Student visa, in the country on an F1 or F2 

visa, or on a J1 or J2 exchange visitor visa 

Applies to: All respondents.

Recode note: If N4USBORN=1 then N4CITZN=1. 

N4SCHUS 

Ever attended elementary or secondary school outside 

the U.S. 

Did you ever attend elementary or secondary school 

outside of the United States? 

0 = No 

1 = Yes 

Applies to: All respondents.

Recode note: If N4DIPL=4 or N4HSTYP=3 or 

Y_NPSTAT=52 then N4SCHUS=1. 
Appendix E. Facsimiles 

E-50 

N4VOTE 

Registered to vote 

Are you registered to vote in U.S. elections? 

0 = No 

1 = Yes 

Applies to: Respondents who were at least 18 years of 

age, and were US citizens. 

CATI Code: TAGE in (ge 18, -9) and N4CITZN in (1, -

9) 

N4EVRVT 

Ever vote 

Have you ever voted in any national, 

state, or local election? 

0 = No 

1 = Yes 

Applies to: Respondents who were at least 18 years of 

age, and were US citizens. 

CATI Code: TAGE in (ge 18, -9) and N4CITZN in (1, -

9) 

N4MILA–N4MILC, N4MILN 

Military status: veteran 

Are you a veteran of the U.S. Armed Forces, or are you 

currently serving in the Armed Forces either on active 

duty or in the reserves? 

(Please check all that apply.) 

N4MILA—Veteran 

0 = No 

1 = Veteran 

N4MILB—Active duty 

0 = No 

1 = Active duty 

N4MILC—Reserves 

0 = No 

1 = Reserves 

N4MILN—None of the above 

0 = No 

1 = None of the above 

Applies to: All respondents.

N4COMSRV 

Community service/volunteer in last year 

Did you perform any community service or volunteer 

work during the past year? 

Please exclude charitable donations (such as food, 

clothing, money, etc.), paid community service, and 

court-ordered service. 

0 = No 

1 = Yes 

Applies to: All respondents.

N4VLTA–N4VLTG, N4VLTX 

Volunteer 

What type of community service or volunteer work did 

you perform? 

(Please check all that apply.) 

0 = No 

1 = Yes 

N4VLTA—Tutoring, other education-related work 

with kids 

N4VLTB—Other work with kids (coaching, sports, 

Big Brother/Big Sister etc.) 

N4VLTC—Fundraising (political and non-political) 

N4VLTD—Homeless shelter/Soup kitchen 

N4VLTE—Neighborhood improvement/cleanup/Habitat for Humanity 

N4VLTF—Health services/hospital, nursing home, 

group home 

N4VLTG—Service to the church 

N4VLTX—Other 

Applies to: Respondents who volunteered in the past 

year. 

CATI Code: N4COMSRV in (1, -9) 

N4VLHRS 

Number of hours volunteered per month 

In the last 12 months, how many hours per month (on 

average) did you volunteer? 

Applies to: Respondents who volunteered in the past 

year more than one time. 

CATI Code: N4COMSRV in (1, -9) and N4VLONE in 

(0, -9) 

N4VLONE 

One time event 

In the last 12 months, how many hours per month (on 

average) did you volunteer? 

One time event 

0 = No 

1 = Yes 

Applies to: Respondents who volunteered in the past 

year. 

CATI Code: N4COMSRV in (1, -9) and N4VLHRS in (-

3, -9) 

Recode note: If N4VLHRS > 0 then N4VLONE = 0. 

N4VLGRAD 

Volunteer work required for graduation/class 

Was any of your community service or volunteer work 

part of your undergraduate program or required for 

graduation? 

0 = No 

1 = Yes 

Applies to: Undergraduates who volunteered in the past 

year. 

CATI Code: TSTAT=1 and N4COMSRV in (1, -9) 
Appendix E. Facsimiles 

E-51 

N4DISSEN 

Have a long-lasting sensory condition 

The next few questions will help us better understand the 

educational services available for people with 

disabilities. 

Do you have a long-lasting condition (6 months or more) 

such as blindness, deafness, or a severe vision or hearing 

impairment? 

0 = No 

1 = Yes 

Applies to: All respondents.

N4DISMOB 

Condition that limits physical activities 

Do you have a long-lasting (6 months or more) condition 

that substantially limits one or more basic physical 

activities such as walking, climbing stairs, reaching, 

lifting, or carrying? 

0 = No 

1 = Yes 

Applies to: All respondents.

N4DISOTH 

Other condition lasting six months or more 

Excluding any conditions already mentioned, do you 

have any other physical, mental, emotional, or learning 

condition that has lasted six months or more? 

0 = No 

1 = Yes 

Applies to: All respondents.

N4DIFLRN, N4DIFDRS, N4DIFSCH, 

N4DIFWRK, N4DIFNON 

Because of that long-lasting (6 months or more) 

condition, do you have any difficulty doing any of the 

following: 

(Please check all that apply.) 

0 = No 

1 = Yes 

N4DIFLRN—Learning, remembering, or 

concentrating 

N4DIFDRS—Dressing, bathing, or getting around 

inside your home or dormitory 

N4DIFSCH—Getting to school to attend class 

N4DIFWRK—Working at a job 

N4DIFNON—None of the above 

Applies to: Respondents who reported some other type of 

disability. 

CATI Code: N4DISOTH in (1, -9) 

TDISABL 

Disability Flag 

TDISABL indicates respondents with any disability 

If N4DISSEN=1 or N4DISMOB=1 or [N4DISOTH=1 

and (N4DIFLRN=1 or N4DIFDRS=1 or N4DIFSCH=1 

or N4DIFWRK=1] then TDISABL=1 

else TDISABL=0 

0 = No 

1 = Yes 

Applies to: All respondents.

N4MAIN 

Main limiting condition 

What is the main type of condition or impairment you 

have? 

(Please choose only one.) 

1 = Hearing impairment (i.e., deaf or hard of hearing) 

2 = Blindness or visual impairment that cannot be 

corrected by wearing glasses 

3 = Speech or language impairment 

4 = Orthopedic or mobility impairment 

5 = Specific learning disability/dyslexia 

6 = Attention deficit disorder (ADD) 

7 = Health impairment/problem 

8 = Mental, emotional or psychiatric condition 

9 = Depression 

10 = Developmental disability 

11 = Brain injury 

12 = Other, please specify 

Applies to: Respondents who reported a disability. 

CATI Code: TDISABL=1 

N4SERCA–N4SERCG, N4SERCX, 

N4SERCN 

Services received 

What disability-related services or accommodations have 

you received to assist you with your schooling in the last 

12 months? 

(Please check all that apply.) 

0 = No 

1 = Yes 

N4SERCA—Alternative exam formats or 

additional time 

N4SERCB—Tutors to assist with ongoing 

homework 

N4SERCC—Readers, classroom note takers, or 

scribes 

N4SERCD—Registration assistance or priority 

class registration 

N4SERCE—Sign language or oral interpreters 

N4SERCF—Adaptive equipment and technology 

(e.g., assistive listening devices 

talking computers) 

N4SERCG—Course substitution or waiver 

N4SERCX—Other, please specify 

N4SERCN—None of the above 

Applies to: Respondents who reported a disability. 

CATI Code: TDISABL=1 
Appendix E. Facsimiles 

E-52 

N4NEEDA–N4NEEDG, N4NEEDX, 

N4NEEDN 

Services needed 

What disability-related services or accommodations have 

you received to assist you with your schooling in the last 

12 months? 

(Please check all that apply.) 

0 = No 

1 = Yes 

N4NEEDA—Alternative exam formats or 

additional time 

N4NEEDB—Tutors to assist with ongoing 

homework 

N4NEEDC—Readers, classroom note takers, or 

scribes 

N4NEEDD—Registration assistance or priority 

class registration 

N4NEEDE—Sign language or oral interpreters 

N4NEEDF—Adaptive equipment and technology 

(e.g., assistive listening devices 

talking computers) 

N4NEEDG—Course substitution or waiver 

N4NEEDX—Other, please specify 

N4NEEDN—None of the above 

Applies to: Respondents who reported a disability. 

CATI Code: TDISABL=1 

N4VOCREC 

Ever received Voc Rehab services 

Have you received Vocational Rehabilitation services? 

0 = No 

1 = Yes 

Applies to: Respondents who reported a disability. 

CATI Code: TDISABL=1 

N4VOCAPP 

Ever applied for Voc Rehab services 

Have you applied for Vocational Rehabilitation services? 

0 = No 

1 = Yes 

Applies to: Respondents who reported a disability and 

who did not receive Vocational Rehabilitation services. 

CATI Code: TDISABL=1 and N4VOCREC in (0, -9) 

N4SSI 

Receive SSI/SSDI 

Are you currently receiving Supplemental Security 

Income (SSI) or Social Security Disability Insurance 

(SSDI)? 

0 = No 

1 = Yes, Supplemental Security Income (SSI) 

3 = Yes, Social Security Disability Insurance (SSDI) 

4 = Both SSI and SSDI 

Applies to: Respondents who reported a disability. 

CATI Code: TDISABL=1 
Appendix E. Facsimile 

E-53 

Student Interview–Abbreviated Version 

Appendix E. Facsimile 

E-55 

OMB No. 1850-0666 

Expires: 02/28/2006 

NATIONAL

POSTSECONDARY

STUDENT

AID

STUDY

Abbreviated Interview 

 (NPSAS:2004) 

Instructions: Please answer each question by placing a check (Y) in the box next to the appropriate response or filling in the

information requested. The NPSAS School referenced is the school shown on the label on this page. The study period of 

interest is the 2003-2004 school year (between July 1, 2003 and June 30, 2004). If you do not know an exact dollar amount for 

an item, please try to estimate the amount. 

Your participation in this study is completely voluntary and your decision to participate will not affect any financial aid or other 

benefits you are receiving. You may decline to answer any question. All information you provide is confidential. 

When you have completed your self-administered interview, please return it within 2 weeks in the self-addressed, postage-paid 

return envelope provided. Thank you for participating in this very important study. 

Affix NPSAS label here 
Appendix E. Facsimiles 

E-56 

N4ELIG 

1. Were you enrolled at the NPSAS school at any time between July 1, 2003 and June 30, 2004?

 Yes, was enrolled and left at the end of the term, or was still enrolled as of June 30,2004ÆGo to Question 

4

 Yes, was enrolled but left before the term endedÆGo to Question 2

 Have been enrolled, but still enrolled in high schoolÆGo to end

 NoÆGo to end

N4DRPRF 

2. Did you receive a full refund of your tuition when you left? 

 YesÆGo to Question 3

 NoÆGo to Question 4

N4DRPCMP 

3. Did you complete a course or term at the NPSAS school at any time between July 1, 2003 and June 30, 2004?

 YesÆGo to Question 4

 NoÆGo to end

N4STAT 

4. For all questions about your 2003–2004 enrollment at the NPSAS school, please refer to your most recent term 

of enrollment at the school. 

 In your most recent term at the NPSAS school, have you been enrolled as an undergraduate or graduate student, 

or have you been taking courses without being enrolled in a degree program? 

 Undergraduate student (includes associate’s and bachelor’s degrees, postsecondary diplomas and 

certificates at the undergraduate level, as well as professional degrees that do not require a bachelor’s 

degree)ÆGo to Question 5

 Graduate student (includes master’s and doctoral degrees, and post-baccalaureate and post-master’s 

certificates, as well as professional degrees that may be pursued after obtaining a bachelor’s degree)ÆGo 

to Question 6

 Taking classes without being enrolled in a degree programÆGo to Question 7

N4DGUG 

5. What undergraduate degree or certificate were you working on at the NPSAS school during the 2003–2004 

school year? 

 Bachelor’s degreeÆGo to Question 14

 Associate’s degreeÆGo to Question 14

 Undergraduate certificate or diploma (occupational or technical program)ÆGo to Question 8

 Undergraduate student, not in a degree programÆGo to Question 13

 Professional degree (only includes the following degree programs: chiropractic, dentistry, law, medicine, 

optometry, osteopathic medicine, pharmacy, podiatry, divinity/theology, or veterinary medicine)ÆGo to 

Question 11

 Post-baccalaureate certificate ÆGo to Question 14
Appendix E. Facsimiles 

E-57 

N4DGGR 

6. What graduate degree or certificate were you working on at the NPSAS school during the 2003-2004 school 

year? 

If you are enrolled in more than one program, enter the highest. For example, if you are working on both a 

doctoral degree and a professional degree, enter a doctoral degree. 

 Master’s degreeÆGo to Question 10

 Doctoral degreeÆGo to Question 9

 Post-baccalaureate certificateÆGo to Question 14

 Graduate student, not in a degree programÆGo to Question 13

 Post-master’s certificateÆGo to Question 14

 Professional degree (only includes the following degree programs: chiropractic, dentistry, law, medicine, 

optometry, osteopathic medicine, pharmacy, podiatry, divinity/theology, or veterinary medicine)ÆGo to 

Question 11 

N4CLSLV 

7. During the 2003-2004 school year, were you taking mainly undergraduate or graduate classes at the NPSAS 

school? 

 Mainly undergraduate classes 

 Mainly graduate classes 

 An equal mix of undergraduate and graduate classes 

Go to Question 13 

N4CKHOUR 

8. Did your program of study require at least 3 months or 300 clock hours of instruction in order for a certificate to 

be awarded? 

 YesÆGo to Question 14

 NoÆGo to End 

N4DGD 

9. What specific doctoral degree were you working toward in your most recent term in the 2003-2004 school year? 

 Doctor of Philosophy (PhD) 

 Doctor of Education (EdD) 

 Doctor of Science (DSc/ScD) or Engineering (DEng) 

 Doctor of Psychology (PsyD) 

 Doctor of Business or Public Administration (DBA/DPA) 

 Doctor of Fine Arts (DFA) 

 Doctor of Divinity/Theology (ThD) 

 Other doctoral degree not listed 

Go to Question 14 
Appendix E. Facsimiles 

E-58 

N4DGMS 

10. What specific master’s degree were you working toward in your most recent term in the 2003-2004 school 

year? 

 Master of Science (MS) 

 Master of Arts (MA) 

 Master of Education (MEd) or Teaching (MAT) 

 Master of Business Administration (MBA) 

 Public administration (MPA) 

 Master of Social Work (MSW) 

 Master of Fine Arts (MFA) 

 Master of Public Health (MPH) 

 Master of Divinity (MDiv) 

 Other master’s degree program not listed 

Go to Question 14 

N4DGPR 

11. What specific professional degree were you working toward in your most recent term in the 2003–2004 school 

year? 

 Ministry or Divinity (MDiv/DMin/MHL/BD/ordination) 

 Law (JD/LLB) 

 Medicine (MD) or Osteopathic medicine (DO) 

 Dentistry (DDS/DMD) 

 Chiropractic (DC/DCM) 

 Pharmacy (PharmD) 

 Optometry (OD) 

 Podiatry (DPM/DP/PodD) 

 Veterinary medicine (DVM) 

 Other undergraduate degree not listed 

 Other graduate degree not listed 

Go to Question 12 

N4PRBA 

12. Which of the following describes your most recent enrollment at the NPSAS school? 

 Enrolled in a professional degree program, but have not yet earned a bachelor’s degree 

 Have already earned a bachelor’s degree and was/now enrolled for a professional degree at the graduate 

level 

Go to Question 14 

N4ELCRD 

13. For all questions about your 2003–2004 enrollment at the NPSAS school, please refer to your most recent term 

of enrollment at the school. 

In your most recent term at the NPSAS school, were you enrolled in a course for credit that could be transferred 

to another school? 

 YesÆGo to Question 14

 NoÆGo to End
Appendix E. Facsimiles 

E-59 

N4NENRL 

14. We’d like to know about your enrollment at the NPSAS school during the academic year. 

Please indicate all of the months you have been enrolled between July 2003 June 2004.

If you plan to be enrolled for any portion of a month, please include that month. 

2003

 July 

 August 

 September 

 October 

 November 

 December 

Go to Question 15 

2004

 January 

 February 

 March 

 April 

 May 

 June 

N4SCHSTR 

15. In what month and year did you first attend the NPSAS school after completing high school requirements? 

__ __ / __ __ __ __ 

Month / Year 

Go to Question 16 

N4CMPDGN 

16. Have you completed all the requirements for your degree? 

 Yes 

 No, have not completed requirements 

 No, not in a degree program 

Go to Question 17 

N4EXPNP 

17. What is the highest level of education you expect to complete at the NPSAS school? 

 Bachelor’s degree 

 Associate’s degree 

 Undergraduate certificate or diploma (occupational or technical program) 

 Master’s degree 

 Doctoral degree (such as the Ph.D., Ed.D., etc.) 

 Post-baccalaureate certificate 

 Post-master’s certificate 

 Professional degree (only includes the following degree programs: chiropractic, dentistry, law, medicine, 

optometry, osteopathic medicine, pharmacy, podiatry, divinity/theology, or veterinary medicine) 

 No degree/certificate 

Go to Question 18 
Appendix E. Facsimiles 

E-60 

N4NEW1 

18. Did you attend any other schools besides the NPSAS school any time between July 1, 2003 and June 30, 

2004? 

 Yes 

 No 

Go to Instruction Box 

If the respondent is an undergraduate student (a student working on an undergraduate degree, a student 

taking mainly undergraduate classes, or a student taking an equal mix of undergraduate and graduate classes) 

go to Question 19. 

If the respondent is a graduate student (a student working on a graduate degree or a student taking mainly 

graduate classes), go to Question 26. 

N4NFST 

19. Was the NPSAS school the first college or trade school you enrolled in after completing your high school 

requirements? 

 YesÆGo to Question 21

 NoÆGo to Question 20

N4FSTSTR 

20. In what month and year did you first attend any college, university, or trade school after high school? 

__ __ / __ __ __ __ 

Month / Year 

Go to Question 21 

N4CMPCLS 

21. Did you complete one or more postsecondary classes (at a college or trade school) toward a degree or formal 

award between the time you completed high school and July 1, 2003? 

 Yes 

 No 

Go to Instruction Box 

If the respondent attended a school other than the NPSAS school between July 1, 2003 and June 30, 2004 go to 

Question 22. Else go to Question 26. 

N4TRNSFR 

22. Did you transfer to the NPSAS school from another school at any time during 2003-2004? 

 YesÆGo to Question 23

 NoÆGo to Question 24
Appendix E. Facsimiles 

E-61 

N4TRNCRD 

23. Did the NPSAS school accept all, some, or none of the credits you wanted to transfer? 

 All 

 Some 

 None 

Go to Question 25 

N4TRNAWY 

24. Did you transfer from the NPSAS school to another school at any point during 2003–2004? 

 YesÆGo to Question 26

 NoÆGo to Question 25

N4TRNPLN 

25. Do you plan to transfer from the NPSAS school to another school? 

 Yes 

 No 

Go to Question 26 

N4PRDG 

26. Have you earned any degrees or certificates since you left high school? 

 Yes 

 No 

Go to Instruction Box 

Is the respondent an undergraduate student (a student working on an undergraduate degree, a student taking 

mainly undergraduate classes, or a student taking an equal mix of undergraduate and graduate classes)? 

If YES, go to Question 27. Else skip to Question 28. 

N4REASON 

27. What were your main reasons for enrolling at the NPSAS school? (Please check all that apply.) 

 Learn job skills/prepare for job 

 Transfer to a 2-year school 

 Transfer to a 4-year school 

 Transfer but not known where 

 Personal interest or enrichment 

 Complete an undergraduate certificate or diploma 

Go to Question 28 

N4EVR4YR 

28. Have you ever attended a 4-year school? 

 Yes 

 No 

Go to Question 29 
Appendix E. Facsimiles 

E-62 

N4GENDR 

29. So that the rest of this interview may be customized for you, please answer the following questions. What is 

your gender? 

 Male 

 Female 

Go to Question 30 

N4DOB 

30. In what month and year were you born? 

__ __ / __ __ __ __ 

Month / Year 

Go to Question 31 

N4MARR 

31. What is your current marital status? 

 Single, never married 

 Married 

 Separated 

 Divorced 

 Widowed 

Go to Question 32 

If the respondent is an undergraduate student (a student working on an undergraduate degree, a student 

taking mainly undergraduate classes, or a student taking an equal mix of undergraduate and graduate classes), 

go to Question 32. 

If the respondent is a graduate student (a student working on a graduate degree or a student taking mainly 

graduate classes), go to instruction box after Question 34. 

N4DIPL 

32. Which of the following best describes your high school completion? 

 Received a high school diplomaÆGo to Question 33

 Passed a GED (General Educational Development) testÆGo to Question 33

 Received a high school completion certificateÆGo to Question 33

 Attended a foreign high schoolÆGo to Question 33

 Did not complete high school or a high school equivalency programÆGo to Question 34

 Home schooledÆGo to Question 33

N4HSYR 

33. When did you last attend high school or receive your high school diploma/GED? 

Year: __ __ __ __ 

If N4HSYR = 2004 or blank, go to Question 34. Else go to Instruction Box after Question 34. 
Appendix E. Facsimiles 

E-63 

N4CMP 

34. Were you completing high school requirements for the entire time you were enrolled at the NPSAS school

between July 1, 2003 and June 30, 2004? 

 YesÆGo to End

 NoÆGo to Instruction Box

If the respondent is an undergraduate student (a student working on an undergraduate degree, a student 

taking mainly undergraduate classes, or a student taking an equal mix of undergraduate and graduate classes), 

go to Question 36. 

If the respondent is a graduate student (a student working on a graduate degree or a student taking mainly 

graduate classes), go to Question 35.

N4GRAID 

35. For the 2003-2004 school year, which of the following did you have? (Please check all that apply and fill in the 

amount of each type of aid received.) 

 Teaching assistantship Amount $__________ 

 Research assistantship Amount $__________ 

 Graduate fellowship Amount $__________ 

 Traineeship Amount $__________ 

 Graduate assistantship Amount $__________ 

 None 

Go to Question 37 

N4SCHJOB 

36. During the 2003-2004 school year, did you participate in either work study or a paid assistantship? (Please 

check all that apply.) 

 Work Study 

 Assistantship 

 None of the above 

Go to Question 37 

N4RCVAID 

37. Did you receive financial aid—such as grants, loans, or scholarships—during the 2003-2004 school year? 

 YesÆGo to Question 39

 NoÆGo to Question 38

N4APPAID 

38. Did you apply for financial aid for the 2003–2004 school year? 

 Yes 

 No 

Go to Question 40 
Appendix E. Facsimiles 

E-64 

N4STAID 

39. Did you receive any scholarships or grants from your school or from a state grant program during the 2003-

2004 school year? (Please check all that apply and fill in the amount of each type of aid received.) 

 State grant or scholarship Amount $__________ 

 College grant or scholarships Amount $__________ 

 None 

Go to Question 40 

N4OTAID 

40. Did you receive any financial aid during the 2003–2004 school year that did not come from the financial aid 

office? (Please check all that apply and fill in the amount of each type of aid received.) 

 Tuition reimbursement from your employer Amount $__________ 

 Grants or scholarships from a private organization Amount $__________ 

 Veteran’s or DoD (Department of Defense) benefits Amount $__________ 

 Aid from your parent’s employer Amount $__________ 

 None 

Go to Question 41 

N4PRVLN 

41. Did you receive any type of commercial or private loan (such as TERI, Excel, or Access loans) from a bank or 

private organization for your enrollment during the 2003–2004 school year? 

 YesÆGo to Question 42

 NoÆGo to Question 43

N4PRVAMT 

42. How much did you borrow in commercial or private loans during the 2003–2004 school year? 

 Amount $__________ 

Go to Instruction Box 

If the respondent is an undergraduate student (a student working on an undergraduate degree, a student 

taking mainly undergraduate classes, or a student taking an equal mix of undergraduate and graduate classes), 

go to Question 43. 

If the respondent is a graduate student (a student working on a graduate degree or a student taking mainly 

graduate classes), go to Question 44.

N4SCHRES 

43. While you were enrolled during the 2003–2004 school year, did you live on campus, with your parents or 

guardians, or some place else? (If you lived in more than one residence, choose the place were you lived for the 

longest period of time.) 

 On-campus 

 With parents or guardians 

 Some place else (off campus) 

Go to Question 44 
Appendix E. Facsimiles 

E-65 

N4NUMJOB 

44. The next questions have to do with jobs other than any work study or assistantships you might have held while 

you were enrolled at the NPSAS school during the 2003–2004 school year. 

How many jobs for pay did you have while you were enrolled during the 2003–2004 school year? __________ 

If response is 0, go to Question 49. Else go to Question 45. 

N4EARN 

45. How much did you earn from all the jobs you held [excluding work study or assistantships] while you were 

enrolled during the 2003-2004 school year? Please exclude summer earnings if you were not enrolled during 

the summer. 

Amount $__________ 

 For the entire school yearÆGo to Question 47

 Per term/semester ÆGo to Question 46

 Per monthÆGo to Question 46

 Per weekÆGo to Question 46

N4EARNS 

46. How many terms/months/weeks will you have worked while you were enrolled during the 2003–2004 school 

year? __________ 

Go to Question 47 

N4HOURS 

47. Not including any work study job/assistantship/fellowship or traineeship, how many hours did you work per 

week (on average) while you were enrolled during the 2003–2004 school year? (Please exclude summer hours 

if you were not enrolled during the summer.) 

__________ 

Go to Question 48 

N4ENRWRK 

48. While you were enrolled at the NPSAS school and working, would you say you were primarily... 

 A student working to meet expenses or 

 An employee who decided to enroll in school 

Go to Question 49 
Appendix E. Facsimiles 

E-66 

N4INCOM 

49. What was your income from all sources (including income from work, investment income, alimony, etc.) prior 

to taxes and deductions in calendar year 2003 (January 1st to December 31st )? If you are married, please 

exclude spouse’s income. 

 No income 

 Less than $1,000 

 $1,000-$2,499 

 $2,500-$4,999 

 $5,000-$9,999 

 $10,000-$14,999 

 $15,000-$19,999 

 $20,000-$29,999 

 $30,000-$49,999 

 $50,000 and above 

If respondent is not married, go to Question 51. Else go to Question 50. 

N4INCSP 

50. How much would you estimate your spouse earned from all sources prior to taxes and deductions in 2003? 

 No income 

 Less than $1,000 

 $1,000-$2,499 

 $2,500-$4,999 

 $5,000-$9,999 

 $10,000-$14,999 

 $15,000-$19,999 

 $20,000-$29,999 

 $30,000-$49,999 

 $50,000 and above 

Go to Question 51 

N4UNTAX 

51. Between July 1, 2003 and June 30, 2004, did you [or your spouse] receive any untaxed income or benefits, such 

as TANF (AFDC), Social Security, worker’s compensation, disability payments, or child support? 

 YesÆGo to Question 52

 NoÆGo to Question 53
Appendix E. Facsimiles 

E-67 

N4TAXTYP 

52. Between July 1, 2003 and June 30, 2004, which of the following did you receive? (Please check all that apply.) 

 TANF (AFDC) 

 Social Security benefits 

 Worker’s compensation 

 Disability payments 

 Food stamps 

 Child support 

 None 

Go to Instruction Box 

If the respondent is an undergraduate student (a student working on an undergraduate degree, a student 

taking mainly undergraduate classes, or a student taking an equal mix of undergraduate and graduate classes), 

go to Question 53. 

If the respondent is a graduate student (a student working on a graduate degree or a student taking mainly 

graduate classes), go to Question 58. 

N4PARNC 

53. What was your parents’/guardians’ income in 2003? 

 Under $30,000 

 $30,000 to $59,999 

 $60,000 to $89,999 

 $90,000 and above 

 Don’t know 

Go to Question 54 

N4REMEVER 

54. Since you completed high school, have you taken remedial or developmental courses to improve your basic 

skills—such as in mathematics, reading, writing, or study skills? 

 YesÆGo to Question 55

 NoÆGo to Question 56

N4REMSY 

55. Did you take any remedial or developmental courses during the 2003-2004 school year? 

 Yes 

 No 

Go to Question 56 

N4ACTSAT 

56. Did you take the SAT or ACT college entrance exam? 

 Yes, SAT 

 Yes, ACT 

 Yes, both the SAT and ACT 

 No 

Go to Question 57 
Appendix E. Facsimiles 

E-68 

N4UGEXP 

57. During the 2003-2004 school year at the NPSAS school, please indicate whether you did the following never, 

sometimes, or often? 

 Never Sometimes Often 

Attend classes taught by graduate students   

Attend large lecture classes   

Write essay answers as part of exams   

Write papers for courses   

Go to Question 58 

N4HISP 

58. Are you of either Hispanic or Latino origin? 

 YesÆGo to Question 59

 NoÆGo to Question 60

N4HISTYP 

59. Are you of... (Please check all that apply.) 

 Cuban descent 

 Mexican, Mexican-American, or Chicano descent 

 Puerto Rican descent 

 Some other Spanish, Hispanic or Latino origin 

Go to Question 60 

N4RAC1 

60. What is your race? (Please check all that apply.) 

 White 

 Black or African American 

 Asian 

 American Indian or Alaska Native 

 Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander 

 Other, specify ____________________ 

Go to Question 61 

N4DEPS 

61. While you were enrolled in the 2003-2004 school year, did you [or your spouse] have any children under age 25 

that you supported financially? 

 YesÆGo to Question 62

 NoÆGo to Question 63

N4DEP2 

62. How many? __________ 

Go to Question 63 
Appendix E. Facsimiles 

E-69 

N4OTDEPS 

63. Were you supporting anyone else while enrolled in the 2003-2004 school year? 

 Yes 

 No 

Go to Question 64 

If the respondent is an undergraduate student (a student working on an undergraduate degree, a student 

taking mainly undergraduate classes, or a student taking an equal mix of undergraduate and graduate classes), 

go to Question 64. 

If the respondent is a graduate student (a student working on a graduate degree or a student taking mainly 

graduate classes), go to Question 66. 

N4PARST 

64. What is your parents’ marital status? 

 Married/remarried 

 Single 

 Divorced/separated 

 Widowed 

Go to Question 65 

N4PRHSD 

65. Not including yourself, how many people did your parents/guardians support financially during the 2003–2004 

school year? __________ 

Go to Question 66 

N4DADED 

66. What is the highest level of education your father completed? 

 Did not complete high school 

 High school diploma or equivalent 

 Vocational/technical training 

 Less than 2 years of college 

 Associate’s degree 

 2 or more years of college but not degree 

 Bachelor’s degree 

 Master’s degree or equivalent 

 Professional degree (only includes the following degree programs: chiropractic, law, optometry, pharmacy, 

podiatry, or divinity/theology) 

 Doctoral degree (PhD, EdD, etc) or equivalent 

 Don’t know 

Go to Question 67 
Appendix E. Facsimiles 

E-70 

N4MOMED 

67. What is the highest level of education your mother completed? 

 Did not complete high school 

 High school diploma or equivalent 

 Vocational/technical training 

 Less than 2 years of college 

 Associate’s degree 

 2 or more years of college but not degree 

 Bachelor’s degree 

 Master’s degree or equivalent 

 Professional degree (only includes the following degree programs: chiropractic, law, optometry, pharmacy, 

podiatry, or divinity/theology) 

 Doctoral degree (PhD, EdD, etc) or equivalent 

 Don’t know 

Go to Question 68 

N4DISSEN 

The next few questions will help us better understand the educational services available for people with 

disabilities. 

68. Do you have a long-lasting condition (6 months or more) such as blindness, deafness, or a severe vision or 

hearing impairment? 

 Yes 

 No 

Go to Question 69 

N4DISMOB 

69. Do you have a long-lasting (6 months or more) condition that substantially limits one or more basic physical 

activities such as walking, climbing stairs, reaching, lifting, or carrying? 

 Yes 

 No 

Go to Question 70 

N4DISOTH 

70. Excluding any conditions already mentioned, do you have any other physical, mental, emotional, or learning 

condition that has lasted six months or more? 

 Yes 

 No 

Go to Instruction Box 

If answers to Questions 67, 68, and 69 are all NO, go to end. Else to go Question 71. 
Appendix E. Facsimiles 

E-71 

N4DIFLRN 

71. Because of that long-lasting (6 months or more) condition, do you have any difficulty doing any of the 

following: (Please check all that apply.) 

 Learning, remembering, or concentrating? 

 Dressing, bathing, or getting around inside your home or dormitory? 

 Getting to school to attend class? 

 Working at a job? 

 None 

Go to Question 72 

N4MAIN 

72. What is the main type of condition or impairment you have? (Please choose only one.) 

 Hearing impairment (i.e., deaf or hard of hearing) 

 Developmental disability 

 Brain injury 

 Other, please specify 

 Blindness or visual impairment that cannot be corrected by wearing glasses 

 Speech or language impairment 

 Orthopedic or mobility impairment 

 Specific learning disability/dyslexia 

 Attention deficit disorder (ADD) 

 Health impairment/problem 

 Mental, emotional or psychiatric condition 

 Depression 

 Other, specify ____________________________________________ 

END 

The interview is now complete. 

Thank you for taking the time to participate in this important study for the U.S. Department of 

Education. 
Appendix E. Facsimiles 

E-72 
F-1 

Appendix F 

Call Center Services (CCS) Training Materials 

CCS Institutional Contractor Training ...............................................................................F-3 

CCS Institutional Contractor Training Manual Table of Contents.....................................F-9 

Field Data Collection Training ........................................................................................F-15 

Field Data Collection Training Table of Contents............................................................F-25 

CCS Help Desk/Telephone Interviewer Training ............................................................F-37 

CCS Help Desk/Telephone Interviewer Training Table of Contents...............................F-41 

Appendix F. Call Center Services (CCS) Training Materials 

F-3 

Call Center Services (CCS) Institutional Contractor Training Agenda 

Appendix F. Call Center Services (CCS) Training Materials 

F-5 

CCS Institutional Contactor 

TRAINING AGENDA 

National Study of Faculty and Students (NSoFaS) 

Coordinator Prompting (IQ, Faculty List, Student List) 

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

~ 

Day One 

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

~ 

8:30 – 10:00 CALL CENTER TRAINING IF NEEDED 

10:00-10:15 INTRODUCTION TO NSoFaS:04 

• Institutional Contacting Team 

• Project Staff 

10:15-10:45 NSOFAS: THE STUDY OVERVIEW 

10:45-11:00 KEY RESULTS FROM PREVIOUS NSOFAS STUDIES 

• NSOPF—Faculty Component 

• NPSAS—Student Component 

11:00-11:30 EARLY NOTIFICATION STRATEGY AND STUDY TIMELINE 

11:30-12:00 THE NSoFaS INSTITUTIONAL WEB SITE 

12:00-12:45 CA PROMPTING PROCEDURES/ QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS 

• Receipt of Packet 

• Completion of the Designating a Coordinator Form 

12:45-1:30 LUNCH 

1:00-1:30 OVERVIEW OF COORDINATOR PROMPTING 

• Receipt of Packet 

• Completing the Coordinator Response Form (CRF) 

1:30-2:30 USING THE ICS 

• Selecting Institutions 

― Sorting Institutions/User 

• Contact Info 

― Adding a Contact 

• Institute Info 

• Eligibility Criteria 

• Appointments 

• Comments/Record of Calls (ROC) 

• Refusal Conversion 

2:30—3:00 CURRENT STAGES & READING THE ICS 

― Previous Stages 

― Current Stages 

• Current Stages Tasks 

― Faculty and Student List Acquisition 

― Institution Questionnaire 

― webCADE 

3:00– 3:15 BREAK 

3:15 – 4:30 FACULTY LIST PROMPTING 
Appendix F. Call Center Services (CCS) Training Materials 

F-6 

4:30—5:00 SUMMARY EVALUATION OF TRAINING 

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

~ 

Day Two 

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

~ 

9:00—9:15 BREAKFAST/INFORMAL Q &A 

9:15 – 10:00 UPDATE ON STAGES COMPLETED 

• Mailing of binders in two waves 

• % Completed CRF 

• #/% Refused 

• # Multi-campus INST 

9:00 – 9:30 OVER SAMPLE OF TWELVE STATES 

9:30-10:15 LIST PROCEDURES FOR NSOPF/ FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS 

• Review of relevant binder tabs 

• Sampling and eligibility issues 

• Field Test ICs most frequently answered questions 

10:15-10:30 BREAK 

10:30 -- 11:15 LIST PROCEDURES FOR NPSAS/ FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS 

• Review of relevant binder tabs 

• Sampling and eligibility issues 

• Field Test ICs most frequently answered questions 

11:00-12:00 ICS: PROBLEM RESOLUTION FORMS/WRITING THOROUGH COMMENTS 

• Tackling Respondent Refusal 

• Reporting ICS functionality 

12:00-1:00 LUNCH 

1:30-2:30 USING REPORTS AND STAGES/STATUS CODES 

2:30 – 3:30 THE INSTITUTION QUESTIONNAIRE 

• Round robin on-line 

3:30 – 3:45 BREAK 

3:45—4:15 OVERVIEW OF NPSAS webCADE CONTENT 

• Student record abstraction options 

• Updating the ICS due dates page 

4:15 -- 4:45 ROLE-PLAY EXERCISES ON IQ COMPLETION AND FACULTY LIST 

4:45 -- 5:00 REVIEW/EXPLAIN HOME STUDY PACKET 

• Instructions 

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 
Appendix F. Call Center Services (CCS) Training Materials 

F-7 

Day Three 

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

~ 

9:00—9:15 BREAKFAST/INFORMAL Q &A 

9:15 – 9:30 BINDER MAILING: STAGE 41 & 43 

• Review Binder Content Teams:

NSoFaS (3) NSOPF (3) NPSAS(3) 

9:30 – 10:30 PROMPTING COORDINATOR FOR RECEIPT OF BINDER NPSAS ONLY (JAN) 

• Role-play

• Mocks

10:30 – 10:45 BREAK 

10:45 – 12:00 PROMPTING COORDINATOR FOR COMPLETION OF IQ (JAN-MAR) 

• Role-play 

• Mocks 

12:00 – 1:00 LUNCH 

1:00 – 1:30 PROMPTING COORDINATOR FOR FACULTY LIST (JAN-MAR) 

1:30—2:00 PROMPTING COORDINATOR FOR STUDENT LIST (JAN-MAY) 

• Getting a webCADE method and due date(FEB-JUNE) 

2:00 – 2:30 ICS CASE ASSIGNMENTS 

• Review cases assigned to ICs

• Practice sorting assignment

• Review report

• QC Faculty and Student List resolution

2:30 – 3:00 Bonus Structure REVIEW HOME STUDY 

3:00 – 3:15 Break 

3:15 – 5:00 Paired-calls (Vet w/New) on the floor 

Appendix F. Call Center Services (CCS) Training Materials 

F-9 

Call Center Services (CCS) 

Institutional Contractor Training Manual Table of Contents 

Appendix F. Call Center Services (CCS) Training Materials 

F-11 

Full Scale – CCS Training Manual 

2004 National Study of Faculty and Students (NSoFaS:04)

Institutional Contacting 

Table of Contents 

Chapter 1 NSoFaS Overview 

1.1 Purpose and Goals of NSOFAS:04 

1.1.1 Sponsorship 

1.1.2 Legislation Authorizing 

1.1.3 Endorsements 

1.2 Description of NSoFaS & Components 

1.3 Special Issues for the 12 "Oversample" States 

1.4 Project Staff Organization 

1.5 Overview of NSoFaS Components 

1.5.1 NSOPF Background 

1.5.2 Faculty comp Goals 

1.5.3 NPSAS Background 

1.5.4 NPSAS Goals 

1.5.5 Examples of NSOPF & NPSAS Data 

1.6 Importance of School Participation 

Chapter 2 Institutional Contactors' Role in NSOFAS 

2.1 Institutional Contactors' Duties 

2.2 Professionalism 

2.2.1 The Importance of Accuracy 

2.2.2 Confidentiality 

2.3 The Sample 

2.3.1 Verification of Institution Address and Chief Administrator 

2.3.2 Early Notification: Contacting the Chief Administrator 

2.3.3 Early Notification: Contacting the Primary Coordinator 

2.3.4 Early Notification: Completing the Coordinator Response Form (CRF) 

2.3.5 Data Collection Phase: Completing the Institution Questionnaire 

2.3.6 Data Collection Phase: Obtaining a Faculty List 

2.3.7 Data Collection Phase: Obtaining a Student Enrollment File 

2.3.8 Data Collection Phase: Completing Student Record Abstractions 

2.4 Handling Difficult Institutional Questions 

2.4.1 Roadblocks 

2.5 Documentation/Commenting 

Chapter 3 Contacting Institutions Chief Administrator (CA) 

3.1 Institutional Culture 

3.2 Timeline 

3.3 Verification call 

3.4 Initial Mailing to the CA 

3.4.1 Initial Follow-up Call to the CA 

3.5 Potential Refusals 

3.6 FAQs and Frequent Situations 

3.6.1 Help Needed: Supplemental Call Info; Problem and Refusal Reporting 
Appendix F. Call Center Services (CCS) Training Materials 

F-12 

Full Scale – CCS Training Manual 

2004 National Study of Faculty and Students (NSoFaS:04)

Institutional Contacting 

Table of Contents (continued) 

Chapter 4 Contacting the Institutional Coordinator 

4.1 Role of the Institutional Coordinator 

4.2 Institution Coordinator Mailings (Packet and Binder) 

4.2.1 Coordinator Packet 

4.2.2 Coordinator Binder 

4.2.3 Contacting the Institutional Coordinator - Coordinator Response Form (CRF) 

4.3 Helping Coordinators with Faculty Lists 

4.3.1 Instructions for Completing Faculty Lists 

4.3.2 File Format - Faculty 

4.3.3 Instructions for Uploading Faculty List 

4.3.4 Instructions for Data Submitted via e-mail or other e-format--Faculty 

4.3.5 Paper List - Faculty 

4.4 Completing the Institution Quex - Faculty 

4.4.1 Prompting for a Phone Interview 

4.4.2 An Overview of the Institution Questionnaire 

4.5 Helping ICs with Student Lists 

4.5.1 Specifications for Student Enrollment Lists 

4.5.2 Contact Information and File Layout for Creating the List of Enrolled Students 

4.6 Handling Special Requests for Reimbursement 

4.7 E-mail Communication with Coordinators 

4.8 Forms Available on the Web 

Chapter 5 Additional Follow-up 

5.1 Faculty List Follow-up 

5.2 Retrieval of Institution Questionnaire Counts 

5.3 Questionnaire/List Discrepancy Calls 

5.4 Unreadable Lists 

5.5 Overview/Content of CADE (Computer Assisted Data Entry) 

5.6 Combining Prompts 

5.7 Overlapping tasks for the full-scale study 

5.8 Steps in Refusal Conversion Process 

5.8.1 Dead-ended: Who Else Can Help? 

5.8.2 Which Calls to Refer to Project Staff 

Chapter 6 The Institutional Contacting System (ICS) 

Chapter 7 The Who, What, When, Where, and How of webCADE? 

7.1 Who Completes webCADE? 

7.2 What is webCADE? 

7.3 When is webCADE to be completed? 

7.4 Where is webCADE? For Coordinators...for CCS? 

7.5 How can Institutional Staff Complete webCADE? 
Appendix F. Call Center Services (CCS) Training Materials 

F-13 

Full Scale – CCS Training Manual 

2004 National Study of Faculty and Students (NSoFaS:04)

Institutional Contacting 

Table of Contents (Continued) 

7.5.1 Completion using Field Data Collectors (FDCs) for fieldCADE 

7.5.2 Prioritizing Method of webCADE Completion 

7.6 What is CCS’s role in tracking webCADE completions? 

 

Appendices

A Contents of CA Packet 

B Contents of IC Packet 

C Institution Questionnaire Screens and Help Text 

D FAQs 

E Glossary of Terms 

F Problem Sheets and Refusal Forms 

G Contents of CADE 

H NSoFaS Stage Flow Overview 

I QC Meeting Notes 

Appendix F. Call Center Services (CCS) Training Materials 

F-15 

Field Data Collection Training Agenda 

Appendix F. Call Center Services (CCS) Training Materials 

F-17 

2004 National Study of Faculty and Students 

National Postsecondary Student Aid Study 

Field Data Collector Training 

AGENDA 

Appendix F. Call Center Services (CCS) Training Materials 

F-19 

Day One 

Hotel, 8:00 pm - 5:00 pm

Entire Group 

REGISTRATION/Breakfast 7:00a – 8:30a 

• Complete I-9 

• RTI Identification photos 

Topic 1 Welcome and Introduction to NSoFaS: 2004 8:30a – 9:00a 

• NSoFaS project teams: Who’s on first? 

Topic 2 Background and purpose of NSoFaS:2004 9:00a – 9:20a 

• Study design 

Topic 3 Historical Perspective on Student Record Abstraction 9:20a – 9:45a

 

Topic 4 Uses of the data (NPSAS specific) 9:45a – 10:30a 

• Findings from NPSAS 2000 

Break 10:30a – 10:45a 

 

Topic 5 Student Financial Aid Process and Practice 10:45a – 11:45p 

• Loans, Grants and other Federal Aid programs 

• FAFSA—the application 

Topic 6 Update on Institutional Contacting Task (webCADE) 11:45a – 12:15a 

• Student List 

• Faculty Lists 

• webCADE (self) 

 LUNCH 12:15p - 1:15p
Appendix F. Call Center Services (CCS) Training Materials 

F-20 

Day Two 

Topic 7 Confidentiality 1:15p – 2:15p 

• Headway Procedures 

• Affidavits of Non-Disclosure/Confidentiality Agreements Notarized 

 

Topic 8 Overview of the Training Session/FDC Responsibilities 2:15p - 2:45p 

• Training agenda and rules 

• FDC responsibilities 

• Content of Case Studies Binder 

Topic 9 Introduction to the Laptop Computer 2:45p - 3:15p 

• Assign computers/Complete Inventory Sheets 

• Review Hardware 

• Intro to Case Management System (CMS) 

 Break 3:15p – 3:30p 

Topic 10 webCADE Demonstration Financial Aid Module (Case # 1) 3:30p – 4:15p 

• Institutional Defaults 

• Financial Aid Section 

• Need Analysis Section 

• ISIR Section 

Topic 11 webCADE Demonstration Registration/Admissions Module 4:15p – 4:30p 

(Case # 1) 

• Locating Section 

• Characteristics Section 

• Admissions Section 

Topic 12 webCADE Demonstration Enrollment/Tuition Module (Case #1) 4:30p – 4:45p 

• Enrollment Section 

• Tuition Section 

 Q&A/Adjournment 4:45p – 5:00p 

• Study Hall 

• Break out rooms for remainder of training 
Appendix F. Call Center Services (CCS) Training Materials 

F-21 

Day Three 

Hotel, 9:00 am - 5:00 pm

By FS Grouping 

Continental Breakfast 8:00a - 9:00a 

Topic 13 Agenda overview and goals of training 9:00a – 9:15a 

Topic 14 Document Search by CADE: Module: Financial Aid Info (Case #10) 9:15a – 10:00a 

• Financial Aid: Subsection 

• Need Analysis Subsection 

• ISIR Subsection 

Topic 15 Document Search by CADE Module: Registration/Admission 10:00a – 10:30a 

(Case #10)

• Locating Subsection 

• Characteristics 

• Admissions 

Topic 16 Document Search CADE Module: ISIR (Case #10) 10:30a – 10:45a 

BREAK 10:45a – 11:00a 

Topic 17 Case Management System (CMS) 11:00a –11:15a 

• Training Cases versus the REAL thing 

• Transmitting Completed Cases 

Topic 18 Keying the Data in webCADE (Case #10) 11:15a –12:00p 

Topic 19 Observations/Questions 12:00p – 12:15p 

Lunch 12:00p – 1:00p 

Topic 20 Postsecondary Institution Environment 1:00p – 1:30p 

• The Faculty/Student studies 

• Web site review 

• Course Catalogs/COA 

• Directories/E-mails for students 

Topic 21 Contacting Institutional Coordinators 1:30:p – 2:30p 

• The “Appointment Call” 

• The “Kick-Off Meeting” 

• Role-Play Vignette 

Topic 22 Round Robin Case #3 2:30p – 3:30p 

Break 3:30p – 3:45p 
Appendix F. Call Center Services (CCS) Training Materials 

F-22 

Day Four 

Topic 23 Paired Practice Case # 6 3:45 – 4:30p 

Topic 24 Observations/Questions/Adjournment 4:30 – 4:45p 

 

• Study Hall Transmit Cases 1, 10, 3, 6 

 6:00p – 7:00p 
Appendix F. Call Center Services (CCS) Training Materials 

F-23 

Day Five

Hotel, 8:30 am - 5:00 pm

By FS Grouping 

Continental Breakfast 8:00a - 9:00a 

Topic 25 Case Management System 9:00a -10:00a 

• Overview of Case Management System 

• Instrument/Update Abstraction Codes 

• Accessing cases 

• Reviewing institutional histories 

• Training cases vs. real cases 

• Overview of electronic PT&E (ePT&E) 

• Other CMS Functions 

Topic 26 Eudora Mail: Practice 10:00a – 10:30 

 Break 10:30a – 10:45a 

Topic 27 Round Robin Case #8 10:45a – 11:45a 

Topic 28 Review Transmission of Data 11:45a – 12:15a

• Transmit Case #8 

• Changing “calling from 

 Lunch 12:15p – 1:15p 

Topic 29 Individual Practice # 9 1:15p – 2:00p 

Topic 30 Role Play (The IC Call) 2:00p – 2:30p 

• Institutional Fact Sheet Case #2 

• Web site review of Western Business School 

 Break 2:45p – 3:00p 

Topic 31 Round-Robin Case # 2 3:00p – 4:00p 

Topic32 Homework Assignment Case# 7 4:00p – 4:05p 

• Complete/Transmit from hotel 

Topic 33 Questions/Adjournment 4:05p – 4:15p 

Study Hall 6:00p – 7:00p 
Appendix F. Call Center Services (CCS) Training Materials 

F-24 

Day Six 

Hotel, 8:30 am - 5:00 pm

By FS Grouping 

Continental Breakfast /Check-out 8:00a - 9:00a 

Topic 34 Review of Homework 9:00a - 9:15a 

Topic 35 IRB and Confidentiality 9:15 – 10:00 

Topic 36 Assignments/Administrative Procedures 10:00 a – 10:30a 

• Cost reporting

• Returning hardcopy vs shredding

• Assignments

 Break 10:30a – 10:45a 

Topic 37 Quality Control Measures 10:15a - 10:45a 

• Verification 

• Data quality review 

Topic 38 Round-Robin Case # 4 10:45a – 11:45p 

 Lunch 11:45p – 1:00p 

Topic 39 Certification Protocol 1:00p – 1:30p 

• Successful Completion/Transmission of Cases #5 & #7 

Topic 40 Training Evaluation 1:30p – 1:45p 

Topic 41 Conference Time with FSs 1:45p – 2:30p 

Topic 42 Adjournment/Packing materials to ship 2:30p – 3:00p 
Appendix F. Call Center Services (CCS) Training Materials 

F-25 

Call Center Services (CCS) 

Field Data Collection Training Table of Contents 

Appendix F. Call Center Services (CCS) Training Materials 

F-27 

Field Data Collection 

Table of Contents 

Section Page 

1.0 INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................... 1-1 

1.1 Study Background ................................................................................................. 1-1 

 1.1.1 Overview.................................................................................................. 1-1 

 1.1.2 RTI International...................................................................................... 1-2 

 1.1.3 Type of Data Collected ............................................................................ 1-3 

 1.1.4 Use of the Data......................................................................................... 1-4 

 1.1.5 Methodology............................................................................................ 1-5 

1.2 NPSAS:04 Progress to Date.................................................................................. 1-8 

1.3 Data Collection Schedule ...................................................................................... 1-9 

1.4 Role and Responsibilities of NPSAS Field Data Collector................................... 1-9 

1.5 Importance of Confidentiality ............................................................................. 1-10 

1.6 Use of this Manual .............................................................................................. 1-10 

1.7 NPSAS Materials and Supplies........................................................................... 1-10 

1.8 Endorsements ...................................................................................................... 1-11 

1.9 Abbreviations ...................................................................................................... 1-12 

1.10 Calendar of Events .............................................................................................. 1-12 

2.0 CONDUCTING THE INSTITUTION VISIT ................................................................. 2-1 

 2.1 Data Collection in Institution Settings .................................................................. 2-1 

 2.1.1 Representation, Professionalism, Accountability .................................... 2-1 

 2.1.2 Confidentiality Issues .............................................................................. 2-2 

 2.1.3 Preparing for the Institution Visit ............................................................ 2-4 

 2.1.4 Field Forms and Materials ....................................................................... 2-4 

 2.1.5 Data Collector Materials Packet .............................................................. 2-8 

 2.1.6 webCADE Preload for Institution Visit................................................... 2-9 

 2.2 The IC Call ............................................................................................................ 2-9

 2.3 Conducting the Institution Visit .......................................................................... 2-11 

 2.4 Institution IC Kickoff Meeting............................................................................ 2-11 

 2.4.1 Institution Fact Sheet ............................................................................. 2-12 

 2.4.2 FDC Checklist........................................................................................ 2-12 

 2.5 Abstracting and webCADE Data Entry............................................................... 2-13 

 2.6 Concluding the Institution Visit .......................................................................... 2-13 

 2.6.1 Exit Interview ........................................................................................ 2-14 

 2.6.2 Post-Visit webCADE Procedures .......................................................... 2-14 

 2.7 Post-Abstraction FS Verification ........................................................................ 2-14 
Appendix F. Call Center Services (CCS) Training Materials 

F-28 

Table of Contents (continued) 

Section Page 

3.0 STUDENT FINANCIAL AID PROCESS ...................................................................... 3-1 

 3.1 Overview ............................................................................................................... 3-1

 3.2 Understanding the Application Processing System .............................................. 3-2 

 3.3 The ISIR/SAR and NPSAS webCADE................................................................. 3-3 

 3.3.1 Understanding the ISIR/SAR Sections .................................................... 3-3 

 3.4 Financial Aid Terms.............................................................................................. 3-5 

 3.5 Financial Aid Programs......................................................................................... 3-5 

 3.6 Graduate and First-Professional Awards............................................................... 3-6 

4.0 THE LAPTOP COMPUTER........................................................................................... 4-1 

 4.1 Overview ............................................................................................................... 4-1

 4.2 Computer Components.......................................................................................... 4-1 

 4.3 Opening the Computer .......................................................................................... 4-2 

 4.4 The Front with the Display Open.......................................................................... 4-2 

 4.5 The Right Side View ............................................................................................. 4-4 

 4.6 The Left Side ......................................................................................................... 4-5 

 4.7 The Back................................................................................................................ 4-6 

 4.8 Powering the Computer......................................................................................... 4-5 

 4.8.1 Using Electricity/Adapter ........................................................................ 4-6 

 4.8.2 Using Battery Power................................................................................ 4-7 

 4.9 Turning the Computer On ..................................................................................... 4-8 

 4.10 Using the Mouse and the Touchpad...................................................................... 4-8 

 4.10.1 Using the Mouse ...................................................................................... 4-8 

 4.10.2 The Touchpad Buttons............................................................................. 4-9 

 4.11 Keyboard ............................................................................................................... 4-9 

 4.12 Preparing to Transmit (Telephone RTI) on the Laptop......................................... 4-9 

 4.13 Troubleshooting................................................................................................... 4-10 

5.0 webCADE and the Record Abstraction Process.............................................................. 5-1 

 5.1 Introduction to Record Abstracting....................................................................... 5-1 

 5.1.1 Overview of the Modules in webCADE.................................................. 5-1 

 5.2 webCADE Terms/Concepts .................................................................................. 5-4 

 5.3 Instructions for Starting webCADE ...................................................................... 5-8 

 5.3.1 Result Codes .......................................................................................... 5-10 

 5.4 Transmitting Data................................................................................................ 5-12 

 5.5 Unlock Cases....................................................................................................... 5-14 

 5.6 Navigating webCADE......................................................................................... 5-14 
Appendix F. Call Center Services (CCS) Training Materials 

F-29 

Table of Contents (continued) 

Section Page 

6.0 ELECTRONIC MAIL—EUDORA LIGHT MAIL......................................................... 6-1 

 6.1 Overview ............................................................................................................... 6-1

 6.2 Main Screen........................................................................................................... 6-2 

 6.3 Accessing Your E-mail Address Book and Setting Up “Nicknames” .................. 6-4 

 6.4 Writing an E-mail Message................................................................................... 6-6 

 6.5 Sending and Receiving New E-Mail..................................................................... 6-8 

 6.6 Reading an E-mail Message.................................................................................. 6-9 

 6.7 Replying to an E-mail Message........................................................................... 6-11 

 6.8 Forwarding an E-mail Message to Another Person............................................. 6-12 

 6.9 Storing an E-mail Message.................................................................................. 6-13 

 6.10 Deleting an E-mail Message................................................................................ 6-14 

 6.11 Moving Messages Between Mailboxes and Folders/Setting Up Folders............ 6-15 

 6.12 Exiting E-mail ..................................................................................................... 6-17 

7.0 RTI ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES..................................................................... 7-1 

 7.1 Introduction ........................................................................................................... 7-1

 7.2 Terms of Employment........................................................................................... 7-1 

 7.3 Authorization for Expenditures............................................................................. 7-2 

 7.4 Communications.................................................................................................... 7-2 

 7.5 Supplies and Equipment........................................................................................ 7-3 

 7.6 Production, Time, and Expense (PT&E) Reporting.............................................. 7-4 

 7.6.1 Reporting Production............................................................................... 7-4 

 7.6.2 Reporting Time ........................................................................................ 7-4 

 7.6.3 Reporting Expenses ................................................................................. 7-4 

 7.6.4 Allowable Time and Expense Charges.................................................... 7-4 

 7.6.5 Other Time and Expense Considerations................................................. 7-6 

 7.6.6 Procedures for Paying FDCs.................................................................... 7-6 

 7.7 The ePT&E System............................................................................................... 7-7 

 7.7.1 Default Value Settings ............................................................................. 7-7 

 7.7.2 Entry Form............................................................................................... 7-9 

 7.7.3 Detail Form ............................................................................................ 7-10 

 7.8 Hard-Copy PTE................................................................................................... 7-14 

 7.9 Telephone Charges.............................................................................................. 7-17 

 7.10 Expense Advances............................................................................................... 7-17 

 7.11 Payroll Processing ............................................................................................... 7-18 

 7.12 Total Costs by Institution .................................................................................... 7-19 

 7.13 Work Absences Caused by Sickness and Vacation............................................. 7-19 

 7.14 Field Accidents and Injuries................................................................................ 7-19 

 7.15 Performance Evaluation ...................................................................................... 7-20 

 7.16 Mailing Procedures.............................................................................................. 7-20 

Table of Contents (continued) 
Appendix F. Call Center Services (CCS) Training Materials 

F-30 

Section Page 

8.0 FIELD SUPERVISOR PROCEDURES.......................................................................... 8-1 

 8.1 Overview ............................................................................................................... 8-1

 8.2 Overview of Field Supervisor’s Duties................................................................. 8-1 

 8.3 Recruiting .............................................................................................................. 8-2 

 8.3.1 Identifying Field Data Collector Candidates ........................................... 8-2 

 8.3.2 Interviewing Field Data Collector Candidates......................................... 8-4 

 8.3.3 Hiring Field Data Collectors.................................................................... 8-7 

 8.4 Field Management................................................................................................. 8-8 

 8.4.1 Web Assignment Transfer System (WEBATS)....................................... 8-9 

 8.4.2 Using the WEB Assignment Transfer System (WEBATS)..................... 8-9 

 8.4.3 Assignment/Transfre System................................................................. 8-16 

 8.4.4 Assigning New Cases ............................................................................ 8-18 

 8.4.5 Transferring Cases ................................................................................. 8-20 

 8.4.6 Transferring Cases to Yourself .............................................................. 8-22 

 8.4.7 Viewing All Cases ................................................................................. 8-24 

 8.4.8 Reviewing Orders .................................................................................. 8-25 

 8.4.9 WEBATS Reports.................................................................................. 8-26 

 8.5 Finalizing Case Assignment Folders................................................................... 8-32 

 8.6 Monitoring Field Activity ................................................................................... 8-32 

 8.6.1 Supervisor/FDC Telephone Conference................................................ 8-33 

 8.6.2 Potential Non-record Abstractions......................................................... 8-34 

 8.6.3 Approval Production, Time & Expense Reports (ePT&E).................... 8-35 

 8.6.4 Problem Solving: The Supervisor as Manager ..................................... 8-48 

 8.6.5 Reporting Progress to RTI ..................................................................... 8-51 

 8.6.6 Ordering Supplies .................................................................................. 8-51 

 
Appendix F. Call Center Services (CCS) Training Materials 

F-31 

Table of Contents (continued) 

Appendices 

A Institutional Contacting Letters: Chief Administrator and Coordinator 

B webCADE Data Elements 

C Glossary of Financial Aid Terms 

D Free Application for Federal Student Aid (hard-copy) 

E State Financial Aid Awards 

F Computer Troubleshooting Guide 
Appendix F. Call Center Services (CCS) Training Materials 

F-32 

List of Exhibits 

Exhibit Page 

1-1 Coordinator Response Form Facsimile (CRF) ..................................................1-13 

1-2 Field Data Collector Responsibilities ................................................................1-20 

1-3 Confidentiality Agreement ................................................................................1-21 

1-4 Affidavit of Nondisclosure ................................................................................1-22 

1-5 List of Abbreviations .........................................................................................1-23 

1-6 NPSAS:04 Field Test Calendar .........................................................................1-24 

2-1 Disclosure Notice...............................................................................................2-15 

2-2 Field Data Collector Checklist...........................................................................2-16 

2-3 Script for the IC Call..........................................................................................2-18 

2-4 IC Call Script Aid ..............................................................................................2-21 

2-5 NPSAS:04 Scheduling Calendar .......................................................................2-23 

2-6 NPSAS:04 Materials Transmittal Form............................................................2-27 

2-7 Record of Contacts Form...................................................................................2-28 

2-8 Problem/Comments Log ....................................................................................2-29 

2-9 Institution Fact Sheet .........................................................................................2-30 

2-10 List of Sampled Students ...................................................................................2-32 

2-11 Post-Abstraction Field Supervisor Verification Form.......................................2-33 

3-1 FAFSA Web Site Home Page.............................................................................. 3-8 

3-2 Flowchart of Financial Aid Process.....................................................................3-9 

7-1 Headway Discipline Policy................................................................................7-21 

7-2 Data Collection Agreement ...............................................................................7-23 

7-3 Project Staff Information ...................................................................................7-24 

7-4 Equipment Receipt and Agreement Form..........................................................7-25 

7-5 RTI ePT&E System Default Value Setting Screen ...........................................7-26 

7-6 ePT&E Application—Entry Form—Completed................................................7-27 

7-7 ePT&E Application—Detail Form ....................................................................7-28 

7-8 ePT&E Application—Detail Form—Completed...............................................7-29 

7-9 Production, Time, and Expense Report .............................................................7-30 

7-10 Production, Time, and Expenses Report—Completed ......................................7-31 

7-11 Advance Balance Sheet .....................................................................................7-32 

7-12 NPSAS Field Data Collector Evaluation...........................................................7-33 

7-13 Federal Express Airbill ......................................................................................7-35 

7-14 Headway Expense Report..................................................................................7-36 

8-1 Field Supervisor Evaluation Form.....................................................................8-53 

8-2 Field Data Collector Evaluation Form...............................................................8-55 

8-3 Field Data Collector Example News Ad............................................................8-57 

8-4 NSoFaS:04 Recruiting Letter.............................................................................8-58 

8-5 Field Data Collector Job Description.................................................................8-59 

List of Exhibits (continued) 
Appendix F. Call Center Services (CCS) Training Materials 

F-33 

Exhibit Page 

8-6 NSoFaS:04 Field Data Collector Appointment Letter.......................................8-60 

8-7 Field Data Collector Personal Data Sheet..........................................................8-16 

8-8 Field Data Collector Applicant Interview Summary .........................................8-65 

8-9 Federal W-4 Form..............................................................................................8-67 

8-10 Employment Eligibility Verification, Form I-9.................................................8-68 

8-11 Hire Letter..........................................................................................................8-69 

8-12 Electronic Mail Request for Travel Advance ....................................................8-70 

8-13 Headway Expense/ePT&E/Travel Advance Log ..............................................8-72 

8-14 Electronic Request for Materials and Supplies..................................................8-74 
Appendix F. Call Center Services (CCS) Training Materials 

F-34 

List of Figures 

Figure Page 

5-1 Case Management Password................................................................................5-8 

5-2 Case Management System: Main Menus............................................................5-9 

5-3 School Name List.................................................................................................5-9 

5-4 Case Selection by Group....................................................................................5-10 

5-5 Update Event......................................................................................................5-10 

5-6 Update Event Code ............................................................................................5-11 

5-7 Transmission......................................................................................................5-13 

5-8 Transmission Results .........................................................................................5-14 

6-1 Eudora: Main Screen Menu Bar .........................................................................6-2 

6-2 Eudora: Adding Names to Address Book...........................................................6-4 

6-3 Eudora: Creating Nicknames ..............................................................................6-5 

6-4 Eudora: Creating an E-mail Message .................................................................6-6 

6-5 Eudora: Checking for E-mail Received ..............................................................6-8 

6-6 Eudora: Selecting E-mail to Read.......................................................................6-9 

6-7 Eudora: Closing an E-mail Window.................................................................6-10 

6-8 Eudora: Responding to an E-mail Message......................................................6-11 

6-9 Eudora: Forwarding an E-mail Message ..........................................................6-12 

6-10 Eudora: Moving Messages to Folders ..............................................................6-13 

6-11 Eudora: Deleting Messages ..............................................................................6-14 

6-12 Eudora: Setting up Folders ...............................................................................6-15 

8-1 Main Selection Page ..........................................................................................8-10 

8-2 Recruiting Main Page ........................................................................................8-11 

8-3 Recruiting SSN Screen ......................................................................................8-12 

8-4 New SSN Screen................................................................................................ 8-13 

8-5 FDC Information Screen....................................................................................8-14 

8-6 Hire Log.............................................................................................................8-15 

8-7 Recruiting Reports Page ....................................................................................8-16 

8-8 Assignment Transfer Main Selection Screen.....................................................8-17 

8-9 Views in WEBATS............................................................................................ 8-18 

8-10 Assign New Cases View.................................................................................... 8-19 

8-11 Transfer Cases View..........................................................................................8-21 

8-12 Send Cases to Other FS .....................................................................................8-23 

8-13 View All Cases ..................................................................................................8-24 

8-14 Review Orders Page...........................................................................................8-25 

8-15 List of WEBATS Reports .................................................................................. 8-26 

8-16 Transmission Log Report...................................................................................8-27 

8-17 Case Detail Report Selection Screen .................................................................8-28 

8-18 Case Detail Report .............................................................................................8-29 

8-19 Individual Interview Status Report.................................................................... 8-30 

8-20 Summary Interview Status Report.....................................................................8-31 

8-21 Description of FS ePT&E Links........................................................................8-39 
Appendix F. Call Center Services (CCS) Training Materials 

F-35 

List of Figures (continued) 

Figure Page 

8-22 ePT&E Forms for Approval Link......................................................................8-40 

8-23 Production, Time, and Expense Report .............................................................8-42 

8-24 Approved Electronic PTE Forms.......................................................................8-45 

8-25 Completed Production, Time, and Expense Report...........................................8-47 

Appendix F. Call Center Services (CCS) Training Materials 

F-37 

Call Center Services (CCS) 

Help Desk/Telephone Interviewer Training Agenda 

Appendix F. Call Center Services (CCS) Training Materials 

F-39 

NPSAS 2004 

Help Desk 

2 Day training 

HD Day 1 9:00 a.m.–5:00 p.m. 

9:00a–9:30a Welcome and Introduction (30 min) 

-Introduction of HD and Project Staff 

-Overview of the Study 

9:30a-9:45a Confidentiality (15 min) 

 -Sign/notarize confidentiality agreements 

9:45a-9:55a Your Role as a Help Desk Operator (10 min)

9:55a-10:05a Telephone Routing System (10 min) 

10:05a-11:05a Help Desk FAQs (60 min) 

-Basic FAQs, Security Issues, Computer Capability 

Requirements, Display Settings, Browser Settings 

11:05a-11:20a Break (15 min) 

11:20a-12:20p Intro to Help Desk Application (60 min) 

12:20p-12:50p Lunch (30 minutes) 

12:50p-1:50p Help Desk Application Round Robin #1 (60 min) 

1:50p-2:05p Help Desk FAQ Review (Oral Quiz) (15 min) 

2:05p-2:35p Demonstration Mock (30 min) 

 -Audiotaped with dataview projection of screens 

2:35p-2:50p FAQ Review (15 min) 

2:50p-3:05p Break (15 min) 

3:05p-4:55p Q x Q Review (110 min) 

 -Review sections and important questions 

4:55p-5:00p Wrap-up/questions 
Appendix F. Call Center Services (CCS) Training Materials 

F-40 

HD Day 2 9:00 a.m.–5:00 p.m. 

9:00a Welcome trainees & begin training session 

9:00a-9:15a FAQ Review (Oral Quiz) (15 min) 

9:15a-10:00a Round Robin Mock #1 (45 min) 

10:00a-10:20a Open-Ended Coding Practice (20 min) 

 

10:20a-11:05a Refusal Avoidance/Conversion (45 min) 

11:05a-11:20a Break 

 

11:20a-12:20p Front-End Practice (60 min) 

12:20p-12:50p Lunch 

12:50p-1:50p Paired Mock (60 min) 

1:50p-2:05p FAQ Review (Oral Quiz) (15 min) 

2:05p-2:35p Help Desk Application Review (30 min) 

2:35p-3:05p Front End Review (30 min) 

3:05p-3:20p Break 

3:20p-4:35p Certification Interviews/FAQ Certification (75 min) 

4:35p-5:00p Wrap-up, questions, lag time etc. (25 min) 

Additional Training (or first shift after training) – 2 hrs 

• Individual Mock Interview 

• Paired Mock Interview 

• Coding Exercise 

• Written Exercise 
Appendix F. Call Center Services (CCS) Training Materials 

F-41 

Call Center Services (CCS) 

Help Desk/Telephone Interviewer Training Table of Contents 

Appendix F. Call Center Services (CCS) Training Materials 

F-43 

Table of Contents 

Page 

1.0 INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................ 1-1 

 1.1 What is the 2004 National Postsecondary Study Aid Study? 

 (NPSAS:04)? .................................................................................................... 1-1 

 1.1.1 Overview of NPSAS:04.......................................................................... 1-1 

 1.1.2 What is the Purpose of NPSAS:04?........................................................ 1-2 

 1.1.3 What Are the Goals of NPSAS:04?........................................................ 1-2 

 1.2 Methodology..................................................................................................... 1-3 

 1.2.1 How were Students Selected?................................................................. 1-3 

 1.2.2 How will the Interviews Be Conducted? ................................................ 1-5 

 1.2.3 The Use of Incentives ............................................................................. 1-6 

 1.3 Beginning Postsecondary Students Longitudinal Study 

 BPS:04/06 & BPS:04/09................................................................................... 1-7 

 1.4 Data Collection Schedule.................................................................................. 1-7 

 1.5 Project Staff ...................................................................................................... 1-8 

2.0 GENERAL INTERVIEWING TECHNIQUES............................................................ 2-1 

 2.1 Overview........................................................................................................... 2-1 

 2.2 Sample Members’ Rights.................................................................................. 2-3 

 2.2.1 Right To Accurate Presentation.............................................................. 2-3 

 2.2.2 Right of Informed Consent ..................................................................... 2-4 

 2.2.3 Right to Refuse ....................................................................................... 2-4 

 2.2.4 Right of Privacy ...................................................................................... 2-4 

 2.3 Confidentiality .................................................................................................. 2-5 

 2.4 Obtaining Cooperation...................................................................................... 2-8 

 2.5 Refusals........................................................................................................... 2-10 

 2.6 Best Practices in Conducting the Interview.................................................... 2-10 

 2.6.1 Asking the Questions ............................................................................ 2-10 

 2.6.2 Using Feedback..................................................................................... 2-13 

 2.6.3 Recording Responses Accurately ......................................................... 2-14 

 2.6.4 Use of Judgment in Coding................................................................... 2-15 

 2.7 Answers to Questions ..................................................................................... 2-17 

3.0 LOCATING AND CONTACTING SAMPLE MEMBERS ........................................ 3-1 

 3.1 Pre-CATI Tracing Activities ............................................................................ 3-1 

 3.2 CATI Locating Procedures ............................................................................... 3-1 

 3.3 CCS Tracing Procedures................................................................................... 3-2 

 3.4 Initial Contact ................................................................................................... 3-3 

 3.5 Scheduling a Callback ...................................................................................... 3-5 

 3.6 Telephone Answering Machine Message Protocol .......................................... 3-6 

 3.7 Status Codes...................................................................................................... 3-7 
Appendix F. Call Center Services (CCS) Training Materials 

F-44 

Table of Contents (continued) 

Page

4.0 CATI DATA COLLECTION ....................................................................................... 4-1 

 4.1 Web-Based Instrumentation/Self Administered Instrument............................. 4-1 

 4.1.1 Using a Windows-based system ............................................................. 4-1 

 4.1.2 Getting around: Using a mouse .............................................................. 4-1 

 4.1.3 Sizing/Moving Windows ........................................................................ 4-1 

 4.1.4 Working with web questions .................................................................. 4-4 

 4.2 Overview of the Questionnaire ......................................................................... 4-6 

5.0 QUALITY CONTROL................................................................................................. 5-1 

 5.1 Assuring Quality in the Interview..................................................................... 5-1 

 5.1.1 Performance Monitoring......................................................................... 5-1 

 5.2 Electronic Problem Reports .............................................................................. 5-7 

 5.3 Quality Circles ................................................................................................ 5-13 

 5.4 Conclusion ...................................................................................................... 5-13 

6.0 HELP DESK AGENT SUPPLEMENT........................................................................ 6-1 

 6.1 Training............................................................................................................. 6-1 

 6.2 Help Desk Objectives ....................................................................................... 6-1 

 6.3 Help Desk Agent Responsibilities .................................................................... 6-2 

 6.4 Toll-free Telephone Number and Routing System........................................... 6-3 

 6.5 Types of Questions You Will Encounter.......................................................... 6-4 

 6.6 Help Desk Call-Tracking Module..................................................................... 6-5 

 6.6.1 Logging in to the Help Desk Call-Tracking Module.............................. 6-5 

 6.6.2 Logging a Call ........................................................................................ 6-7 

 6.6.3 Search Incidents.................................................................................... 6-13 

 6.6.4 Reviewing Pending Incidents ............................................................... 6-15 

 6.6.5 Exiting the application.......................................................................... 6-17 

 6.7 Conclusion ...................................................................................................... 6-17 
Appendix F. Call Center Services (CCS) Training Materials 

F-45 

Table of Contents (continued) 

List of Exhibits

Exhibit 1 Steps in the NPSAS:04 data collection effort................................................... 1-4 

Exhibit 2 NPSAS:04 calendar .......................................................................................... 1-7 

Exhibit 3 Confidentiality agreement................................................................................. 2-6 

Exhibit 4 Affidavit of nondisclosure ................................................................................ 2-7 

Exhibit 5 Answering questions and dealing with Reluctant 

 NPSAS Sample Members ............................................................................... 2-18 

Exhibit 6 Glossary of Windows terms.............................................................................. 4-3 

Exhibit 7 NPSAS:04 monitoring form ............................................................................. 5-3 

Exhibit 8 NPSAS:04 problem reporting system............................................................... 5-9 

List of Appendices 

Appendix A – Prenotification Letter ....................................................................................... A-1 

Appendix B – NPSAS:04 Trace Review Procedures ..............................................................B-1 

Appendix C – NPSAS:04 Refusal Conversion Procedures .....................................................C-1 

Appendix D – Event Codes...................................................................................................... D-1 

Appendix E – Help Desk Issues/Resolutions ...........................................................................E-1 
Appendix F. Call Center Services (CCS) Training Materials 

F-46 
G-1 

Appendix G 

Data-CADE Specifications 

Appendix G. Data-CADE Specifications 

G-3 

Sample School Your IPEDS UNITID: 

000000 

Data Import Specifications for NPSAS 

Overview 

The data we require for the study consists of approximately 200 data elements for each student in the sample. To 

simplify the data collection as much as possible, we have separated the data into eight files, each having related 

data. 

It is very important that you prepare your data exactly as specified in this document. there is no way that we will be 

able to modify our programs to load the data any other way than that which is specified in this document. 

Data file File description 

General.txt Consists of general student characteristics type data such as name, birthday, race and 

gender for the students in the sample. 

Locating.txt Consists of names and addresses of any contacts you might have for the students including 

the students themselves. 

Tests.txt Consists of the standardized tests and scores for the students. 

Terms.txt Consists of the terms, enrollment status and tuition amount paid by the students for the 

terms between July 1, 2003 and June 30th, 2004. 

Budget.txt Contains yes/no type answers regarding whether the students received different types of 

financial aid, and also the prospective budget information for the students in the sample. 

Enrollment.txt Consists of information regarding the sample student’s last enrollment status: class level, 

whether or not they were in a Masters or Doctorate program, whether they have completed 

their degree requirements, etc. 

Aid.txt Contains financial aid info for federal loans and grants, veterans’ benefits, research 

assistantships, Institution based financial aid or state based financial aid the sample students 

received between July 1st 2003 and June 30th 2004. 

Other_Aid.txt Contains financial aid info for awards and grants received by the student that are not listed 

in the Aids.txt file. 
Appendix G. Data-CADE Specifications 

G-4 

Data File Name: General.txt 

Consists of general student characteristics type data such as name, birthday, race, and gender for the students in 

the sample. 

This file should be made up of 1 row per student. 

Sequence Length Start 

pos Type Field description Valid values 

1 8 1 I NPSAS identifier 8 digit study ID, provided by RTI in the student 

sample file. 

2 9 9 A Social security 

number 

9 digit social security number of the student. No 

hyphens. 

3 20 18 A Student's first 

name 

First name of the student 

4 1 38 A Student's middle 

initial 

Middle initial of the student 

5 20 39 A Student's last name Last name of the student 

6 3 59 A Student's name 

suffix 

Jr., III, etc.... 

7 2 62 I BirthMonth 2 digit number for the month of birth 

8 2 64 I BirthDay 2 digit number for the day of birth 

9 4 66 I BirthYear YYYY (Years MUST be represented in 4 digit 

format). The allowable range is 1916 - 1991 

10 1 70 I Gender 1=Male 2=Female 

11 1 71 I Marital status 1=unmarried (single, widowed, divorced) 

2=married 3=separated 

12 20 72 A Maiden last name Answer only if the student is female AND is 

either married or separated 

13 20 92 A Spouse's first name Answer only if the student is either married or 

separated 

14 2 112 A Spouse's middle 

initial 

Answer only if the student is either married or 

separated. 

15 20 114 A Spouse's last name Answer only if the student is either married or 

separated. 

16 20 134 A Driver's license 

number 

Student's drivers license number 

17 2 154 A Driver's license 

state 

2 letter postal code for the issuing State 

18 1 156 I High school degree 1=High School Diploma 2=GED or other 

equivalency 3=Certificate of High School 

completion 4=Foreign high school 5=No High 

School degree or certificate 
Appendix G. Data-CADE Specifications 

G-5 

Sequence Length Start 

pos Type Field description Valid values 

19 4 157 A Year of high school 

degree 

Years MUST be represented in 4 digit format. 

The allowable range is 1936 - the current year 

20 2 161 A State where the 

High School is 

located 

2 letter postal code of the state where the high 

school is located 

21 1 163 I Hispanic 

status/ethnicity 

1=of Hispanic origins 2=Not of Hispanic origins 

22 1 164 I Race: white 1=yes 0=no 

23 1 165 I Race: African 

American 

1=yes 0=no 

24 1 166 I Race: American 

Indian 

1=yes 0=no 

25 1 167 I Race: Hawaiian or 

other Pacific 

Islander 

1=yes 0=no 

26 1 168 I Race: Asian 1=yes 0=no 

27 1 169 I Veteran status 1=Veteran 2=not a Veteran 

28 1 170 I Visa Status 1=U.S Citizen or U.S. National 2=Resident Alien 

3=Foreign/International Student or Nonresident Alien 

29 1 171 I ISIR available 1=Yes 0=No Does the school have an ISIR on 

file for the student? 

30 20 172 A ISIR last name Last name as it appears on the ISIR form (if 

available) 

31 9 192 A ISIR social security 

number 

SSN as it appears on the ISIR form 

32 2 201 I Is the student a 

permanent resident 

of ? 

Please say 1=Yes 0=No -1=Don't know 
Appendix G. Data-CADE Specifications 

G-6 

Data File Name: Locating.txt 

Consists of names and addresses of any contacts you might have for the students including the students 

themselves. 

This file should contain up to four rows per student, one for each address type (student local, student permanent, 

primary parent, other parent/other). 

Sequence Length Start 

pos Type Field description Valid values 

1 8 1 I NPSAS identifier 8 digit study ID, provided by RTI in the 

student sample file. 

2 3 9 I Relationship code of contact 

to the student 

* See Relationship Codes table 

3 50 12 A Relationship description Contact's relationship to the student if 

relationship code specified is 

'other(90)' 

4 25 62 A Phone number Contact's phone number 

5 1 87 I Is the phone number 

specified an International 

Phone number? 

Please say 1=Yes if the specified phone 

number is an international phone 

number else 0=No 

6 25 88 A First name Contact's first name 

7 1 113 A Middle initial Contact's middle initial 

8 25 114 A Last name Contact's last name 

9 10 139 A Suffix Suffix of the contact / student (e.g. Jr., 

III) 

10 40 149 A Address line 1 Contact's address field 1 

11 40 189 A Address line 2 Contact's address field 2 

12 40 229 A City Contact's city of residence 

13 2 269 A State Contact's 2 letter postal code 

14 5 271 A Zip Contact's 5 digit zip code 

15 4 276 A 4 digit zip code extension Contact's 4 digit zip code 

16 50 280 A Country Contact's country of residence 

17 1 330 I Address type 1=Permanent 2=Local 3=Primary 

parent 4=Other parent/guardian 

18 50 331 A The student email address This applies to the rows where the 

relationship code is 0 and can be left 

blank for others 
Appendix G. Data-CADE Specifications 

G-7 

* Relationship codes table Download the relationship codes file here.

Relationship code Relationship description 

-1 Don't know 

0 self 

1 Father 

2 Mother 

3 Spouse 

4 Brother 

5 Sister 

6 Uncle 

7 Aunt 

8 Grandfather 

9 Grandmother 

10 Friend 

11 Co-Worker 

90 Other 

100 Parent 
Appendix G. Data-CADE Specifications 

G-8 

Data File Name: Tests.txt 

Consists of the standardized tests and results for the students. 

This file should contain multiple rows per student If the student is an undergraduate, record rows for SAT and ACT. 

If the student is a graduate or first professional student include a row for GRE. 

Sequence Length Start 

pos Type Field description Valid values 

1 8 1 I NPSAS identifier 8 digit study ID, provided by RTI in the 

student sample file. 

2 1 9 I Exam type 1=SAT 2=ACT 3=GRE 

3 3 10 I Verbal score SAT=200-800 GRE=200-800 

4 3 13 I Quantitative / Math 

score 

SAT=200-800 GRE=200-800 

5 3 16 I Analytic score GRE=0-6 

6 4 19 I Comprehensive score ACT=0-36 

Data File Name: Terms.txt 

Consists of the terms, enrollment status and tuition amount paid by the students for the terms between July 1, 

2003 and June 30th, 2004. 

This file should include one row for EACH term the student was enrolled 

Sequence Length Start 

pos Type Field description Valid values 

1 8 1 I NPSAS identifier 8 digit study ID, provided by RTI in the student 

sample file. 

2 50 9 A Term Name Term Name (e.g. Fall 2003, Spring 2004) 

3 8 59 I Date term begins MMDDYYYY 

4 8 67 I Date term ends MMDDYYYY 

5 2 75 I Term attendance 

status 

-1=Not Declared 1=Full-time 2=Half-time 3=< 

Half-time 

6 3 77 I Enrolled hours Number of hours student enrolled, this term. If 

this school is a clock 

7 8 80 N Tuition amount Tuition amount for this term 
Appendix G. Data-CADE Specifications 

G-9 

Data File Name: Budget.txt 

Contains yes/no type answers regarding whether the students received different types of financial aid, and also the 

prospective budget information for the students in the sample. 

This file should be made up of 1 row per student. 

Sequence Length Start 

pos Type Field description Valid values 

1 8 1 I NPSAS identifier 8 digit study ID, provided by RTI in the 

student sample file. 

2 1 9 I Financial aid budget / EFC 

information available 

1=Yes 0=No 

3 1 10 I Dependency status 1=Dependent 2=Independent 

4 1 11 I Local residence 1=On-Campus or school-owned housing 

2=Off-Campus without parents 3=OffCampus with parents 

5 8 12 N EFC amount Enter the amount of the Expected 

Family Contribution 

6 1 20 I Cost of attendance budget 

available 

1=Yes 0=No 

7 1 21 I Budget period 1=Full time, full year 2=Full time, one 

term 3=Part time, full year 4=Part 

time, one term 5=Other 

8 1 22 A Line-item or total budget 

amount 

1 = line item budget 2 = total budget 

amount only. If 2, enter amount in item 

#15, else list amounts in items 9 - 14. 

9 8 23 N Budget amount for tuition Please enter the TUITION amount for 

the budget period 

10 8 31 N Budget amount for books Please enter the budgeted amount for 

BOOKS/SUPPLIES for the budget period 

11 8 39 N Budget amount for room 

and board 

Please enter budgeted ROOM and 

BOARD totals for the budget period 

12 8 47 N Budget amount for 

transportation 

Please enter any budgeted 

TRANSPORTATION amounts for the 

budget period 

13 8 55 N Budget amount for 

computer technology 

Please enter any COMPUTER FEES for 

the budget period 

14 8 63 N Budget amount for other 

expenses 

Please enter any OTHER expenditures 

for the budget period 

15 8 71 N Total cost of attendance Please enter the TOTAL budget amount 

for the budget period 

16 8 79 I State EFC Amount for the 

state EFC name mentioned 

below 

Please enter this amount here if 

applicable and the student is an 

undergraduate 

+ State EFC programs 

State EFC program 

State EFC Programs go here. 
Appendix G. Data-CADE Specifications 

G-10 

Data File Name: Enrollment.txt 

Consists of information regarding the sample student’s last enrollment status: class level, whether or not they 

were in a Masters or Doctorate program, whether they have completed their degree requirements, etc. 

This file should be made up of 1 row per student. 

Sequence Length Start 

pos Type Field description Valid values 

1 8 1 I NPSAS identifier 8 digit study ID, provided by RTI in 

the student sample file. 

2 8 9 I Term Start date for the 

student's LAST enrolled 

term 

MMDDYYYY 

3 8 17 I Term End date for the 

student's LAST enrolled 

temr 

MMDDYYYY 

4 1 25 I Type of degree program 

during the last enrolled 

term 

+See Degree program code table 

5 1 26 I Associates degree program This applies only if the student is 

enrolled in an Associates degree. 

1=AA, AS, general education or 

transfer program. 

2=AAS Occupational or technical 

program. 

6 2 27 I Master's degree program * See Masters degree code table - 

applies only if student is enrolled in a 

Master's program 

7 2 29 I Doctoral or first 

professional degree 

program 

** See Doctoral/First professional 

degree code table - applies only if 

student is enrolled in a Doctoral or 

First professional program 

8 2 31 I Student's class level during 

the last enrolled term 

1=1st Year / Freshman 

2=2nd Year / Sophomore 

3=3rd Year / Junior 

4=4th Year / Senior 

5=5th Year or Higher Undergraduate 

6=Undergraduate (unclassified) 

7=Student with Advanced Degree 

taking Undergraduate Courses 

8=First Yr Graduate / professional 

9=Second Yr Graduate / professional 

10=Third Yr Graduate / professional 

11=Beyond Third Yr Graduate / 

professional 

9 6 33 N Cumulative GPA 0.00 - 4.00 if the Institution is on a 4 

point scale 0-100 if the Institution is 

on a 100-point scale 

10 40 39 A Current major Enter the student's current major 

11 1 79 I Received baccalaureate 

degree 

1=Yes 0=No This applies to students 

who are graduates or first 

professionals 
Appendix G. Data-CADE Specifications 

G-11 

Sequence Length Start 

pos Type Field description Valid values 

12 2 110 I Month the student received 

the baccalaureate degree 

MM - 2 digit number for the month 

13 4 112 I Year the student received 

the baccalaureate degree 

YYYY - 4 digit year 

14 1 116 I Ever enrolled in this 

institution prior to July 1, 

2003 

1=Yes 0=No . This applies to only to 

undergraduate students and graduate 

students that do not have a 

baccalaureate degree. 

15 2 117 I First enrolled Month if prior 

to July 1, 2003 

MM - 2 digit number 

16 4 119 I First enrolled Year if prior 

to July 1, 2003 

YYYY - 4 digit year 

17 1 123 I Transferred any credits 

from another 

postsecondary institution 

1=Yes 0=No This applies to only to 

undergraduate students and graduate 

students that do not have a 

baccalaureate degree. 

18 1 124 I Classified as a first-time, 

first-year degree-seeking 

student for IPEDS reporting 

purposes? 

1=Yes 0=No This applies to only to 

undergraduate students and graduate 

students that do not have a 

baccalaureate degree. 

19 1 125 I Expected to Complete 

degree requirements on or 

before June 30, 2004 

1=Yes 0=No 

20 4 126 I Total clock hours in 

program - if this is a clock 

hour only school 

Total clock hours in program 

21 2 130 I Clock hours per week 

required - if this is a clock 

hour only school 

Enter the number of hours (lab and 

classroom) required per week 

22 8 132 N Tuition total for all terms If available, enter the total amount of 

tuition for all terms that the student 

was enrolled 

23 1 140 I Jurisdiction classification for 

tuition purposes 

1=In jurisdiction (e.g., in-state, indistrict, etc.) 2=Out-of-jurisdiction 

(e.g., out-of-state, out-of-district, 

etc.) 

24 1 141 I Tuition paid by a state 

prepaid or savings plan? 

1=Yes 0=No ++See the applicable 

State prepaid or savings plans listed 

25 2 142 I Tuition paid by a state 

prepaid or savings plan 

code 1 

#See Tuition Savings Plan code table 

26 8 144 N Tuition paid by a state 

prepaid or savings plan 1 

amount 

Enter amount received, if applicable 
Appendix G. Data-CADE Specifications 

G-12 

Sequence Length Start 

pos Type Field description Valid values 

27 2 152 I Tuition paid by a state 

prepaid or savings plan 

code 2 

#See Tuition Savings Plan code table 

28 8 154 N Tuition paid by a state 

prepaid or savings plan 2 

amount 

Enter amount received, if applicable 

29 8 162 N Tuition amount paid by a 

state prepaid or savings 

plan from another state 

Enter amount received, if applicable 
Appendix G. Data-CADE Specifications 

G-13 

+ Degree Program code table Download the degree program codes file here.

Degree code Degree program 

1 Bachelor's degree 

2 Associate's Degree 

3 Undergraduate certificate or diploma (occupational or technical program) 

4 Undergraduate, not in a degree program 

5 Master's degree program 

6 First professional degree (includes the following degree programs: Chiropractic, Dentistry, Law, 

Medicine, Optometry, Osteopathic Medicine, Pharmacy, 

7 Doctoral degree program 

8 Post-baccalaureate certificate program (including teaching credential) 

9 Graduate, not in a degree program 

* Masters degree code table Download the Masters codes file here.

Masters code Masters degree program 

1 Master of Science (MS) 

2 Master of Arts (MA) 

3 Master of Education (MEd) or Teaching (MAT) 

4 Master of Business Administration (MBA) 

5 Master of Public Administration (MPA) or Public Policy (MPP) 

6 Master of Social Work (MSW) 

7 Master of Fine Arts (MFA) 

8 Master of Public Health (MPH) 

10 Other Master's Degree Not Listed Above 

19 Master of Divinity (MDiv) 
Appendix G. Data-CADE Specifications 

G-14 

** Doctoral degree code table Download the Doctoral codes file here.

Doctoral code Doctoral degree Program 

11 Doctor of Philosophy (PhD) 

12 Doctor of Education (EdD) 

13 Doctor of Science (Dsc/ScD) or Engineering (DEng) 

14 Doctor of Psychology (PsyD) 

15 Doctor of Business or Public Administration (DBA, DPA) 

16 Doctor of Fine Arts (DFA) 

17 Doctor of Theology (ThD) 

18 Other Doctoral Degree 

19 Ministry or Divinity (MDiv, DMin, MHL, BD, ordination) 

20 Law (LLB or JD) 

21 Medicine (MD) or Osteopathic Medicine (DO) 

22 Dentistry (DDS or DMD) 

23 Chiropractic (DC or DCM) 

24 Pharmacy (Pharm. D.) 

25 Optometry (OD) 

26 Podiatry (DPM, DP, PodD) 

27 Veterinary Medicine (DVM) 

# Tuition Savings Plan code table 

 

Plan code Plan description 

Customized Tuition Savings plan goes here. 
Appendix G. Data-CADE Specifications 

G-15 

Data File Name: Aid.txt 

Contains financial aid info for federal loans and grants, veterans benefits, research assistantships, Institution 

based financial aid or state based financial aid the sample students received between July 1st 2003 and June 30th 

2004. 

This file can contain multiple rows per student. 

Sequence Length Start pos Type Field description Valid values 

1 8 1 I NPSAS identifier 8 digit study ID, provided by RTI in the 

student sample file. 

2 1 9 N Specify the type of aid 1=Federal Aid 2=State Aid 

3=Institutional Aid 4=Graduate Aid 

5=Other Aid 

3 8 10 N Aid code If Aid type is 1 then - 

*See the Federal Aid Code Table 

If Aid type is 2 then - 

**See State Aid Code Table. 

If Aid type is 3 then - 

***See Institute Aid Code Table. 

If Aid type is 4 then - 

+See Graduate Aid Code Table. 

If Aid type is 5 then - 

++See Other Aid Code Table. 

4 8 18 N Aid amount Enter the amount received. This field 

should contain no dollar sign, no 

commas, and no decimals. 
Appendix G. Data-CADE Specifications 

G-16 

* Federal Aid code table Download the Federal Aid codes file here.

Federal Aid code Federal Aid Program 

1 Pell grant 

2 Stafford loan - subsidized (FFEL or Direct ) 

3 Stafford loan - unsubsidized (FFEL or Direct ) 

4 PLUS parent loan (FFEL or Direct ) 

5 Perkins loan 

6 Federal SEOG grant 

7 Federal work-study (FWS) 

8 Robert Byrd honors scholarship 

9 Federal health professions loan(Nursing, HPSL, Primary Care, Disadvantaged) 

10 Federal health professions disadvantaged student scholarships (SDS) 

** State Aid code table 

State Aid code State Aid Program 

Customized state aids go here. 
Appendix G. Data-CADE Specifications 

G-17 

*** Institute Aid code table 

Institute Aid code Institute Aid Program 

Institute provide Aids / Grants go here. 

1 Grants/scholarships : need based 

2 Grants/scholarships : merit based 

3 Grants/scholarships : both need and merit 

4 Athletic scholarship 

5 UG Tuition waivers for faculty/staff, family 

6 Tuition waivers and discounts for other undergraduates 

7 Undergraduate Institutional loan 

8 Undergraduate Institutional work-study 

9 Undergraduate resident assistants, tutors, or advisor stipends 
Appendix G. Data-CADE Specifications 

G-18 

+ Graduate Aid code table Download the Graduate aid codes file here.

Graduate Aid code Graduate Aid Program 

10 Graduate fellowship or scholarship 

11 Federal fellowship (NSF, NASA, NIH, USDA, etc.) 

12 Federal traineeship 

13 Teaching assistantships/stipends 

14 Research assistantships/stipends 

15 Other graduate assistants, tutors, or readers stipends 

16 Tuition waivers for graduate students (including assistants) 

17 Tuitions waivers for faculty/staff, spouse or children 

18 Institutional work-study 

19 Institutional loan 
Appendix G. Data-CADE Specifications 

G-19 

++ Other Aid code table Download the Other aid codes file here.

Other Aid code Other Aid Program 

20 Scholarships/grants from private organizations, foundations, unions 

21 Employer paid tuition 

22 Veterans benefits 

23 ROTC and other grants for Armed Forces personnel 

24 WIA, other job training, vocational rehabilitation 

25 Bureau of Indian Affairs grants 

26 Scholarships/grants from state agencies in other states 

27 Private or commercial loans (including TERI, Citi-Assist, Access, Sallie-Mae Signature, etc.) 

28 District of Columbia Tuition Assistance Grants (DCTAG or DCCAP) 
Appendix G. Data-CADE Specifications 

G-20 

Data File Name: OtherAid.txt 

Contains financial aid info for awards and grants received by the student that are not listed in the Aids.txt file. 

This file can contain multiple rows per student. 

Sequence Length Start 

pos Type Field description Valid values 

1 8 1 I NPSAS identifier 8 digit study ID, provided by RTI in the student 

sample file. 

2 40 9 A Name of the 

other award 

Please provide the name of the Aid Award - only 

aids not listed in the Aid.txt file 

3 2 49 I Type of other 

award 

* See Other Award Type Table 

4 1 50 I Source of the 

other award 

1=Institution 2=State 3=Federal 4=Other 

5=Other_G 6=Other_UG 

5 8 51 N Amount of other 

award 

Enter amount received. This field should contain 

no dollar sign, no commas, and no decimals. 

* Other Award Type table. Download the award codes file here.

Award Type code Award Type Description 

1 Grant/scholarship : need-based 

2 Grant/scholarship : merit-based 

3 Grant/scholarship : both need and merit 

4 Tuition waiver 

5 Loan 

6 Work-study or assistantship 

7 Other 
H-1 

Appendix H 

Imputations 

Appendix H. Imputations 

H-3 

Table H–1. Rate of missing data before imputation for all variables: 2004 

Percent missing data rate 

Variable description Variable name 

All 

students 

Undergraduate 

students 

Graduate/first

-professional 

students 

Carnegie code (2000) for NPSAS institution CC2000 0.0 0.0 0.0 

NPSAS institution control CONTROL 0.0 0.0 0.0 

CADE record available INCADE 0.0 0.0 0.0 

CATI record available INCATI 0.0 0.0 0.0 

CPS record available INCPS 0.0 0.0 0.0 

NPSAS institution state INSTSTAT 0.0 0.0 0.0 

NPSAS institution level LEVEL 0.0 0.0 0.0 

NPSAS institution region OBEREG 0.0 0.0 0.0 

NPSAS institution type SECTOR9 0.0 0.0 0.0 

Student type STYPELST 0.0 0.0 0.0 

Age groups as of 12/31/03 AGEGROUP 0.0 0.0 0.0 

Gender GENDER 0.0 0.0 0.0 

Age as of 12/31/03 AGE 0.1 0.1 0.1 

Veteran status VETERAN 3.4 2.9 6.9 

Dependency status DEPEND 4.9 5.5 0.0 

Student’s marital status SMARITAL 6.2 5.9 8.2 

Orphan or ward of court ORPHAN 5.7 6.4 1.2 

Dependents—has dependents DEPANY 10.7 10.2 14.5 

Number in college (independent students) SINCOL 11.7 11.2 15.5 

Dependents—has dependent children DEPCHILD 14.2 14.1 15.0 

Dependents—has dependent other than children DEPOTHER 14.3 14.2 15.0 

Dependents—number of dependent children DEPNUMCH 17.4 17.5 16.5 

Dependent children—age of oldest DEPOLD 18.2 18.4 17.1 

Dependent children—age of youngest DEPYNG 18.2 18.4 17.1 

Citizenship (max non-citizen) CITIZEN2 1.9 1.9 1.7 

Race-ethnicity: Hispanic or Latino origin HISPANIC 8.6 9.1 5.0 

Race—Asian RAASIAN 9.4 9.9 6.0 

Race—Black or African-American RABLACK 9.4 9.9 6.0 

Race—American Indian or Alaska Native RAINDIAN 9.4 9.9 6.0 

Race—Native Hawaiian/other Pacific Islander RAISLAND 9.4 9.9 6.0 

Race—Other RAOTHER 9.4 9.9 6.0 

Race—White RAWHITE 9.4 9.9 6.0 

Race—ethnicity: type of Hispanic origin HISPTYPE 12.7 13.6 6.4 

Monthly enrollment status 2003/07 ENR01 1.2 1.2 0.6 

Monthly enrollment status 2003/08 ENR02 1.2 1.2 0.6 

Monthly enrollment status 2003/09 ENR03 1.2 1.2 0.6 

Monthly enrollment status 2003/10 ENR04 1.2 1.2 0.6 

Monthly enrollment status 2003/11 ENR05 1.2 1.2 0.6 

Monthly enrollment status 2003/12 ENR06 1.2 1.2 0.6 

Monthly enrollment status 2004/01 ENR07 1.2 1.2 0.6 

Monthly enrollment status 2004/02 ENR08 1.2 1.2 0.6 

Monthly enrollment status 2004/03 ENR09 1.2 1.2 0.6 

Monthly enrollment status 2004/04 ENR10 1.2 1.2 0.6 

Monthly enrollment status 2004/05 ENR11 1.2 1.2 0.6 

Monthly enrollment status 2004/06 ENR12 1.2 1.2 0.6 

Number of institutions attended STUDMULT 13.9 13.8 14.3 

Mothers highest education level PMOMED 13.3 13.1 14.9 

Father’s highest education level PDADED 13.3 13.1 14.8 

Parent’s marital status PMARITAL 5.6 6.3 0.0 

Dependent student’s parent’s family size PFAMNUM 5.8 6.6 0.0 

Parent’s children in college PINCOL 6.0 6.8 0.0 

See notes at end of table. 
Appendix H. Imputations 

H-4 

Table H–1. Rate of missing data before imputation for all variables: 2004—Continued 

Percent missing data rate 

Variable description Variable name 

All 

students 

Undergraduate 

students 

Graduate/firstprofessional 

students 

Dependent parent income derived DEPINC 33.1 33.1 0.0 

Dependent student earnings derived DSTUINC 33.3 33.3 0.0 

Independent student & spouse income derived INDEPINC 46.3 41.5 64.5 

Spouse of student earnings derived SPSINC 62.6 58.1 77.9 

Institutional graduate fellowships GRINFEL 0.1 0.0 0.9 

Federal veteran’s and military aid VADODAMT 0.0 0.0 0.0 

Institutional work-study INSTWRK 2.8 3.1 0.8 

Institutional tuition and fee waivers INSWAIV 7.7 8.1 4.2 

Tuition waivers for faculty/staff EMPLWAIV 7.7 8.2 4.2 

Total graduate fellowships/grants/traineeships GRFELAMT 0.1 0.0 0.8 

Graduate other assistantship amount GRGRDAMT 0.1 0.0 0.9 

Research assistantship amount GRRESAMT 0.1 0.0 1.0 

Teaching assistantship amount GRTEAAMT 0.1 0.0 1.0 

Federal traineeships GRTRNAMT 0.1 0.0 0.9 

Federal veteran’s benefits VETBEN 0.0 0.0 0.0 

Pell grant amount PELLAMT 0.2 0.2 0.0 

Applied for aid AIDAPP 0.4 0.4 0.4 

PLUS loan amount PLUSAMT 0.4 0.4 0.0 

Stafford loan subsidized amount STAFSUB 0.4 0.4 0.3 

Stafford loan unsubsidized amount STAFUNSB 0.4 0.4 0.3 

Perkins loan amount PERKAMT 1.8 1.8 2.0 

Applied for federal aid FEDAPP 3.3 3.1 4.7 

Employer tuition aid (excl staff) EMPLYAM1 2.8 3.1 0.9 

Private sources (alternative) loans PRIVLOAN 2.9 3.2 0.9 

State work-study total STWKAMT 3.4 3.3 4.2 

Total federal work-study TFEDWRK 3.4 3.3 4.2 

Institutional loan INLNAMT 7.7 8.1 4.2 

Institutional merit grants INSMERIT 7.2 8.1 0.0 

Institutional need-based grant INSTNEED 7.2 8.1 0.0 

Other federal grants OTHFDGRT 7.7 8.1 4.2 

State need-based grants STATNEED 7.7 8.1 4.2 

State loan total STLNAMT 7.7 8.1 4.2 

State merit only grants STMERIT 7.7 8.1 4.2 

State non-need grants STNOND1 7.7 8.1 4.2 

State voc rehab and job training (WIA) VOCHELP 7.7 8.1 4.2 

FSEOG amount SEOGAMT 7.2 8.2 0.0 

Athletic scholarship INATHAMT 7.2 8.2 0.0 

Employer (parents) tuition aid EMPLYAM2 32.3 33.6 22.3 

Degree program DEGFIRST 0.0 0.0 0.0 

Military service type MILTYPE 11.7 11.3 15.1 

Housing LOCALRES 15.2 17.3 0.0 

Carnegie code (2000) with control CC2000A 0.0 0.0 0.0 

Data sources [1=cati 2=cade 4=cps] DATASRC 0.0 0.0 0.0 

Offered first-professional degree FPOFFER 0.0 0.0 0.0 

Historical Black college indicator HBCU 0.0 0.0 0.0 

Highest level of offering at NPSAS institution HLOFFER 0.0 0.0 0.0 

Positive value in NSLDS 2003–2004 data INNSLDS 0.0 0.0 0.0 

Positive value in Pell data INPELL 0.0 0.0 0.0 

NPSAS institution sector SECTOR1 0.0 0.0 0.0 

Comparable to 1987 NPSAS COMPTO87 1.2 1.2 0.6 

Reason enrolled: complete associate’s degree ATTENDA 40.0 39.9 44.6 

See notes at end of table. 
Appendix H. Imputations 

H-5 

Table H–1. Rate of missing data before imputation for all variables: 2004—Continued 

Percent missing data rate 

Variable description Variable name 

All 

students 

Undergraduate 

students 

Graduate/firstprofessional 

students 

Reason enrolled: complete certificate ATTENDB 40.0 39.9 44.6 

Reason enrolled: job skills ATTENDC 40.0 39.9 44.6 

Reason enrolled: personal interest ATTENDD 40.0 39.9 44.6 

Reason enrolled: transfer to a 2-year college ATTENDE 40.0 39.9 44.6 

Reason enrolled: transfer to a 4-year college ATTENDF 40.0 39.9 44.6 

Reason enrolled: transfer to another college ATTENDG 40.0 39.9 44.6 

Average hours per month performing community service COMHOUR 63.1 65.3 46.3 

Performed a one time event community service COMONE 58.2 60.3 41.6 

Part of undergraduate program or required for graduation COMREQ 59.7 59.7 0.0 

Community service performed last year COMSERV 35.9 37.4 24.6 

Community service performed: fundraising COMSERVA 57.0 59.1 40.7 

Community service performed: homeless shelter/soup kitchen COMSERVB 57.0 59.1 40.7 

Community service performed: hospital/nursing home COMSERVC 57.0 59.1 40.7 

Community service performed: neighborhood improvement COMSERVD 57.0 59.1 40.7 

Community service performed: service to church COMSERVE 57.0 59.1 40.7 

Community service performed: tutoring/mentoring COMSERVF 57.0 59.1 40.7 

Community service performed: work with kids other than 

tutoring/mentoring COMSERVG 

57.0 59.1 40.7 

Community service performed: other COMSERVX 57.0 59.1 40.7 

Considered campus safety before choosing NPSAS CONSIDRA 38.6 38.6 0.0 

Considered graduation rate before choosing NPSAS CONSIDRB 38.6 38.6 0.0 

Considered job placement rate before choosing NPSAS CONSIDRC 59.3 59.3 0.0 

Degree already earned since high school DEGEARN 31.5 32.8 21.6 

Degree already earned: bachelor’s degree DEGEARNA 62.1 72.2 27.3 

Degree already earned: associate’s degree DEGEARNB 62.1 72.2 27.3 

Degree already earned: undergraduate certificate/diploma DEGEARNC 62.1 72.2 27.3 

Degree already earned: post-BA certificate DEGEARND 62.1 72.2 27.3 

Degree already earned: master’s degree DEGEARNE 62.1 72.2 27.3 

Degree already earned: post-MA certificate DEGEARNF 62.1 72.2 27.3 

Degree already earned: first professional degree DEGEARNG 62.1 72.2 27.3 

Degree already earned: doctoral degree DEGEARNH 62.1 72.2 27.3 

Distance education used: live, interactive TV or audio DELIVE 81.6 82.4 73.1 

Distance education used: pre-recorded TV or audio DERECR 81.6 82.4 73.1 

Distance education used: the internet DEWWW 81.6 82.4 73.1 

Disability indicator DISABLE 35.2 36.6 24.7 

Condition that limits physical activities DISMOBIL 35.1 36.5 24.5 

Other condition lasting six months or more DISOTHER 35.1 36.5 24.6 

Difficulty: dressing, bathing, or getting around inside home DISOTHRA 90.2 90.1 90.9 

Difficulty: getting to school to attend class DISOTHRB 90.2 90.1 90.9 

Difficulty: learning, remembering, or concentrating DISOTHRC 90.2 90.1 90.9 

Difficulty: working at a job DISOTHRD 90.2 90.1 90.9 

Have a long-lasting sensory condition DISSENSR 35.0 36.5 24.5 

Distance education: entire program DISTALL 80.8 81.7 72.0 

Distance education: took courses in 2002-2003 DISTEDUC 35.6 37.1 24.4 

Distance education: location of courses DISTLOC 80.9 81.8 72.1 

Distance education: number of courses took DISTNUM 81.5 82.5 72.7 

Distance education: satisfaction DISTSATF 81.0 81.9 72.2 

Main type of condition or impairment DISTYPES 84.5 84.4 84.9 

Took remedial course: English (freshman/sophomore) REMEDIA 79.8 79.8 0.0 

Took remedial course: math (freshman/sophomore) REMEDIB 79.8 79.8 0.0 

Took remedial course: reading (freshman/sophomore) REMEDIC 79.8 79.8 0.0 

See notes at end of table. 
Appendix H. Imputations 

H-6 

Table H–1. Rate of missing data before imputation for all variables: 2004—Continued 

Percent missing data rate 

Variable description Variable name 

All 

students 

Undergraduate 

students 

Graduate/firstprofessional 

students 

Took remedial course: study skills (freshman/sophomore) REMEDID 79.8 79.8 0.0 

Took remedial course: writing (freshman/sophomore) REMEDIE 79.8 79.8 0.0 

Remedial courses: took this school year (freshman/sophomore) REMETOOK 68.7 68.7 0.0 

Remedial courses: ever taken REMEVER 35.7 35.7 0.0 

Service needed: adaptive equipment and technology SERNEEDA 84.9 84.8 85.2 

Service needed: alternative exam format SERNEEDB 84.9 84.8 85.2 

Service needed: courses substitution or waiver SERNEEDC 84.9 84.8 85.2 

Service needed: readers or classroom note takers SERNEEDD 84.9 84.8 85.2 

Service needed: registration assistance SERNEEDE 84.9 84.8 85.2 

Service needed: sign language or oral interpreters SERNEEDF 85.0 85.0 85.3 

Service needed: tutors to assist with ongoing homework SERNEEDG 84.9 84.8 85.2 

Service needed: other SERNEEDX 84.9 84.8 85.2 

Service received: adaptive equipment and technology SERRECVA 84.6 84.6 85.0 

Service received: alternative exam format SERRECVB 84.6 84.6 85.0 

Service received: courses substitution or waiver SERRECVC 84.6 84.6 85.0 

Service received: readers or classroom note takers SERRECVD 84.6 84.6 85.0 

Service received: registration assistance SERRECVE 84.6 84.6 85.0 

Service received: sign language or oral interpreters SERRECVF 84.6 84.6 85.0 

Service received: tutors to assist with ongoing homework SERRECVG 84.6 84.6 85.0 

Service received: other SERRECVX 84.6 84.6 85.0 

Currently receiving SSI or SSDI SSISSDI 84.5 84.5 84.8 

Ever applied for vocational rehabilitation services VOCAPPLY 86.7 86.7 86.5 

Ever received vocational rehabilitation services VOCRECV 84.5 84.4 84.8 

Ever vote VOTEEVER 35.8 37.0 25.6 

Registered to vote VOTEREG 35.8 37.1 25.7 

Balance due on all credit cards CRBALDUE 75.2 75.2 0.0 

Have dependent children in daycare DEPCARE 40.2 41.9 27.8 

Monthly daycare costs DEPCOST 66.3 68.0 51.4 

Ever attend community college EVER2PUB 35.0 37.5 22.9 

Ever attend 4-year institution EVER4YR 39.8 39.8 0.0 

Graduate assistantship: included health insurance GAINSUR 17.2 0.0 17.2 

Graduate TA duties: answered student email GRADTAA 18.1 0.0 18.1 

Graduate TA duties: assisted grading GRADTAB 18.1 0.0 18.1 

Graduate TA duties: assumed teaching responsibility GRADTAC 18.1 0.0 18.1 

Graduate TA duties: held office hours GRADTAD 18.1 0.0 18.1 

Graduate TA duties: lead discussion sections GRADTAE 18.1 0.0 18.1 

Graduate TA duties: supervised lab hours GRADTAF 18.1 0.0 18.1 

Highest level of education ever expected HIGHLVEX 36.6 37.3 28.1 

Institution distance from home HOMEDIST 38.8 40.2 28.0 

Assets: parents own home HOMEPAR 34.9 34.9 0.0 

Assets: student owns home HOMESTUD 47.0 51.7 33.0 

Can afford school without working (student) JOBAFFOR 53.8 53.7 55.3 

Job related to coursework (non-degree) JOBCLASS 45.8 45.5 52.5 

Earnings from work while enrolled (excl work-study) JOBEARN 49.0 49.8 41.8 

Job effect: helped with career preparation (student) JOBEFFA 53.7 53.6 55.2 

Job effect: helped with coursework (student) JOBEFFB 53.7 53.6 55.2 

Job effect: restricted class choice (student) JOBEFFC 53.7 53.6 55.2 

Job effect: limited class schedule (student) JOBEFFD 53.7 53.6 55.2 

Job effect: limited facility access (student) JOBEFFE 53.7 53.6 55.2 

Job effect: limited number of classes (student) JOBEFFF 53.7 53.6 55.2 

See notes at end of table. 
Appendix H. Imputations 

H-7 

Table H–1. Rate of missing data before imputation for all variables: 2004—Continued 

Percent missing data rate 

Variable description Variable name 

All 

students 

Undergraduate 

students 

Graduate/firstprofessional 

students 

Type of employer JOBEMPL 45.1 46.2 35.9 

Parents expected to have a job (student) JOBEXPT 51.7 51.7 0.0 

Hours worked per week (excluding work-study) JOBHOUR 43.7 44.6 36.4 

Main reason for working (student) JOBMAIN 53.7 53.6 55.3 

Job related to major (degree) JOBMAJOR 51.0 53.2 33.9 

Number of jobs during NPSAS year JOBNUM 32.7 34.0 23.1 

Job located primarily on of off campus JOBONOFF 43.7 44.8 34.9 

Have job prior to enrollment at NPSAS JOBPRIOR 43.8 44.8 35.0 

Primary role, student or employee JOBROLE 42.6 43.5 34.4 

Summer savings JOBSAVE 47.1 47.1 0.0 

Combine school and work: took class outside work (employee) JOBSCHA 69.8 72.7 48.9 

Combine school and work: took distance education (employee) JOBSCHB 69.8 72.7 48.9 

Combine school and work: modify work schedule (employee) JOBSCHC 69.8 72.7 48.9 

Summer job JOBSUMMR 37.3 37.3 0.0 

Weeks worked while enrolled JOBWEEK 43.7 44.7 35.2 

Field of study/major (detailed) MAJORS 10.7 12.0 1.1 

Number of credit cards in own name NUMCRED 34.7 34.7 0.0 

Monthly allowance amount from parents PARALLOW 25.6 27.0 0.0 

Help from parents: pay housing PARHELPA 32.7 32.7 0.0 

Help from parents: pay education expenses other than tuition PARHELPB 32.7 32.7 0.0 

Help from parents: pay living expenses other than housing PARHELPC 32.7 32.7 0.0 

Help from parents: pay tuition and fees PARHELPD 32.7 32.7 0.0 

Lived with parents while not enrolled PARLIVE 30.7 30.7 0.0 

Parents help pay credit bills PARPAYCR 51.6 51.6 0.0 

Payoff or carry credit balance PAYOFBAL 51.7 51.7 0.0 

Use credit to pay for tuition PAYTUIT 51.5 51.5 0.0 

Primary language PRIMLANG 35.8 37.3 24.6 

Race—American Indian or Alaska Native recognized tribe RAINDTRB 37.8 38.3 32.1 

Siblings attended college before SIBCOLB4 35.0 35.0 0.0 

School job: part of community service project SJCOMSER 33.4 33.4 0.0 

School job: hours per week SJHOURS 21.0 20.5 22.2 

School job: related to major SJMAJOR 34.4 34.4 0.0 

School job: located primarily on or off campus SJONOFF 34.3 34.3 0.0 

School job: for NPSAS or another institution/organization SJSCHOOL 34.4 34.4 0.0 

School job: involved with literacy education or tutoring SJTUTOR 33.3 33.3 0.0 

Spouse attending college SPINCOL 33.3 37.3 21.3 

Associate degree type UGDEGAA 2.6 2.6 0.0 

Received untaxed benefits in 2003 UNTAXBF 36.2 39.8 24.3 

Received untaxed benefits: child support UNTAXBFA 70.7 70.3 74.6 

Received untaxed benefits: disability payments UNTAXBFB 79.6 78.4 87.2 

Received untaxed benefits: food stamps UNTAXBFC 79.6 78.4 87.2 

Received untaxed benefits: social security benefits UNTAXBFD 79.8 78.6 87.4 

Received untaxed benefits: TANF UNTAXBFE 70.7 70.3 74.6 

Received untaxed benefits: worker’s compensation UNTAXBFF 79.6 78.4 87.2 

Student was born in the United States USBORN 35.6 36.9 25.1 

Year began graduate school YEARGRAD 22.0 0.0 22.0 

Year received bachelor’s degree BAYEAR 19.3 0.0 19.3 

Grade point average GPA 12.8 12.8 0.0 

Graduate class level GRADLVL 3.9 0.0 3.9 

Year began graduate degree GRADPYR 24.5 0.0 24.5 

Graduate enrollment status (all years) GRENRST 21.7 0.0 21.7 

See notes at end of table. 
Appendix H. Imputations 

H-8 

Table H–1. Rate of missing data before imputation for all variables: 2004—Continued 

Percent missing data rate 

Variable description Variable name 

All 

students 

Undergraduate 

students 

Graduate/firstprofessional 

students 

High school degree type HSDEG 9.7 9.7 0.0 

High school graduation year HSGRADYY 13.5 13.5 0.0 

Student’s parents were born in the United States PARBORN 36.1 37.6 24.8 

Year first enrolled in postsecondary education PSECTYR 24.0 24.0 0.0 

Type of class: business CLASSA 46.2 46.0 47.6 

Type of class: health CLASSB 46.2 46.0 47.6 

Type of class: education CLASSC 46.2 46.0 47.6 

Type of class: engineering and engineering technology CLASSD 46.2 46.0 47.6 

Type of class: computer and information sciences CLASSE 46.2 46.0 47.6 

Type of class: social sciences CLASSF 46.2 46.0 47.6 

Type of class: natural sciences and mathematics CLASSG 46.2 46.0 47.6 

Type of class: arts and humanities CLASSH 46.2 46.0 47.6 

Type of class: communications CLASSI 46.2 46.0 47.6 

Type of class: vocational program CLASSJ 46.2 46.0 47.6 

Type of classes: university transfer CLASSK 46.2 46.0 47.6 

Type of classes: general education CLASSL 46.2 46.0 47.6 

Type of class: other CLASSX 46.2 46.0 47.6 

Claimed as a dependent DEPCLAIM 32.7 32.7 0.0 

Ever attended elementary or secondary school outside the U.S. FORESCH 36.2 36.2 0.0 

Tuition paid by assistantship GRASTUIT 20.2 0.0 20.2 

Type of high school attended HSTYPE 34.8 34.8 0.0 

Effect of job on grades JOBEFFGR 35.3 35.9 26.8 

NPSAS was first school attended after high school NPFIRST 34.0 34.0 0.0 

Own investments, business or farm over $10,000 OWNINVST 46.7 50.7 33.0 

Parents taking college courses in 2003-2004 PARCOLL 35.0 35.0 0.0 

Parents own other real estate PARESTA 35.8 35.8 0.0 

Claim Federal Hope scholarship TAXHOPE 38.0 38.9 31.8 

Claim lifetime learning tax credit TAXLEARN 37.7 38.8 29.2 

Claim tuition tax deduction TAXTUIT 36.9 38.2 27.9 

Transferred credits to NPSAS TRANSCRD 68.5 68.5 0.0 

Transferred from NPSAS TRANSFR 58.7 58.7 0.0 

Plan to transfer from NPSAS TRANSPLN 51.9 51.9 0.0 

Transferred to NPSAS TRANSTO 43.4 43.4 0.0 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 2004 National Postsecondary 

Student Aid Study (NPSAS:04). 
Appendix H. Imputations 

H-9 

Table H–2. Pre- versus post-imputation frequency distribution for eight select variables: 2004 

Percent 

Variable 

Pre-imputation 

frequency 

Post-imputation 

frequency 

Difference 

pre-post 

Dependency status 

 Dependent 43.5 45.9 -2.4 

 Independent 56.5 54.1 2.4 

Dependents—has dependent children 

 No 77.6 75.6 1.9 

 Yes 22.4 24.4 -1.9 

Dependents—has dependents 

 No dependents 73.9 73.7 0.1 

 Has dependents 26.1 26.3 -0.1 

Mother's highest education level 

 Do not know 4.3 3.9 0.4 

 Did not complete high school 10.7 9.8 0.9 

 High school diploma or equivalent 38.0 35.0 3.0 

 Vocational or technical training 4.0 3.7 0.3 

 Less than 2 years of college 6.2 6.9 -0.7 

 Associate's degree 7.1 7.9 -0.9 

 Two or more years of college but no degree 3.7 4.1 -0.4 

 Bachelor's degree 16.1 17.9 -1.8 

 Master's degree or equivalent 8.1 8.8 -0.7 

 First-professional degree 0.8 0.8 0.0 

 Doctoral degree 1.1 1.2 -0.1 

Number of institutions attended 

 One institution attended 87.3 87.5 -0.2 

 Two institutions attended 11.8 11.6 0.2 

 Three institutions attended 0.8 0.8 0.0 

 Four institutions attended 0.1 0.1 0.0 

 Five institutions attended 0.0 0.0 0.0 

Military service type 

 No military service 95.3 95.4 -0.1 

 Active duty 0.5 0.5 -0.1 

 Reserves 1.0 1.1 -0.1 

 Veteran 3.2 3.0 0.3 

Number of family members in college (independent) 

 No family members in college 47.7 45.9 1.7 

 One family member in college 45.3 46.5 -1.2 

 Two family members in college 6.2 6.6 -0.4 

 Three family members in college 0.7 0.8 -0.1 

 Four family members in college 0.1 0.1 0.0 

 Five family members in college 0.0 0.0 0.0 

 Six family members in college 0.0 0.0 0.0 

Disability 

 No disability 90.1 89.7 0.4 

 Disabled 9.9 10.3 -0.4 

1

 Difference = (Pre-Post)/Pre. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 2004 National Postsecondary 

Student Aid Study (NPSAS:04). 
Appendix H. Imputations 

H-10 
I-1 

Appendix I 

Analysis Variables 

I-3 

Table I-1. Analysis variables: 2004 

Variable name Prefix Label 

STUDTYPE A Student Type_Indicator NPSAS:04 Student type 

AIDAPP Aid_Application Applied for any aid 

FEDAPP Aid_Application Applied for federal aid 

ANYFEDND Aid_Federal Federal need-based aid flag 

CAMPAMT Aid_Federal Federal campus-based aid (Perkins, SEOG, FWSP) 

FEDNEED Aid_Federal Federal need-based aid 

TFEDAID Aid_Federal Total federal aid (excludes VA/DOD) 

TFEDAID2 Aid_Federal Total federal aid (includes VA/DOD) 

TFEDWRK Aid_Federal Federal Work-study 

TITIVAMT Aid_Federal Total federal Title IV aid 

ANYGTRN Aid_Federal_Grants Graduate traineeship flag 

ANYPELL Aid_Federal_Grants Pell grant flag 

GRTRNAMT Aid_Federal_Grants Traineeship amount 

OTHFDGRT Aid_Federal_Grants Other federal grants (not Title IV) 

PELLAMT Aid_Federal_Grants Federal Pell Grant 

PLNPSAS Aid_Federal_Grants NPSAS school Pell indicator 

SEOGAMT Aid_Federal_Grants Federal SEOG grant 

TFEDGRT Aid_Federal_Grants Total federal grants 

ANYSTAF Aid_Federal_Loans Stafford loan flag 

DIRECTLN Aid_Federal_Loans Stafford loan-Direct or FFELP program indicator 

FEDCUM1 Aid_Federal_Loans Cumulative federal loans-undergraduate 

FEDCUM2 Aid_Federal_Loans Cumulative federal loans-graduate/first-professional 

FEDCUM3 Aid_Federal_Loans Cumulative federal loans-total 

FEDOWE1 Aid_Federal_Loans Amount still owed on all undergraduate federal loans 

FEDOWE2 Aid_Federal_Loans Amount still owed on all graduate federal loans 

FEDOWE3 Aid_Federal_Loans Amount still owed on all federal loans 

LNNPSAS Aid_Federal_Loans NPSAS school loan indicator 

PERKAMT Aid_Federal_Loans Perkins loan 

PERKCUM1 Aid_Federal_Loans Cumulative Perkins loans-undergraduate 

PERKCUM2 Aid_Federal_Loans Cumulative Perkins loans-graduate/first-professional 

PERKCUM3 Aid_Federal_Loans Cumulative Perkins loans-total 

PHSLOAN Aid_Federal_Loans Federal health professions loans 

PLUSAMT Aid_Federal_Loans PLUS loan total 

PLUSCUM Aid_Federal_Loans Cumulative PLUS loans 

STAFCT1 Aid_Federal_Loans Stafford subsidized maximum categories 

STAFCT2 Aid_Federal_Loans Stafford total maximum categories 

STAFFAMT Aid_Federal_Loans Stafford total subsidized + unsubsidized 

STAFSUB Aid_Federal_Loans Stafford subsidized total 

STAFTYPE Aid_Federal_Loans Stafford loan types received 

STAFUNSB Aid_Federal_Loans Stafford unsubsidized total 

STFCUM1 Aid_Federal_Loans Cumulative Stafford loans-undergraduate 

STFCUM2 Aid_Federal_Loans Cumulative Stafford loans-graduate/first-professional 

STFCUM3 Aid_Federal_Loans Cumulative Stafford loans-total 

SUBLOAN Aid_Federal_Loans Federal subsidized loans (Stafford & Perkins) 

T4LNAMT1 Aid_Federal_Loans Title IV loans (except PLUS) 

T4LNAMT2 Aid_Federal_Loans Title IV loans (includes PLUS) 

TFEDLN Aid_Federal_Loans Total federal loans (excludes PLUS) 

TFEDLN2 Aid_Federal_Loans Total federal loans (includes PLUS) 

ANYFED Aid_Federal_Total Federal any aid flag 

ANYGFEL Aid_Grants Graduate fellowship flag 

EMPLYAMT Aid_Grants Employer aid (includes college staff) 

GRFELAMT Aid_Grants Total graduate fellowships, grants, traineeships, waivers 

MERITAID Aid_Grants Total merit-only grants 

INLNAMT Aid_Institutional Institutional loans 

INSTAMT Aid_Institutional Institutional aid total 

See notes at end of table. 
Appendix I. Analysis Variables 

I-4 

Table I-1. Analysis variables: 2004—Continued 

Variable name Prefix Label 

INSTWRK Aid_Institutional Institutional work-study 

ANYINSTG Aid_Institutional_Grants Institution grant flag 

EMPLWAIV Aid_Institutional_Grants Institutional tuition waivers for staff 

GRINFEL Aid_Institutional_Grants Institutional graduate fellowship amount 

INATHAMT Aid_Institutional_Grants Athletic scholarships 

INGRTAMT Aid_Institutional_Grants Institutional grants total 

INSMERIT Aid_Institutional_Grants Institutional merit-only grants 

INSTNEED Aid_Institutional_Grants Institutional need-based grants 

INSTNOND Aid_Institutional_Grants Institutional no-need & merit grants 

INSWAIV Aid_Institutional_Grants Institutional tuition & fee waivers 

ANYGAST Aid_Institutional_Other Graduate any assistantship flag 

ANYGDA Aid_Institutional_Other Graduate other assistantship flag 

ANYGRA Aid_Institutional_Other Graduate research assistantship flag 

ANYGTA Aid_Institutional_Other Graduate teaching assistantship flag 

GRASTAMT Aid_Institutional_Other Total assistantships amount 

GRGRDAMT Aid_Institutional_Other Other graduate assistantship amount 

GRRESAMT Aid_Institutional_Other Research assistantship amount 

GRTEAAMT Aid_Institutional_Other Teaching assistantship amount 

ANYINWK Aid_Institutional_Work Work-study (institution) flag 

UNSBLOAN Aid_Loans Total unsubsidized loans (all sources) 

AIDSNEED Aid_Need Aid amount exceeding federal need 

EFC Aid_Need Expected Family Contribution (EFC composite) 

EFC1 Aid_Need EFC as reported (Pell, CPS, CADE) 

EFCAID Aid_Need Aid subject to federal EFC limitation 

SNEED1 Aid_Need Student budget minus EFC 

SNEED2 Aid_Need Student budget minus EFC minus total aid 

SNEED3 Aid_Need Student budget minus EFC minus federal grants 

SNEED4 Aid_Need Student budget minus EFC minus grants + federal need aid 

SNEED5 Aid_Need Student budget minus EFC minus all grants 

SNEED7 Aid_Need Student budget minus EFC, federal & state grants 

NETCST1 Aid_Net Price Student budget minus all aid 

NETCST10 Aid_Net Price Tuition and fees minus federal grants 

NETCST12 Aid_Net Price Tuition and fees minus state grants 

NETCST13 Aid_Net Price Tuition and fees minus institutional grants 

NETCST14 Aid_Net Price Tuition and fees minus all non-federal grants 

NETCST15 Aid_Net Price Tuition and fees minus state + institutional grants 

NETCST16 Aid_Net Price Student budget minus federal and state grants 

NETCST17 Aid_Net Price Student budget minus all grants and loans 

NETCST18 Aid_Net Price Student budget minus all aid except work-study 

NETCST2 Aid_Net Price Student budget minus federal grants 

NETCST3 Aid_Net Price Student budget minus all grants 

NETCST4 Aid_Net Price Student budget minus grants and half of loans 

NETCST9 Aid_Net Price Tuition and fees minus all grants 

ANYVET Aid_Outside Veterans benefits flag 

OTHRSCR Aid_Outside Outside sources total 

OTHTYPE Aid_Outside Total other type of aid (PLUS, job training, assistantships, 

VA/DOD) 

PRIVAMT Aid_Outside Total private sources grants and loans 

PRIVLOAN Aid_Outside Private (alternative) loans 

VADODAMT Aid_Outside Veteran’s benefits and DOD 

VETBEN Aid_Outside Veteran’s benefits 

ANYEMP Aid_Outside_Grants Employer aid flag 

ANYPEMP Aid_Outside_Grants Parent employer aid flag 

ANYPRVGT Aid_Outside_Grants Private grant flag 

EMPLYAM1 Aid_Outside_Grants Employer aid (student) 

See notes at end of table. 
Appendix I. Analysis Variables 

I-5 

Table I-1. Analysis variables: 2004—Continued 

Variable name Prefix Label 

EMPLYAM2 Aid_Outside_Grants Employer aid (parents) 

EMPLYAM3 Aid_Outside_Grants Employer aid (student & parents) 

OTHGTAMT Aid_Outside_Grants Outside grants (private & employer) 

PRIVAID Aid_Outside_Grants Private sources grants 

ANYPRVLN Aid_Outside_Loans Private loan flag 

AIDSRC Aid_Package Aid package by source of aid 

AIDTYPE Aid_Package Aid package by type of aid 

FEDLNPAK Aid_Package Federal loan package by type of loan 

FEDPACK Aid_Package Federal aid package by type of aid 

GLOANSRC Aid_Package Loan package by source of loan for graduate students 

GRNTSRC Aid_Package Grant package by source of grant 

INSTPACK Aid_Package Aid package with institutional aid 

LOANSRC Aid_Package Loan package by source of loan 

PELLPACK Aid_Package Aid package with Pell grants 

AIDCST Aid_Ratio Ratio of total aid to student budget 

FEDGRPCT Aid_Ratio Ratio of federal grants to total aid 

FEDPCT Aid_Ratio Ratio of federal aid to total aid 

GRTCST Aid_Ratio Ratio of grant aid to student budget 

GRTLOAN Aid_Ratio Ratio of grants to total loans 

GRTPCT Aid_Ratio Ratio of grants to total aid 

GRTPCTTN Aid_Ratio Ratio of grant aid to tuition 

GRTRATIO Aid_Ratio Ratio of grants to grants and loans 

INSTGPCT Aid_Ratio Ratio of institutional grants to total aid 

INSTPCT Aid_Ratio Ratio of institution aid to total aid 

LOANCST Aid_Ratio Ratio of loans to student budget (excludes PLUS) 

LOANCST2 Aid_Ratio Ratio of loans to student budget (includes PLUS) 

LOANPCT Aid_Ratio Ratio of loans to total aid (excludes PLUS) 

LOANPCT2 Aid_Ratio Ratio of loans to total aid (includes PLUS) 

PELLCST Aid_Ratio Ratio of Pell grant to student budget 

PELLRAT1 Aid_Ratio Ratio of Pell grant to total aid 

PELLRAT2 Aid_Ratio Ratio of Pell grant to total grants 

PLUSPCT Aid_Ratio Ratio of PLUS loan to total aid 

STAPCT Aid_Ratio Ratio of state aid to total aid 

STGRPCT Aid_Ratio Ratio of state grants to total aid 

WORKPCT Aid_Ratio Ratio of work-study to total aid 

STATEAMT Aid_State State aid total 

STLNAMT Aid_State State loans 

ANYSTGRT Aid_State_Grants State grant flag 

MNAFR Aid_State_Grants Minnesota Assigned Family Responsibility 

NYNTB Aid_State_Grants New York net taxable balance 

NYSCHD Aid_State_Grants New York TAP award schedule 

STATNEED Aid_State_Grants State-need-based grants 

STATNOND Aid_State_Grants State non-need & merit grants 

STGTAMT Aid_State_Grants State grants total 

STMERIT Aid_State_Grants State merit-only grants 

STNOND1 Aid_State_Grants State non-need grants 

STWKAMT Aid_State_Other State work-study 

VOCHELP Aid_State_Other Vocational rehabilitation and training 

ANYWKST Aid_Total Work-study job flag 

TNFEDAID Aid_Total Total non-federal aid 

TOTAID Aid_Total Aid total amount 

TOTAID2 Aid_Total Total federal (Title IV), state, & institutional aid 

TOTAID4 Aid_Total Total aid excluding PLUS 

TOTAID5 Aid_Total Total aid excluding work-study 

TOTWKST Aid_Total Total work-study 

See notes at end of table. 
Appendix I. Analysis Variables 

I-6 

Table I-1. Analysis variables: 2004—Continued 

Variable name Prefix Label 

NEEDAID Aid_Total_Grants Total need-based grant aid 

TNFEDGRT Aid_Total_Grants Total non-federal grants 

TOTGRT Aid_Total_Grants Total grants 

BORAMT1 Aid_Total_Loans Cumulative borrowed for undergraduate education 

BORAMT2 Aid_Total_Loans Cumulative borrowed for graduate education 

BORAMT3 Aid_Total_Loans Cumulative borrowed for education 

OWEAMT1 Aid_Total_Loans Amount still owed on all undergraduate education loans 

OWEAMT2 Aid_Total_Loans Amount still owed on all graduate education loans 

OWEAMT3 Aid_Total_Loans Amount still owed on all education loans 

TNFEDLN Aid_Total_Loans Total non-federal loans 

TOTLOAN Aid_Total_Loans Total loans (excluding PLUS) 

TOTLOAN2 Aid_Total_Loans Total loans (including PLUS) 

AGE Background_Demographics Age as of 12/31/03 

AGEGROUP Background_Demographics Age groups as of 12/31/03 

AGEPSE Background_Demographics Age at start of postsecondary education 

CITIZEN2 Background_Demographics Citizenship 

DELAYENR Background_Demographics Delayed enrollment into PSE- number of years 

DEPEND Background_Demographics Dependency status 

DEPEND2 Background_Demographics Dependency status (3 categories) 

DEPEND4 Background_Demographics Dependency status (4 categories) 

DEPEND5A Background_Demographics Dependency and marital status (separated=married) 

DEPEND5B Background_Demographics Dependency and marital status (separated=unmarried) 

GENDER Background_Demographics Gender 

HISPANIC Background_Demographics Race-ethnicity: Hispanic or Latino origin 

HISPTYPE Background_Demographics Race-ethnicity: Type of Hispanic origin 

IMMIGRA Background_Demographics Immigrant status 

ORPHAN Background_Demographics Orphan or ward of court 

PRIMLANG Background_Demographics English is the primary language 

RAASIAN Background_Demographics Race--Asian 

RABLACK Background_Demographics Race—Black or African-American 

RACE Background_Demographics Race-ethnicity (with multiple) 

RACECEN Background_Demographics Race: census categories 

RAINDIAN Background_Demographics Race—American Indian or Alaska Native 

RAINDTRB Background_Demographics Race—American Indian or Alaska Native recognized tribe 

RAISLAND Background_Demographics Race—Native Hawaiian/other Pacific Islander 

RAOTHER Background_Demographics Race—Other 

RAWHITE Background_Demographics Race—White 

RISKINDX Background_Demographics Index of risk 

SINGLPAR Background_Demographics Single-parent independent students 

SMARITAL Background_Demographics Student’s marital status 

USBORN Background_Demographics Student was born in the United States 

DISABLE Background_Disabilities Disability indicator 

DISMOBIL Background_Disabilities Condition that limits physical activities 

DISOTHER Background_Disabilities Other condition lasting six months or more 

DISOTHRA Background_Disabilities Difficulty: dressing, bathing, or getting around inside home 

DISOTHRB Background_Disabilities Difficulty: getting to school to attend class 

DISOTHRC Background_Disabilities Difficulty: learning, remembering, or concentrating 

DISOTHRD Background_Disabilities Difficulty: working at a job 

DISSENSR Background_Disabilities Have a long-lasting sensory condition 

DISTYPES Background_Disabilities Main type of condition or impairment 

SERNEEDA Background_Disabilities Service needed: adaptive equipment and technology 

SERNEEDB Background_Disabilities Service needed: alternative exam format 

SERNEEDC Background_Disabilities Service needed: course substitution or waiver 

SERNEEDD Background_Disabilities Service needed: readers or classroom note takers 

SERNEEDE Background_Disabilities Service needed: registration assistance 

See notes at end of table. 
Appendix I. Analysis Variables 

I-7 

Table I-1. Analysis variables: 2004—Continued 

Variable name Prefix Label 

SERNEEDF Background_Disabilities Service needed: sign language or oral interpreters 

SERNEEDG Background_Disabilities Service needed: tutors to assist with ongoing homework 

SERNEEDX Background_Disabilities Service needed: other 

SERRECVA Background_Disabilities Service received: adaptive equipment and technology 

SERRECVB Background_Disabilities Service received: alternative exam format 

SERRECVC Background_Disabilities Service received: courses substitution or waiver 

SERRECVD Background_Disabilities Service received: readers or classroom note takers 

SERRECVE Background_Disabilities Service received: registration assistance 

SERRECVF Background_Disabilities Service received: sign language or oral interpreters 

SERRECVG Background_Disabilities Service received: tutors to assist with ongoing homework 

SERRECVX Background_Disabilities Service received: other 

SSISSDI Background_Disabilities Currently receiving SSI or SSDI 

VOCAPPLY Background_Disabilities Ever applied for vocational rehabilitation services 

VOCRECV Background_Disabilities Ever received vocational rehabilitation services 

DEPANY Background_Family Dependents - has dependents 

DEPCARE Background_Family Dependent children in daycare 

DEPCHILD Background_Family Dependents - has dependent children 

DEPCOST Background_Family Monthly daycare costs 

DEPNUM Background_Family Dependents - total number 

DEPNUMCH Background_Family Dependents - number of dependent children 

DEPOLD Background_Family Dependent children - age of oldest 

DEPOTHER Background_Family Dependents - has dependent other than children 

DEPTYPE Background_Family Dependents - types of dependents 

DEPYNG Background_Family Dependent children - age of youngest 

HSIZE Background_Family Family size (dependent & independent) 

SFAMNUM Background_Family Family size (independent) 

SINCOL Background_Family Number of family members in college (independent) 

SPINCOL Background_Family Spouse attending college 

LOCALRES Background_Residence Housing 

PARLIVE Background_Residence Lived with parents while not enrolled 

STUSTATE Background_Residence State of legal residence (student) 

GAINSUR Education_Assistantship Graduate assistantship: included health insurance 

GRADTAA Education_Assistantship Graduate TA duties: answered student e-mail 

GRADTAB Education_Assistantship Graduate TA duties: assisted grading 

GRADTAC Education_Assistantship Graduate TA duties: assumed teaching responsibility 

GRADTAD Education_Assistantship Graduate TA duties: held office hours 

GRADTAE Education_Assistantship Graduate TA duties: led discussion sections 

GRADTAF Education_Assistantship Graduate TA duties: supervised lab hours 

DEGEARN Education_Attainment Degree already earned since high school 

DEGEARNA Education_Attainment Degree already earned: bachelor’s degree 

DEGEARNB Education_Attainment Degree already earned: associate’s degree 

DEGEARNC Education_Attainment Degree already earned: undergraduate certificate/diploma 

DEGEARND Education_Attainment Degree already earned: post-BA certificate 

DEGEARNE Education_Attainment Degree already earned: master’s degree 

DEGEARNF Education_Attainment Degree already earned: post-MA certificate 

DEGEARNG Education_Attainment Degree already earned: first professional degree 

DEGEARNH Education_Attainment Degree already earned: doctoral degree 

ATTEND Education_Attendance Attendance intensity in fall 

ATTEND2 Education_Attendance Attendance intensity in fall (half-time) 

ATTNPT Education_Attendance Attendance intensity (half-time) 

ATTNPTRN Education_Attendance Attendance intensity (all schools) 

ATTNSTAT Education_Attendance Attendance pattern 

BAYEAR Education_Attendance Year received bachelor’s degree 

E01 Education_Attendance Monthly enrollment status 2003/07 

E02 Education_Attendance Monthly enrollment status 2003/08 

See notes at end of table. 
Appendix I. Analysis Variables 

I-8 

Table I-1. Analysis variables: 2004—Continued 

Variable name Prefix Label 

E03 Education_Attendance Monthly enrollment status 2003/09 

E04 Education_Attendance Monthly enrollment status 2003/10 

E05 Education_Attendance Monthly enrollment status 2003/11 

E06 Education_Attendance Monthly enrollment status 2003/12 

E07 Education_Attendance Monthly enrollment status 2004/01 

E08 Education_Attendance Monthly enrollment status 2004/02 

E09 Education_Attendance Monthly enrollment status 2004/03 

E10 Education_Attendance Monthly enrollment status 2004/04 

E11 Education_Attendance Monthly enrollment status 2004/05 

E12 Education_Attendance Monthly enrollment status 2004/06 

ENLEN Education_Attendance Number of months enrolled 

ENR01 Education_Attendance Monthly enrollment status 2003/07 

ENR02 Education_Attendance Monthly enrollment status 2003/08 

ENR03 Education_Attendance Monthly enrollment status 2003/09 

ENR04 Education_Attendance Monthly enrollment status 2003/10 

ENR05 Education_Attendance Monthly enrollment status 2003/11 

ENR06 Education_Attendance Monthly enrollment status 2003/12 

ENR07 Education_Attendance Monthly enrollment status 2004/01 

ENR08 Education_Attendance Monthly enrollment status 2004/02 

ENR09 Education_Attendance Monthly enrollment status 2004/03 

ENR10 Education_Attendance Monthly enrollment status 2004/04 

ENR11 Education_Attendance Monthly enrollment status 2004/05 

ENR12 Education_Attendance Monthly enrollment status 2004/06 

ENRFALL Education_Attendance Enrolled from July through Dec in 2003 

ENRSPR Education_Attendance Enrolled from Jan through June in 2004 

ENRSTAT Education_Attendance Enrollment pattern 

EVER2PUB Education_Attendance Ever attend community college 

EVER4YR Education_Attendance Ever attend 4-year institution 

GRADGAP Education_Attendance Years between BA and graduate school 

GRADPYR Education_Attendance Year began graduate degree 

GRENRST Education_Attendance Graduate enrollment status (all years) 

MFT Education_Attendance Months enrolled full-time 

MHT Education_Attendance Months enrolled half-time 

MLT Education_Attendance Months enrolled less than half time 

MPT Education_Attendance Months enrolled part-time 

PSECTYR Education_Attendance Year first enrolled in postsecondary education 

STUDMULT Education_Attendance Number of institutions attended 

DELIVE Education_Courses Distance education used: live, interactive TV or audio 

DERECR Education_Courses Distance education used: pre-recorded TV or audio 

DEWWW Education_Courses Distance education used: the internet 

DISTALL Education_Courses Distance education: entire program 

DISTEDUC Education_Courses Distance education: took courses in 2003-2004 

DISTLOC Education_Courses Distance education: location of courses 

DISTNUM Education_Courses Distance education: number of courses took 

DISTSATF Education_Courses Distance education: satisfaction 

REMEDIA Education_Courses Took remedial course: English (freshman/sophomore) 

REMEDIB Education_Courses Took remedial course: math (freshman/sophomore) 

REMEDIC Education_Courses Took remedial course: reading (freshman/sophomore) 

REMEDID Education_Courses Took remedial course: study skills (freshman/sophomore) 

REMEDIE Education_Courses Took remedial course: writing (freshman/sophomore) 

REMETOOK Education_Courses Remedial courses: took this school year (freshman/sophomore) 

REMEVER Education_Courses Remedial courses: ever taken 

HSDEG Education_High School High school degree type 

HSGRADYY Education_High School High school graduation year 

GPA Education_Performance Grade point average 

See notes at end of table. 
Appendix I. Analysis Variables 

I-9 

Table I-1. Analysis variables: 2004—Continued 

Variable name Prefix Label 

CCTRACK Education_Persistence Community college track 

STAY1YR Education_Persistence Attained or persisted in 2003-04 

COLLGRAD Education_Program Graduating senior in 2003-2004 

GRADDEG Education_Program Graduate degree program 

GRADGPG Education_Program Graduate and first-professional degree programs 

GRADLVL Education_Program Graduate class level 

GRADPGM Education_Program Graduate programs 

HIGHLVEX Education_Program Highest level of education ever expected 

MAJORS Education_Program Field of study/major (detailed) 

MAJORS12 Education_Program Field of study: undergraduate (12 cat) 

MAJORSGR Education_Program Graduate field of study (12 cat) 

PROGSTAT Education_Program Completed degree program in 2003-2004 

STYPELST Education_Program Student type 

UGDEG Education_Program Undergraduate degree program 

UGDEGAA Education_Program Associate degree type 

UGLVL1 Education_Program Class level 

UGLVL2 Education_Program Class level (for loans) 

ATTENDA Education_Reasons_School Choice Reason enrolled: complete associate’s degree 

ATTENDB Education_Reasons_School Choice Reason enrolled: complete certificate 

ATTENDC Education_Reasons_School Choice Reason enrolled: job skills 

ATTENDD Education_Reasons_School Choice Reason enrolled: personal interest 

ATTENDE Education_Reasons_School Choice Reason enrolled: transfer to a 2-year college 

ATTENDF Education_Reasons_School Choice Reason enrolled: transfer to a 4-year college 

ATTENDG Education_Reasons_School Choice Reason enrolled: transfer to another college 

CONSIDRA Education_Reasons_School Choice Considered campus safety before choosing NPSAS 

CONSIDRB Education_Reasons_School Choice Considered graduation rate before choosing NPSAS 

CONSIDRC Education_Reasons_School Choice Considered job placement rate before choosing NPSAS 

JOBAFFOR Employment_While Enrolled Can afford school without working (student) 

JOBCLASS Employment_While Enrolled Job related to coursework (non-degree) 

JOBEARN Employment_While Enrolled Earnings from work while enrolled (excl work-study) 

JOBEARN2 Employment_While Enrolled Earnings from work while enrolled (incl work-study) 

JOBEFFA Employment_While Enrolled Job effect: helped with career preparation (student) 

JOBEFFB Employment_While Enrolled Job effect: helped with coursework (student) 

JOBEFFC Employment_While Enrolled Job effect: restricted class choice (student) 

JOBEFFD Employment_While Enrolled Job effect: limited class schedule (student) 

JOBEFFE Employment_While Enrolled Job effect: limited facility access (student) 

JOBEFFF Employment_While Enrolled Job effect: limited number of classes (student) 

JOBEMPL Employment_While Enrolled Type of employer 

JOBENR Employment_While Enrolled Work intensity while enrolled (excl work-study) 

JOBENR2 Employment_While Enrolled Work intensity while enrolled (including work-study) 

JOBEXPT Employment_While Enrolled Parents expected to have a job (student) 

JOBHOUR Employment_While Enrolled Hours worked per week (excluding wk-study) 

JOBHOUR2 Employment_While Enrolled Hours worked per week (including work-study) 

JOBMAIN Employment_While Enrolled Main reason for working (student) 

JOBMAJOR Employment_While Enrolled Job related to major (degree) 

JOBNUM Employment_While Enrolled Number of jobs during NPSAS year 

JOBONOFF Employment_While Enrolled Job located primarily on of off campus 

JOBPRIOR Employment_While Enrolled Have job prior to enrollment at NPSAS 

JOBROLE Employment_While Enrolled Primary role (student or employee) 

JOBSCHA Employment_While Enrolled Combine school and work: took class outside work (employee) 

JOBSCHB Employment_While Enrolled Combine school and work: took distance education (employee) 

JOBSCHC Employment_While Enrolled Combine school and work: modify work schedule (employee) 

JOBTYPE Employment_While Enrolled Job type: Work-study or regular job 

JOBWEEK Employment_While Enrolled Weeks worked while enrolled 

SJCOMSER Employment_While Enrolled School job: part of community service project 

See notes at end of table. 
Appendix I. Analysis Variables 

I-10 

Table I-1. Analysis variables: 2004—Continued 

Variable name Prefix Label 

SJHOURS Employment_While Enrolled School job: hours per week 

SJMAJOR Employment_While Enrolled School job: related to major 

SJONOFF Employment_While Enrolled School job: located primarily on or off campus 

SJSCHOOL Employment_While Enrolled School job: for NPSAS or another institution/organization 

SJTUTOR Employment_While Enrolled School job: involved with literacy education or tutoring 

HOMEPAR Finances_Assets Assets: parent owns home 

HOMESTUD Finances_Assets Assets: student owns home 

CRBALDUE Finances_Debt_Other Credit cards - balance due 

NUMCRED Finances_Debt_Other Credit cards - number in own name 

PARPAYCR Finances_Debt_Other Credit cards - parents help pay 

PAYOFBAL Finances_Debt_Other Credit cards - pay off or carry balance 

PAYTUIT Finances_Debt_Other Credit cards - use to pay tuition 

CINCOME Finances_Income Total income-parents and independent (continuous) 

DEPINC Finances_Income Income of dependent student’s parents 

DSTUINC Finances_Income Income of dependent student (excluding parents) 

INCOME Finances_Income Total income by dependency (categorical) 

INDEPINC Finances_Income Income of independent student and spouse 

ISTUINC Finances_Income Income of independent student (excluding spouse) 

JOBSAVE Finances_Income Summer savings 

JOBSUMMR Finances_Income Summer job 

PCTALL Finances_Income Income percentile rank for all students 

PCTDEP Finances_Income Income percentile dependent students 

PCTINDEP Finances_Income Income percentile independent students 

PCTPOV Finances_Income Income percent of poverty level 

SPSINC Finances_Income Income of independent student’s spouse 

UNTAXBF Finances_Income Received untaxed benefits in 2003 

UNTAXBFA Finances_Income Received untaxed benefits: child support 

UNTAXBFB Finances_Income Received untaxed benefits: disability payments 

UNTAXBFC Finances_Income Received untaxed benefits: food stamps 

UNTAXBFD Finances_Income Received untaxed benefits: social security benefits 

UNTAXBFE Finances_Income Received untaxed benefits: TANF 

UNTAXBFF Finances_Income Received untaxed benefits: worker’s compensation 

XDEPINC Finances_Income Income of dependent student’s parents (categorical) 

XDSTUINC Finances_Income Income of dependent student (excluding parents) (categorical) 

XISTUINC Finances_Income Income of independent student (excluding spouse) (categorical) 

XSPSINC Finances_Income Income of independent student’s spouse (categorical) 

INSTID Institution NPSAS:04 Sample Institution IPEDS UNITID 

CALSYS Institution_Other Academic calendar system 

CLOCK Institution_Other Clock hour or credit hour institution 

CNTLAFFI Institution_Other Institutional control and affiliation 

ENRLSIZE Institution_Other Enrollment size at NPSAS institution 

GPASCALE Institution_Other GPA scale 

HBCU Institution_Other Historical Black college indicator 

HOMEDIST Institution_Other Institution distance from home 

INSTSAST Institution_Other NPSAS institution representative sample states 

INSTSTAT Institution_Other NPSAS institution state 

INSTSTSE Institution_Other NPSAS institution representative state sample by sector 

LOCALE Institution_Other Degree of urbanization 

OBEREG Institution_Other NPSAS institution region 

OCRHSI Institution_Other Hispanic-serving institution 

PCTMIN1 Institution_Other Percent enrolled-Black, non-Hispanic 

PCTMIN2 Institution_Other Percent enrolled-American Indian/Alaskan 

PCTMIN3 Institution_Other Percent enrolled-Asian/Pacific Islander 

PCTMIN4 Institution_Other Percent enrolled-Hispanic 

SAMESTAT Institution_Other Attend institution in state of legal residence 

See notes at end of table. 
Appendix I. Analysis Variables 

I-11 

Table I-1. Analysis variables: 2004—Continued 

Variable name Prefix Label 

SELECTIV Institution_Other Selectivity (4-year institutions) 

BUDGETAJ Institution_Price Student budget (attendance adjusted) 

BUDGETFT Institution_Price Student full budget (full-time, full-year) 

BUDNONAJ Institution_Price Non-tuition expense budget (attendance adjusted) 

BUDNONFT Institution_Price Non-tuition budget (full-time, full-year) 

INJURIS Institution_Price Tuition jurisdiction (in/out of area)-NPSAS inst 

TUITION2 Institution_Price Tuition and fees (NPSAS) 

ADMCON1 Institution_Requirements Consider secondary school GPA 

ADMCON2 Institution_Requirements Consider secondary school rank 

ADMCON3 Institution_Requirements Consider secondary school record 

ADMCON4 Institution_Requirements Consider completion of college-preparatory program 

ADMCON5 Institution_Requirements Consider recommendations 

ADMCON6 Institution_Requirements Consider formal demonstration of competencies 

ADMCON7 Institution_Requirements Consider admission test scores 

ADMCON8 Institution_Requirements Consider TOEFL 

AIDCTRL Institution_Type Institution control (with multiple) 

AIDLEVL Institution_Type Institution level (with multiple) 

AIDSECT Institution_Type Institution sector (with multiple) 

AIDSECTG Institution_Type Institution type - graduate (with multiple) 

ATTNINST Institution_Type Institution type and full-time status 

CC2000 Institution_Type Carnegie code (2000) for NPSAS institution 

CC2000A Institution_Type Carnegie code (2000) with control 

CONTROL Institution_Type NPSAS institution control 

FPOFFER Institution_Type First-professional degree program offered 

GASECTOR Institution_Type Georgia institution sector 

HLOFFER Institution_Type Highest level of offering at NPSAS institution 

LEVEL Institution_Type NPSAS institution level 

NYSECTOR Institution_Type New York institution sector 

PELLSECA Institution_Type Sector of school from which received Pell grant 1 

PELLSECB Institution_Type Sector of school from which received Pell grant 2 

PGMSEC Institution_Type Graduate program and institution type 

SECTOR1 Institution_Type NPSAS institution sector (control & level) 

SECTOR4 Institution_Type Institution sector (4 with multiple) 

SECTOR9 Institution_Type NPSAS institution type 

STFSECA Institution_Type Sector of school from which received Stafford loan 1 

STFSECB Institution_Type Sector of school from which received Stafford loan 2 

PAREDUC Parent_Education Parent’s highest education level 

PDADED Parent_Education Father’s highest education level 

PMOMED Parent_Education Mother’s highest education level 

PARBORN Parent_Family Student’s parents were born in the United States 

PFAMNUM Parent_Family Family size (dependent) 

PINCOL Parent_Family Number of family members in college (dependent) 

PMARITAL Parent_Family Parent’s marital status 

SIBCOLB4 Parent_Family Siblings attended college before 

SIBINCOL Parent_Family Have siblings in college 

PARALLOW Parent_Support Monthly allowance amount from parents 

PARHELPA Parent_Support Help from parents: pay housing 

PARHELPB Parent_Support Help from parents: pay education expenses other than tuition 

PARHELPC Parent_Support Help from parents: pay living expenses other than housing 

PARHELPD Parent_Support Help from parents: pay tuition and fees 

COMHOUR Public Service_Participation Community service - average hours per month 

COMONE Public Service_Participation Community service - one time event 

COMREQ Public Service_Participation Community service - required or part of program 

COMSERV Public Service_Participation Community service - performed last year 

COMSERVA Public Service_Participation Community service: fundraising 

See notes at end of table. 
Appendix I. Analysis Variables 

I-12 

Table I-1. Analysis variables: 2004—Continued 

Variable name Prefix Label 

COMSERVB Public Service_Participation Community service: homeless shelter/soup kitchen 

COMSERVC Public Service_Participation Community service: hospital/nursing home 

COMSERVD Public Service_Participation Community service: neighborhood improvement 

COMSERVE Public Service_Participation Community service: service to church 

COMSERVF Public Service_Participation Community service: tutoring/mentoring 

COMSERVG Public Service_Participation Community service: work with kids other than 

tutoring/mentoring 

COMSERVX Public Service_Participation Community service: others 

MILTYPE Public Service_Participation Military service type 

VETERAN Public Service_Participation Veteran status 

VOTEEVER Public Service_Participation Ever vote 

VOTEREG Public Service_Participation Registered to vote 

COMPTO87 Survey_Sample Comparable to 1987 NPSAS (excluding Puerto Rico) 

DATASRC Survey_Sample Data sources (CATI, CADE, and CPS) 

FTBSTAT Survey_Sample First time beginners 

INCADE Survey_Sample Data available from CADE 

INCATI Survey_Sample Data available from CATI 

INCPS Survey_Sample Data available from CPS 

INNSLDS Survey_Sample Data available from NSLDS federal loan record 

INPELL Survey_Sample Data available from NSLDS Pell grant record 

ZRID Survey_Sample Identification number 

ZATTENDA Survey_Source Source variable for ATTENDA 

ZATTENDB Survey_Source Source variable for ATTENDB 

ZATTENDC Survey_Source Source variable for ATTENDC 

ZATTENDD Survey_Source Source variable for ATTENDD 

ZATTENDE Survey_Source Source variable for ATTENDE 

ZATTENDF Survey_Source Source variable for ATTENDF 

ZATTENDG Survey_Source Source variable for ATTENDG 

ZBORAMT1 Survey_Source Source variable for BORAMT1 

ZBORAMT2 Survey_Source Source variable for BORAMT2 

ZBORAMT3 Survey_Source Source variable for BORAMT3 

ZBUDGET Survey_Source Source variable for BUDNONAJ 

ZCAMP Survey_Source Source variable for CAMPAMT 

ZCITIZEN Survey_Source Source variable for CITIZEN2 

ZCOMHOUR Survey_Source Source variable for COMHOUR 

ZCOMONE Survey_Source Source variable for COMONE 

ZCOMREQ Survey_Source Source variable for COMREQ 

ZCOMSERA Survey_Source Source variable for COMSERVA 

ZCOMSERB Survey_Source Source variable for COMSERVB 

ZCOMSERC Survey_Source Source variable for COMSERVC 

ZCOMSERD Survey_Source Source variable for COMSERVD 

ZCOMSERE Survey_Source Source variable for COMSERVE 

ZCOMSERF Survey_Source Source variable for COMSERVF 

ZCOMSERG Survey_Source Source variable for COMSERVG 

ZCOMSERV Survey_Source Source variable for COMSERV 

ZCOMSERX Survey_Source Source variable for COMSERVX 

ZCONSIDA Survey_Source Source variable for CONSIDRA 

ZCONSIDB Survey_Source Source variable for CONSIDRB 

ZCONSIDC Survey_Source Source variable for CONSIDRC 

ZCRBALDU Survey_Source Source variable for CRBALDUE 

ZDEGEARA Survey_Source Source variable for DEGEARNA 

ZDEGEARB Survey_Source Source variable for DEGEARNB 

ZDEGEARC Survey_Source Source variable for DEGEARNC 

ZDEGEARD Survey_Source Source variable for DEGEARND 

ZDEGEARE Survey_Source Source variable for DEGEARNE 

ZDEGEARF Survey_Source Source variable for DEGEARNF 

See notes at end of table. 
Appendix I. Analysis Variables 

I-13 

Table I-1. Analysis variables: 2004—Continued 

Variable name Prefix Label 

ZDEGEARG Survey_Source Source variable for DEGEARNG 

ZDEGEARH Survey_Source Source variable for DEGEARNH 

ZDEGEARN Survey_Source Source variable for DEGEARN 

ZDELIVE Survey_Source Source variable for DELIVE 

ZDEPCARE Survey_Source Source variable for DEPCARE 

ZDEPCOST Survey_Source Source variable for DEPCOST 

ZDEPINC Survey_Source Source variables for DEPINC 

ZDERECR Survey_Source Source variable for DERECR 

ZDEWWW Survey_Source Source variable for DEWWW 

ZDISABLE Survey_Source Source variable for DISABLE 

ZDISMOBI Survey_Source Source variable for DISMOBIL 

ZDISOTHA Survey_Source Source variable for DISOTHRA 

ZDISOTHB Survey_Source Source variable for DISOTHRB 

ZDISOTHC Survey_Source Source variable for DISOTHRC 

ZDISOTHD Survey_Source Source variable for DISOTHRD 

ZDISOTHR Survey_Source Source variable for DISOTHER 

ZDISSENS Survey_Source Source variable for DISSENSR 

ZDISTALL Survey_Source Source variable for DISTALL 

ZDISTEDU Survey_Source Source variable for DISTEDUC 

ZDISTLOC Survey_Source Source variable for DISTLOC 

ZDISTNUM Survey_Source Source variable for DISTNUM 

ZDISTSAT Survey_Source Source variable for DISTSATF 

ZDISTYPE Survey_Source Source variable for DISTYPES 

ZDSTUINC Survey_Source Source variables for DSTUINC 

ZEFC Survey_Source Source variable for ZEFC 

ZEFC1 Survey_Source Source variable for ZEFC1 

ZEMPLWV Survey_Source Source variable for EMPLWAIV 

ZEMPLYA1 Survey_Source Source variable for EMPLYAM1 

ZEMPLYA2 Survey_Source Source variable for EMPLYAM2 

ZEMPLYA3 Survey_Source Source variable for EMPLYAM3 

ZEMPLYAM Survey_Source Source variable for EMPLYAMT 

ZENROLL Survey_Source Source variable for enrollment variables 

ZEVER2PU Survey_Source Source variable for EVER2PUB 

ZEVER4YR Survey_Source Source variable for EVER4YR 

ZFEDNEED Survey_Source Source variable for FEDNEED 

ZGAINSUR Survey_Source Source variable for GAINSUR 

ZGENDER Survey_Source Source variable for GENDER 

ZGPA Survey_Source Source variable for GPA 

ZGRADDEG Survey_Source Source variable for GRADDEG 

ZGRADGPG Survey_Source Source variable for ZGRADGPG 

ZGRADLVL Survey_Source Source variable for GRADLVL 

ZGRADTAA Survey_Source Source variable for GRADTAA 

ZGRADTAB Survey_Source Source variable for GRADTAB 

ZGRADTAC Survey_Source Source variable for GRADTAC 

ZGRADTAD Survey_Source Source variable for GRADTAD 

ZGRADTAE Survey_Source Source variable for GRADTAE 

ZGRADTAF Survey_Source Source variable for GRADTAF 

ZGRASTAM Survey_Source Source variable for GRASTAMT 

ZGRGRDAM Survey_Source Source variable for GRGRDAMT 

ZGRINFEL Survey_Source Source variable for GRINFEL 

ZGRRESAM Survey_Source Source variable for GRRESAMT 

ZGRTEAAM Survey_Source Source variable for GRTEAAMT 

ZGRTRNAM Survey_Source Source variable for GRTRNAMT 

ZHIGHLVE Survey_Source Source variable for HIGHLVEX 

ZHOMEDIS Survey_Source Source variable for HOMEDIST 

See notes at end of table. 
Appendix I. Analysis Variables 

I-14 

Table I-1. Analysis variables: 2004—Continued 

Variable name Prefix Label 

ZHOMEPAR Survey_Source Source variable for HOMEPAR 

ZHOMESTU Survey_Source Source variable for HOMESTUD 

ZHSDEG Survey_Source Source variable for HSDEG 

ZHSGRADY Survey_Source Source variable for HSGRADYY 

ZINATHAM Survey_Source Source variable for INATHAMT 

ZINCOME Survey_Source Source variable for INCOME 

ZINDEINC Survey_Source Source variables for INDEPINC 

ZINGRTAM Survey_Source Source variable for INGRTAMT 

ZINLNAMT Survey_Source Source variable for INLNAMT 

ZINSMERI Survey_Source Source variable for INSMERIT 

ZINSTAMT Survey_Source Source variable for INSTAMT 

ZINSTND Survey_Source Source variable for INSTNEED 

ZINSTNON Survey_Source Source variable for INSTNOND 

ZINSTWRK Survey_Source Source variable for INSTWRK 

ZINSWAIV Survey_Source Source variable for INSWAIV 

ZISTUINC Survey_Source Source variables for ISTUINC 

ZJOBAFFO Survey_Source Source variable for JOBAFFOR 

ZJOBCLAS Survey_Source Source variable for JOBCLASS 

ZJOBEARN Survey_Source Source variable for JOBEARN 

ZJOBEFFA Survey_Source Source variable for JOBEFFA 

ZJOBEFFB Survey_Source Source variable for JOBEFFB 

ZJOBEFFC Survey_Source Source variable for JOBEFFC 

ZJOBEFFD Survey_Source Source variable for JOBEFFD 

ZJOBEFFE Survey_Source Source variable for JOBEFFE 

ZJOBEFFF Survey_Source Source variable for JOBEFFF 

ZJOBEMPL Survey_Source Source variable for JOBEMPL 

ZJOBEXPT Survey_Source Source variable for JOBEXPT 

ZJOBHOUR Survey_Source Source variable for JOBHOUR 

ZJOBMAIN Survey_Source Source variable for JOBMAIN 

ZJOBMAJO Survey_Source Source variable for JOBMAJOR 

ZJOBNUM Survey_Source Source variable for JOBNUM 

ZJOBONOF Survey_Source Source variable for JOBONOFF 

ZJOBPRIO Survey_Source Source variable for JOBPRIOR 

ZJOBROLE Survey_Source Source variable for JOBROLE 

ZJOBSAVE Survey_Source Source variable for JOBSAVE 

ZJOBSCHA Survey_Source Source variable for JOBSCHA 

ZJOBSCHB Survey_Source Source variable for JOBSCHB 

ZJOBSCHC Survey_Source Source variable for JOBSCHC 

ZJOBSUMM Survey_Source Source variable for JOBSUMMR 

ZJOBWEEK Survey_Source Source variable for JOBWEEK 

ZMAJORS Survey_Source Source variable for MAJORS 

ZNUMCRED Survey_Source Source variable for NUMCRED 

ZOTHFDGT Survey_Source Source variable for OTHFDGRT 

ZOTHGTAM Survey_Source Source variable for OTHGTAMT 

ZOTHRSCR Survey_Source Source variable for OTHRSCR 

ZOTHTYPE Survey_Source Source variable for OTHTYPE 

ZOWEAMT1 Survey_Source Source variable for OWEAMT1 

ZOWEAMT2 Survey_Source Source variable for OWEAMT2 

ZOWEAMT3 Survey_Source Source variable for OWEAMT3 

ZPARALLO Survey_Source Source variable for PARALLOW 

ZPARHELA Survey_Source Source variable for PARHELPA 

ZPARHELB Survey_Source Source variable for PARHELPB 

ZPARHELC Survey_Source Source variable for PARHELPC 

ZPARHELD Survey_Source Source variable for PARHELPD 

ZPARLIVE Survey_Source Source variable for PARLIVE 

See notes at end of table. 
Appendix I. Analysis Variables 

I-15 

Table I-1. Analysis variables: 2004—Continued 

Variable name Prefix Label 

ZPARPAYC Survey_Source Source variable for PARPAYCR 

ZPAYOFBA Survey_Source Source variable for PAYOFBAL 

ZPAYTUIT Survey_Source Source variable for PAYTUIT 

ZPELL Survey_Source Source variable for PELLAMT 

ZPERK Survey_Source Source variable for PERKAMT 

ZPHSLOAN Survey_Source Source variable for PHSLOAN 

ZPLUS Survey_Source Source variable for PLUSAMT 

ZPRIMLAN Survey_Source Source variable for PRIMLANG 

ZPRIVAID Survey_Source Source variable for PRIVAID 

ZPRIVAMT Survey_Source Source variable for PRIVAMT 

ZPRIVLON Survey_Source Source variable for PRIVLOAN 

ZPSECTYR Survey_Source Source variable for PSECTYR 

ZRAINDTR Survey_Source Source variable for RAINDTRB 

ZREMEDIA Survey_Source Source variable for REMEDIA 

ZREMEDIB Survey_Source Source variable for REMEDIB 

ZREMEDIC Survey_Source Source variable for REMEDIC 

ZREMEDID Survey_Source Source variable for REMEDID 

ZREMEDIE Survey_Source Source variable for REMEDIE 

ZREMETOO Survey_Source Source variable for REMETOOK 

ZREMEVER Survey_Source Source variable for REMEVER 

ZSEOG Survey_Source Source variable for SEOGAMT 

ZSERNEDA Survey_Source Source variable for SERNEEDA 

ZSERNEDB Survey_Source Source variable for SERNEEDB 

ZSERNEDC Survey_Source Source variable for SERNEEDC 

ZSERNEDD Survey_Source Source variable for SERNEEDD 

ZSERNEDE Survey_Source Source variable for SERNEEDE 

ZSERNEDF Survey_Source Source variable for SERNEEDF 

ZSERNEDG Survey_Source Source variable for SERNEEDG 

ZSERNEDX Survey_Source Source variable for SERNEEDX 

ZSERRECA Survey_Source Source variable for SERRECVA 

ZSERRECB Survey_Source Source variable for SERRECVB 

ZSERRECC Survey_Source Source variable for SERRECVC 

ZSERRECD Survey_Source Source variable for SERRECVD 

ZSERRECE Survey_Source Source variable for SERRECVE 

ZSERRECF Survey_Source Source variable for SERRECVF 

ZSERRECG Survey_Source Source variable for SERRECVG 

ZSERRECX Survey_Source Source variable for SERRECVX 

ZSIBCOLB Survey_Source Source variable for SIBCOLB4 

ZSJCOMSE Survey_Source Source variable for SJCOMSER 

ZSJHOURS Survey_Source Source variable for SJHOURS 

ZSJMAJOR Survey_Source Source variable for SJMAJOR 

ZSJONOFF Survey_Source Source variable for SJONOFF 

ZSJSCHOO Survey_Source Source variable for SJSCHOOL 

ZSJTUTOR Survey_Source Source variable for SJTUTOR 

ZSMAR Survey_Source Source variable for SMARITAL 

ZSPINCOL Survey_Source Source variable for SPINCOL 

ZSPSINC Survey_Source Source variables for SPSINC 

ZSSISSDI Survey_Source Source variable for SSISSDI 

ZSTAF Survey_Source Source variable for STAFFAMT 

ZSTAFS Survey_Source Source variable for STAFSUB 

ZSTAFU Survey_Source Source variable for STAFUNSB 

ZSTATEAM Survey_Source Source variable for STATEAMT 

ZSTATND Survey_Source Source variable for STATNEED 

ZSTATNON Survey_Source Source variable for STATNOND 

ZSTGTAMT Survey_Source Source variable for STGTAMT 

See notes at end of table. 
Appendix I. Analysis Variables 

I-16 

Table I-1. Analysis variables: 2004—Continued 

Variable name Prefix Label 

ZSTLNAMT Survey_Source Source variable for STLNAMT 

ZSTMERIT Survey_Source Source variable for STMERIT 

ZSTNOND1 Survey_Source Source variable for STNOND1 

ZSTWKAMT Survey_Source Source variable for STWKAMT 

ZSTYPE Survey_Source Source variable for STYPELST 

ZT4LNAM1 Survey_Source Source variable for T4LNAMT1 

ZT4LNAM2 Survey_Source Source variable for T4LNAMT2 

ZTFEDAID Survey_Source Source variable for TFEDAID 

ZTFEDGRT Survey_Source Source variable for TFEDGRT 

ZTFEDLN Survey_Source Source variable for TFEDLN 

ZTFEDLN2 Survey_Source Source variable for TFEDLN2 

ZTFEDWRK Survey_Source Source variable for TFEDWRK 

ZTITIVAM Survey_Source Source variable for TITIVAMT 

ZTOTAID Survey_Source Source variable for TOTAID 

ZTOTGRT Survey_Source Source variable for TOTGRT 

ZTOTLOAN Survey_Source Source variable for TOTLOAN 

ZTOTWKST Survey_Source Source variable for TOTWKST 

ZTUITION Survey_Source Source variable for TUITION2 

ZUGDEG Survey_Source Source variable for UGDEG 

ZUGDEGAA Survey_Source Source variable for UGDEGAA 

ZUGLVL1 Survey_Source Source variable for UGLVL1 

ZUNTAXA Survey_Source Source variable for UNTAXBFA 

ZUNTAXB Survey_Source Source variable for UNTAXBFB 

ZUNTAXBF Survey_Source Source variable for UNTAXBF 

ZUNTAXC Survey_Source Source variable for UNTAXBFC 

ZUNTAXD Survey_Source Source variable for UNTAXBFD 

ZUNTAXE Survey_Source Source variable for UNTAXBFE 

ZUNTAXF Survey_Source Source variable for UNTAXBFF 

ZUSBORN Survey_Source Source variable for USBORN 

ZVADODAM Survey_Source Source variable for VADODAMT 

ZVETBEN Survey_Source Source variable for VETBEN 

ZVOCAPPL Survey_Source Source variable for VOCAPPLY 

ZVOCHELP Survey_Source Source variable for VOCHELP 

ZVOCRECV Survey_Source Source variable for VOCRECV 

ZVOTEEVE Survey_Source Source variable for VOTEEVER 

ZVOTEREG Survey_Source Source variable for VOTEREG 

ANALPSU Survey_Weights PSU 

ANALSTR Survey_Weights Stratum 

WTA00 Survey_Weights Study weight 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 2004 National Postsecondary Student 

Aid Study (NPSAS:04). 
J-1 

Appendix J 

GEM Adjustment Procedure 

Appendix J. GEM Adjustment Procedure 

J-3 

Weight adjustments are obtained using a generalized exponential model (GEM) with 

weight adjustment at adjustment step j for individual i having the following form: 

( ) ( ) ( ) ( )

( )( ) ( )

exp '

exp '

ji ji ji ji ji ji ji ji j

ji j

ji ji ji ji ji ji j

l u c u c l Ax

u c c l Ax

λ

α λ

λ

−+ − = −+−

where the , ji ji l u are lower and upper bounds on α ji , the ji c are pre-specified centering constants 

such that , ji ji ji lcu < < ji x is a covariate vector, and , Aji ji ji ji ji ji ji =− − − uluccl /( )( ) is a scale 

factor.1

 The p-dimensional parameter vector λ j is estimated by solving 

( ) 0 ji ji ji j x

i A

xw T α λ ∈

∑ − =

where T x is a control total vector and A is the set of individuals whose weights are being 

adjusted. 

To fit a GEM, at adjustment step j, individuals are first stratified and then grouped 

according to extreme weights within strata: low-extreme (weight = median -3 times the 

interquartile range), normal, or high-extreme (weight = median +3 times the interquartile range) 

weights. Depending on the strata and extreme weight group they are in, each individual is then 

assigned a bounds adjustment multiple (see below for details). Furthermore, across all strata, 

each extreme weight group is given group-specific bounds. Each individual’s final adjustment 

bounds for model fitting is obtained by multiplying their individual adjustment multiple by the 

group-specific bounds. The GEM can then be fit with individual weight adjustments constrained 

to lie within the obtained bounds. 

The GEM procedure used for institution and student weight adjustments was similar, 

with the exception that extreme weight adjustments were not done for the institution weights. 

The institution weights are incorporated into the student weights (see section 6.2.1), so the 

extreme weight adjustments were done only at the student level. The summary of the institution 

GEM adjustment factors is in section 6.1.3. The details of the student GEM adjustments are 

below. 

The first step in finding individual bounds was to stratify individuals by the 375-level 

cross of the 58-level institutional strata and eight student sampling strata.2

 These strata were used 

in the sampling design, as outlined in section 2.1.1, and so should group similar weights together. 

For each stratum, individuals were then further partitioned into extreme weight groups: 

low-extreme, normal, and high-extreme. This partitioning was accomplished using a standard 

nonparametric approach to outlier detection based on the interquartile range. Within stratum k for 

k=1,...,375, the interquartile range, IQRk is as follows: 

 

1 To see the relationship to a logit model, let the lower bound lji equal 1, the centering constant cji equal 2, and let the 

upper bound uji go to infinity. In the limit there is aji =1+exp(xji ́λj), a logit model in which aji is the reciprocal of a 

response probability. 

2 Not all 58 institutional strata contained students in all 8 student strata. For example, less-than-2-year and 2-year 

institutions had no graduate/first-professional students. 
Appendix J. GEM Adjustment Procedure 

J-4 

,75 ,25 ˆ ˆ jk jk jk IQR P P = − , 

the difference of the estimated 75th and 25th percentiles (the third and first quartiles). Using 

,50 ˆ

Pjk , the estimated stratum k sample median, outlier bounds 1 2 , jk jk b b were computed where 

1 ,50

2 ,50

ˆ 3

ˆ 3

jk jk jk

jk jk jk

b P IQR

b P IQR

= −

= +

and the weights in stratum k could then be grouped: wji is considered low-extreme if w b ji jk < 1 , 

wji is considered high-extreme if w b ji jk > 2 , and wji is considered normal otherwise. The 

individual i bounds adjustment multiple, mji , is then obtained as follows: 

1

2

if is low-extreme

=1 if is normal

if is high-extreme

jk

ji ji

ji

ji

jk

ji

ji

b

m w

w

w

b

w

w

=

=

and so 1 mji > for low-extreme weights and 1 mji < for high-extreme weights. This has the 

desirable effect of increasing the lower bound for low-extreme weights and decreasing the upper 

bound for high-extreme weights. 

To obtain the extreme weight group bounds, let g give the grouping, with g=1 being lowextreme, g=2 being normal, and g=3 being high-extreme. The group bounds are then a lower 

bound *

jg l , and an upper bound *jg u and also a centering constant *j c . To reduce the total number 

of bounds in the model and to simplify the fitting process, * *

j j 2 3 l l = , and * *j j 1 2 u u = was always 

constrained. Extreme weight group bounds were then further constrained for nonresponse 

adjustment. 

The additional constraints on the extreme weight group bounds for nonresponse 

adjustment are that ** *

123 1 jj j lll === because individual weight adjustments were restricted to be 

greater than 1. This is desirable as nonresponse adjustments represent the inverse of response 

probabilities. The centering constant *

j c is then set equal to the reciprocal of the estimated 

weighted response rate. 

The extreme weight group bounds were not implemented for poststratification due to 

model convergence problems. For poststratification, the low-extreme and high-extreme bounds 

were set equal to the normal bounds, and the centering constant was 1, i.e., *

4 c =1. 

Subject to all of the above constraints, the extreme weight group bounds used in adjusting 

the initial weights are provided in table J-1. All further specifications of these bounds were made 

to ensure model convergence. 
Appendix J. GEM Adjustment Procedure 

J-5 

Table J-1. Bounds and centering constants for group weight adjustments for each GEM 

adjustment step: 2004 

Lower bounds Upper bounds 

Adjustment step 

Low 

extreme Normal 

High 

extreme 

Centering 

constant 

Low 

extreme Normal 

High 

extreme 

Location adjustment 1.0 1.0 # 1.0 8.3 8.3 3.9 

Refusal adjustment 1.0 1.0 # 1.0 1.4 1.4 1.4 

Other nonresponse adjustment 1.0 1.0 # 1.0 1.5 1.5 1.3 

Poststratification adjustment 0.5 0.5 0.5 1.0 26.8 26.8 26.8 

# Rounds to zero. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 2004 National Postsecondary 

Student Aid Study (NPSAS:04). 

Once the group bounds had been determined, individual weight adjustment bounds were 

found by multiplying the individual bounds adjustment multiples by the appropriate group 

specific bounds: 

*

*

*

ji jg ji

ji j ji

ji jg ji

l lm

c cm

u um

=

=

=

where g is determined by the group to which wji belongs. 

GEM adjustment for nonresponse and poststratification also differs by choice of covariate 

vector ji x , and the composition of control total vector Tx . 

For nonresponse adjustment, the components of ji x are the predictors of nonresponse. 

Vector Tx is in this case the full sample (respondents and nonrespondents) weight totals for the 

levels of the predictors in ji x . Solution of equation (1) is then equivalent to finding the λ j for 

which ( ) x

i A

∑x jiwji ji j = T ∈

α λ where A is the set of all respondents. That is, the lambda is found 

such that its associated adjustments have the property that sums of adjusted weights for 

respondents equal sums of the current weights over the entire sample. Since nonrespondents have 

adjusted weights set equal to zero, it is then also true that over all sampled individuals, sums of 

adjusted weights equal those of current weights. 

For poststratification adjustment, the components of ji x are the levels of the selected 

variables for which population level control totals are available (see section 6.2.3). In this case, 

vector Tx contains these control totals. The resulting weights have been adjusted to preserve the 

totals. 
Appendix J. GEM Adjustment Procedure 

J-6 
K-1 

Appendix K 

Nonresponse Bias Analysis 

Institution Nonresponse Bias Analysis .....................................................................................................K-3 

Student Nonresponse Bias Analysis .......................................................................................................K-69 

Item-Level Nonresponse Bias Analysis..................................................................................................K-85 

K-3 

Institution Nonresponse Bias Analysis 

K-5 

Table K–1. Institution nonresponse bias before nonresponse adjustment and after weight adjustments for selecte

institutions: 2004 

Before nonresponse adjustment After nonres

Variable

Unweighted 

respondents 

Unweighted 

nonrespondents 

Respondent 

mean 

weighted 

Nonrespondent 

mean 

weighted 

Estimated 

bias 

Relative 

bias

Overall 

mean, 

before 

adjustments 

O

mean

adjustm

Institution strata  Public less-than-2-year 50 20 4.49 6.01 -0.29 -0.06 4.82 

 Public 2-year 320 60 16.92 18.00 -0.21 -0.01 17.15 

 Public 4-year, non-doctorategranting 110 20 6.02 8.80 -0.53 -0.08 6.61 

 Public 4-year, doctorate-granting 200 30 4.57 2.34 0.431 0.10 4.09  Private not-for-profit, less-than-4 

year 

70 10 5.66 1.05 0.891 0.19 4.67 

 Private not-for-profit, 4-year, nondoctorate-granting 220 50 16.92 14.42 0.48 0.03 16.38 

 Private not-for-profit, 4-year, 

doctorate-granting 

170 50 7.26 8.20 -0.18 -0.02 7.47 

 Private for-profit, less-than-2-year 140 30 20.72 27.33 -1.27 -0.06 22.14 

 Private for-profit, 2-year or more 90 20 17.44 13.86 0.69 0.04 16.67 Carnegie classification code 

 Doctorate-granting/research 

universities—extensive 

130 20 2.58 1.52 0.20 0.09 2.35 

 Doctorate-granting/research 

universities—intensive 

90 10 1.86 0.94 0.18 0.10 1.66 

 Master’s colleges and universities I 180 30 7.73 7.75 # # 7.73  Master’s (comprehensive) 

colleges and universities II 

20 10 1.38 1.41 -0.01 # 1.38 

 Baccalaureate colleges—liberal 

arts 

50 10 2.83 3.13 -0.06 -0.02 2.90 

 Baccalaureate colleges—general 80 20 6.05 9.44 -0.65 -0.10 6.78 

 Baccalaureate/associate’s 

colleges 

10 # 1.30 0.77 0.10 0.08 1.19 

 Associate’s colleges 340 60 23.50 24.18 -0.13 -0.01 23.64 

 Theological seminaries and other 

specialized faith-related institutions 

30 10 6.15 1.36 0.92 0.18 5.12 

 Medical schools and medical 

centers 

30 10 0.65 0.87 -0.04 -0.06 0.70 

 Other separate health profession 

schools 

10 # 0.90 0.37 0.10 0.13 0.78 

 Schools of engineering and 

technology 

10 # 1.44 0.34 0.21 0.17 1.21 

See notes at end of table. 
K-6 

Table K–1. Institution nonresponse bias before nonresponse adjustment and after weight adjustments for selecte

institutions: 2004—Continued 

Before nonresponse adjustment After nonres

Variable

Unweighted 

respondents 

Unweighted 

nonrespondents 

Respondent 

mean 

weighted 

Nonrespondent 

mean 

weighted 

Estimated 

bias 

Relative 

bias

Overall 

mean, 

before 

adjustments 

O

mean

adjustm

 Schools of business and 

management 

10 # 0.42 0.43 # # 0.42 

 Schools of art, music, and design 20 10 0.82 2.35 -0.29 -0.26 1.15 

 Schools of law # # 0.10 0.58 -0.09 -0.47 0.21  Teachers colleges # # 0.10 # # # 0.08  Other specialized institutions 10 # 1.35 0.83 0.10 0.08 1.24  Tribal colleges and universities # # 0.23 # # # 0.18  Unavailable or unknown 330 70 40.60 43.75 -0.60 -0.01 41.28 

Degree of urbanization 

 Large city 350 80 22.51 22.97 -0.09 # 22.61 

 Mid-size city 360 60 22.17 25.92 -0.72 -0.03 22.98  Urban fringe of large city 250 60 20.08 14.26 1.12 0.06 18.83  Urban fringe of mid-size city 80 20 6.48 5.46 0.20 0.03 6.26 

 Large town 50 # 2.14 1.66 0.09 0.04 2.03  Small town 170 30 13.28 9.37 0.75 0.06 12.44 

 Rural 40 # 3.64 0.40 0.621 0.21 2.94 

 Not assigned 30 # 2.20 0.73 0.28 0.15 1.88  Unavailable or unknown 50 10 7.52 19.23 -2.25 -0.23 10.04 

Bureau of Economic Analysis Code 

(Office of Business Economics [OBE]) Region2

 New England 90 20 6.18 13.12 -1.33 -0.18 7.68 

 Mid East 200 60 14.44 14.79 -0.07 # 14.52 

 Great Lakes 210 40 17.48 8.02 1.82 0.12 15.44  Plains 140 20 9.17 3.68 1.06 0.13 7.99 

 Southeast 320 50 23.63 28.43 -0.92 -0.04 24.66 

 Southwest 130 30 8.30 6.86 0.28 0.03 7.99 

 Rocky Mountains 40 10 3.20 5.06 -0.36 -0.10 3.60  Far West 200 60 15.66 19.95 -0.82 -0.05 16.58 

 Outlying areas 30 # 1.93 0.09 0.351 0.22 1.54 

Historically Black college or 

university 

 Yes 30 10 2.00 1.77 0.05 0.02 1.95 

 No 1,340 260 98.00 98.23 -0.05 # 98.05 

See notes at end of table. 
K-7 

Table K–1. Institution nonresponse bias before nonresponse adjustment and after weight adjustments for selecte

institutions: 2004—Continued 

Before nonresponse adjustment After nonres

Variable

Unweighted 

respondents 

Unweighted 

nonrespondents 

Respondent 

mean 

weighted 

Nonrespondent 

mean 

weighted 

Estimated 

bias 

Relative 

bias

Overall 

mean, 

before 

adjustments 

O

mean

adjustm

Percent receiving federal grant aid  <=25 400 80 18.56 15.10 0.66 0.04 17.82 

 >25, <=50 490 100 34.15 38.07 -0.75 -0.02 34.99  >50, <=75 230 40 22.73 15.90 1.31 0.06 21.26  >75 120 20 15.74 16.62 -0.17 -0.01 15.93  Unavailable or unknown 120 40 8.82 14.31 -1.06 -0.11 10.00 Percent receiving state/local grant 

aid 

 <=25 620 110 56.09 52.95 0.60 0.01 55.42 

 >25, <=50 360 80 21.46 22.92 -0.28 -0.01 21.78  >50, <=75 180 30 10.01 6.18 0.74 0.08 9.18 

 >75 90 10 3.62 3.64 # # 3.62  Unavailable or unknown 120 40 8.82 14.31 -1.06 -0.11 10.00 

Percent receiving institutional grant 

aid 

 <=25 710 120 60.76 53.22 1.45 0.02 59.14 

 >25, <=50 210 40 10.58 12.29 -0.33 -0.03 10.95  >50, <=75 130 40 6.79 11.12 -0.83 -0.11 7.72 

 >75 200 40 13.05 9.06 0.77 0.06 12.19 

 Unavailable or unknown 120 40 8.82 14.31 -1.06 -0.11 10.00 Percent receiving student loan aid 

 <=25 430 70 29.32 30.31 -0.19 -0.01 29.53 

 >25, <=50 330 60 14.96 13.23 0.33 0.02 14.59  >50, <=75 320 70 27.49 27.11 0.07 # 27.41  >75 180 30 19.41 15.04 0.84 0.05 18.47  Unavailable or unknown 120 40 8.82 14.31 -1.06 -0.11 10.00 Percent enrolled: Black, nonHispanic 

 <=25 1,140 220 81.09 68.87 2.35 0.03 78.46 

 >25, <=50 130 20 9.54 10.71 -0.23 -0.02 9.79 

 >50, <=75 30 10 3.11 8.23 -0.98 -0.24 4.21  >75 50 # 4.50 1.62 0.55 0.14 3.88  Unavailable or unknown 20 20 1.76 10.57 -1.69 -0.49 3.66 

See notes at end of table. 
K-8 

Table K–1. Institution nonresponse bias before nonresponse adjustment and after weight adjustments for selecte

institutions: 2004—Continued 

Before nonresponse adjustment After nonres

Variable

Unweighted 

respondents 

Unweighted 

nonrespondents 

Respondent 

mean 

weighted 

Nonrespondent 

mean 

weighted 

Estimated 

bias 

Relative 

bias

Overall 

mean, 

before 

adjustments 

O

mean

adjustm

Percent enrolled: Asian or Pacific 

Islander 

 <=25 1,310 250 96.23 88.53 1.48 0.02 94.57 

 >25, <=50 20 10 1.82 0.51 0.25 0.16 1.53 

 >50, <=75 # # 0.15 # # # 0.11  >75 # # 0.05 0.40 -0.07 -0.58 0.12  Unavailable or unknown 20 20 1.76 10.57 -1.69 -0.49 3.66 Percent enrolled: Hispanic 

 <=25 1,170 220 85.27 71.82 2.58 0.03 82.37 

 >25, <=50 100 20 7.92 10.63 -0.52 -0.06 8.51 

 >50, <=75 30 # 2.07 1.20 0.17 0.09 1.89  >75 40 10 2.97 5.78 -0.54 -0.15 3.58  Unavailable or unknown 20 20 1.76 10.57 -1.69 -0.49 3.66 Total undergraduate enrollment3

 <= 825.5 330 70 50.22 43.68 1.26 0.03 48.81 

 >825.5, <=2,938 330 70 22.80 24.98 -0.42 -0.02 23.27  >2,938, <=9,799.5 340 60 15.24 12.76 0.48 0.03 14.70  >9,799.5 340 60 10.28 8.15 0.41 0.04 9.82 

 Unavailable or unknown 20 20 1.47 10.43 -1.72 -0.54 3.39 Total male undergraduate 

enrollment3

 <=281 330 70 49.43 41.46 1.53 0.03 47.71 

 >281, <=1,251 330 70 24.52 28.84 -0.83 -0.03 25.45  >1,251, <=4,208.5 340 60 14.27 11.61 0.51 0.04 13.70  >4,208.5 340 60 10.31 7.67 0.51 0.05 9.74 

 Unavailable or unknown 20 20 1.47 10.43 -1.72 -0.54 3.39 Total female undergraduate 

enrollment3

 <=472.5 330 70 51.49 43.97 1.44 0.03 49.87 

 >472.5, <=1,645 330 70 20.93 24.05 -0.60 -0.03 21.60  >1,645, <=5,422.5 350 50 15.40 13.13 0.44 0.03 14.91  >5,422.5 340 60 10.72 8.42 0.44 0.04 10.22  Unavailable or unknown 20 20 1.47 10.43 -1.72 -0.54 3.39 

See notes at end of table. 
K-9 

Table K–1. Institution nonresponse bias before nonresponse adjustment and after weight adjustments for select

institutions: 2004—Continued 

Before nonresponse adjustment After nonres

Variable

Unweighted 

respondents 

Unweighted 

nonrespondents 

Respondent 

mean 

weighted 

Nonrespondent 

mean 

weighted 

Estimated 

bias 

Relative 

bias

Overall 

mean, 

before 

adjustments 

O

mean

adjustm

Total graduate/first-professional 

enrollment4

 <= 1,820.5 320 90 21.49 29.67 -1.57 -0.07 23.25 

 > 1,820.5 320 60 8.68 5.10 0.691 0.09 7.91 

 Total enrollment = 0 730 130 69.83 65.22 0.89 0.01 68.84 

Total male graduate/firstprofessional enrollment4

 <= 727 330 80 22.16 29.29 -1.37 -0.06 23.69 

 > 727 310 60 7.95 5.49 0.47 0.06 7.42 

 Total enrollment = 0 730 130 69.89 65.22 0.90 0.01 68.89 

Total female graduate/firstprofessional enrollment4

 <= 1,073.5 320 90 21.36 29.53 -1.57 -0.07 23.12 

 > 1,073.5 320 60 8.78 5.24 0.681 0.08 8.02 

 Total enrollment = 0 730 130 69.85 65.22 0.89 0.01 68.86 

† Not applicable. # Rounds to zero. 1 Bias is significant at the 0.05/(c-1) level, where c is the number of categories within the primary variable. 2 New England = Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Rhode Island, Vermont; Mid East = Delaware, District of Columbia, Maryland, New 

Pennsylvania; Great Lakes = Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Ohio, Wisconsin; Plains = Iowa, Kansas, Minnesota, Missouri, Nebraska, North Dakota, South DaSoutheast = Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, North Carolina, South Carolina, Tennessee, Virginia, West Virginia; Mexico, Oklahoma, Texas; Rocky Mountains = Colorado, Idaho, Montana, Utah, Wyoming; Far West = Alaska, California, Hawaii, Nevada, Oregon, WashOutlying Areas = American Samoa, Federated States of Micronesia, Guam, Marshall Islands, Northern Mariana Islands, Puerto Rico, Palau, Virgin Island

3 Undergraduate enrollment categories were defined by quartiles. 4 Graduate/first-professional enrollment categories were defined by the median. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 2004 National Postsecondary Student Aid Study (NPSAS:04). 
K-10 

Table K–2. Institution nonresponse bias before nonresponse adjustment and after weight adjustments for select

less-than-2-year institutions: 2004 

Before nonresponse adjustment After nonre

Variable 

Unweighted 

respondents 

Unweighted 

nonrespondents 

Respondent 

mean 

weighted 

Nonrespondent 

mean 

weighted 

Estimated 

bias 

Relative 

bias

Overall 

mean, 

before 

adjustments 

O

mean

adjustm

Carnegie classification code 

Doctorate-granting/research 

universities—extensive 

† † † † † † † 

Doctorate-granting/research 

universities—intensive 

† † † † † † † 

Master’s colleges and 

universities I 

† † † † † † † 

Master’s (comprehensive) 

colleges and universities II 

† † † † † † † 

Baccalaureate colleges—liberal 

arts 

† † † † † † † 

Baccalaureate colleges—general † † † † † † † Baccalaureate/associate’s 

colleges 

† † † † † † † 

Associate’s colleges † † † † † † † Theological seminaries and 

other specialized faith-related institutions 

† † † † † † † 

Medical schools and medical 

centers 

† † † † † † † 

Other separate health profession 

schools 

† † † † † † † 

Schools of engineering and 

technology 

† † † † † † † 

Schools of business and 

management 

† † † † † † † 

Schools of art, music, and 

design 

† † † † † † † 

Schools of law † † † † † † † Teachers colleges † † † † † † † Other specialized institutions † † † † † † † Tribal colleges and universities † † † † † † † Unavailable or unknown 50 20 100.00 100.00 # # 100.00 1

Degree of urbanization 

Large city # # 2.79 2.99 -0.05 -0.02 2.84 

Mid-size city 10 # 4.53 5.71 -0.29 -0.06 4.85 Urban fringe of large city 10 # 31.78 23.52 2.01 0.07 29.57 

Urban fringe of mid-size city 10 # 14.71 1.33 3.25 0.28 11.12 

See notes at end of table. 
K-11 

Table K–2. Institution nonresponse bias before nonresponse adjustment and after weight adjustments for select

less-than-2-year institutions: 2004—Continued 

Before nonresponse adjustment After nonre

Variable 

Unweighted 

respondents 

Unweighted 

nonrespondents 

Respondent 

mean 

weighted 

Nonrespondent 

mean 

weighted 

Estimated 

bias 

Relative 

bias

Overall 

mean, 

before 

adjustments 

O

mean

adjustm

Large town # # 6.18 # # # 4.52 Small town 10 # 23.76 6.42 4.22 0.22 19.11 

Rural # # 6.25 # # # 4.58 

Not assigned † † † † † † † 

Unavailable or unknown 10 # 10.00 60.02 -12.16 -0.55 23.41 

Bureau of Economic Analysis Code 

(Office of Business Economics [OBE]) Region1

New England # # # 60.02 -14.59 -1.00 16.09 

Mid East 10 # 21.39 20.04 0.33 0.02 21.03 Great Lakes 10 # 23.17 3.30 4.83 0.26 17.84 Plains # # 13.82 1.21 3.07 0.29 10.44 Southeast 10 # 22.91 6.55 3.98 0.21 18.52 Southwest # # 10.54 4.95 1.36 0.15 9.04 

Rocky Mountains 10 # 3.66 2.74 0.22 0.07 3.41 Far West 10 # 4.07 1.21 0.70 0.21 3.30 Outlying areas # # 0.44 # # # 0.32 

Historically Black college or 

university 

Yes † † † † † † † 

No 50 20 100.00 100.00 # # 100.00 1

Percent receiving federal grant aid 

<=25 # # 2.54 6.46 -0.95 -0.27 3.59 

>25, <=50 10 10 8.47 15.50 -1.71 -0.17 10.35 

>50, <=75 20 # 61.02 15.61 11.042 0.22 48.85 >75 10 # 17.52 # # # 12.83 Unavailable or unknown 10 # 10.44 62.43 -12.64 -0.55 24.38 

Percent receiving state/local grant 

aid 

<=25 30 10 45.84 33.06 3.11 0.07 42.41 

>25, <=50 10 # 33.98 1.21 7.972 0.31 25.19 >50, <=75 10 # 8.08 # # # 5.91 

>75 # # 1.67 3.30 -0.40 -0.19 2.11 Unavailable or unknown 10 # 10.44 62.43 -12.64 -0.55 24.38 

See notes at end of table. 
K-12 

Table K–2. Institution nonresponse bias before nonresponse adjustment and after weight adjustments for select

less-than-2-year institutions: 2004—Continued 

Before nonresponse adjustment After nonre

Variable 

Unweighted 

respondents 

Unweighted 

nonrespondents 

Respondent 

mean 

weighted 

Nonrespondent 

mean 

weighted 

Estimated 

bias 

Relative 

bias

Overall 

mean, 

before 

adjustments 

O

mean

adjustm

Percent receiving institutional grant 

aid 

<=25 40 10 89.12 35.78 12.97 0.17 74.82 

>25, <=50 # # # 1.79 -0.43 -1.00 0.48 

>50, <=75 # # 0.44 # # # 0.32 >75 † † † † † † † 

Unavailable or unknown 10 # 10.44 62.43 -12.64 -0.55 24.38 

Percent receiving student loan aid 

<=25 30 10 46.95 16.95 7.29 0.18 38.91 

>25, <=50 10 # 6.37 # # # 4.66 

>50, <=75 # # 13.80 18.83 -1.22 -0.08 15.15 

>75 # # 22.44 1.79 5.02 0.29 16.90 Unavailable or unknown 10 # 10.44 62.43 -12.64 -0.55 24.38 

Percent enrolled: Black, nonHispanic 

<=25 40 10 81.32 9.18 17.542 0.27 61.98 

>25, <=50 # 10 9.56 16.06 -1.58 -0.14 11.30 >50, <=75 # # # 12.33 -3.00 -1.00 3.31 

>75 † † † † † † † 

Unavailable or unknown # # 9.12 62.43 -12.96 -0.59 23.41 

Percent enrolled: Asian or Pacific 

Islander 

<=25 50 10 90.88 37.57 12.96 0.17 76.59 

>25, <=50 † † † † † † † 

>50, <=75 † † † † † † † >75 † † † † † † † Unavailable or unknown # # 9.12 62.43 -12.96 -0.59 23.41 

Percent enrolled: Hispanic 

<=25 40 10 88.23 37.57 12.32 0.16 74.65 

>25, <=50 # # 1.77 # # # 1.29 

>50, <=75 # # 0.88 # # # 0.65 >75 † † † † † † † 

Unavailable or unknown # # 9.12 62.43 -12.96 -0.59 23.41 

See notes at end of table. 
K-13 

Table K–2. Institution nonresponse bias before nonresponse adjustment and after weight adjustments for selecte

less-than-2-year institutions: 2004—Continued 

Before nonresponse adjustment After nonre

Variable 

Unweighted 

respondents 

Unweighted 

nonrespondents 

Respondent 

mean 

weighted 

Nonrespondent 

mean 

weighted 

Estimated 

bias 

Relative 

bias

Overall 

mean, 

before 

adjustments 

O

mean

adjustm

Total undergraduate enrollment3

<=206 10 # 54.94 21.99 8.01 0.17 46.11 

>206, <=798 10 # 21.19 3.72 4.25 0.25 16.51 >798, <=2,099 10 # 8.86 7.65 0.29 0.03 8.54 

>2099 10 # 5.89 4.20 0.41 0.08 5.44 Unavailable or unknown # # 9.12 62.43 -12.96 -0.59 23.41 

Total male undergraduate 

enrollment3

<=87 10 # 50.48 25.72 6.02 0.14 43.84 

>87, <=309 10 # 23.43 # #2 # 17.15 >309, <=1,015 10 # 11.52 6.16 1.30 0.13 10.08 >1,015 10 # 5.45 5.69 -0.06 -0.01 5.52 

Unavailable or unknown # # 9.12 62.43 -12.96 -0.59 23.41 

Total female undergraduate 

enrollment3

<=119 10 # 54.51 21.99 7.91 0.17 45.79 

>119, <=342 10 # 21.78 3.72 4.39 0.25 16.94 >342, <=927 10 10 8.26 9.44 -0.29 -0.03 8.58 

>927 10 # 6.33 2.41 0.95 0.18 5.28 Unavailable or unknown # # 9.12 62.43 -12.96 -0.59 23.41 

† Not applicable. # Rounds to zero. 1 New England = Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Rhode Island, Vermont; Mid East = Delaware, District of Columbia, Maryland, New 

Pennsylvania; Great Lakes = Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Ohio, Wisconsin; Plains = Iowa, Kansas, Minnesota, Missouri, Nebraska, North Dakota, South D

Southeast = Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, North Carolina, South Carolina, Tennessee, Virginia, West Virginia; Mexico, Oklahoma, Texas; Rocky Mountains = Colorado, Idaho, Montana, Utah, Wyoming; Far West = Alaska, California, Hawaii, Nevada, Oregon, WashOutlying Areas = American Samoa, Federated States of Micronesia, Guam, Marshall Islands, Northern Mariana Islands, Puerto Rico, Palau, Virgin Island

2 Bias is significant at the 0.05/(c-1) level, where c is the number of categories within the primary variable. 3 Undergraduate enrollment categories were defined by quartiles. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 2004 National Postsecondary Student Aid Study (NPSAS:04). 
K-14 

Table K–3. Institution nonresponse bias before nonresponse adjustment and after weight adjustments for select

2-year institutions: 2004 

Before nonresponse adjustment After nonre

Variable 

Unweighted 

respondents

Unweighted 

nonrespondents

Respondent 

mean 

weighted

Nonrespondent 

mean 

weighted

Estimated 

bias 

Relative 

bias

Overall 

mean, 

before 

adjustments

O

mean

adjustm

Carnegie classification code 

Doctorate-granting/research 

universities—extensive 

† † † † † † † 

Doctorate-granting/research 

universities—intensive 

† † † † † † † 

Master’s colleges and 

universities I 

† † † † † † † 

Master’s (comprehensive) 

colleges and universities II 

† † † † † † † 

Baccalaureate colleges—liberal 

arts 

† † † † † † † 

Baccalaureate colleges—general † † † † † † † Baccalaureate/associate’s 

colleges 

† † † † † † † 

Associate’s colleges 260 40 84.54 94.02 -2.21 -0.03 86.68 Theological seminaries and other 

specialized faith-related institutions 

† † † † † † † 

Medical schools and medical 

centers 

† † † † † † † 

Other separate health profession 

schools 

† † † † † † † 

Schools of engineering and 

technology 

† † † † † † † 

Schools of business and 

management 

† † † † † † † 

Schools of art, music, and design † † † † † † † Schools of law † † † † † † † Teachers colleges † † † † † † † Other specialized institutions † † † † † † † Tribal colleges and universities # # 0.28 # # # 0.21 Unavailable or unknown 60 10 15.18 5.98 2.14 0.16 13.11 

Degree of urbanization 

Large city 50 10 12.27 6.75 1.28 0.12 11.02 Mid-size city 90 10 25.91 32.17 -1.46 -0.05 27.32 Urban fringe of large city 70 20 18.16 20.99 -0.66 -0.03 18.80 

See notes at end of table. 
K-15 

Table K–3. Institution nonresponse bias before nonresponse adjustment and after weight adjustments for select

2-year institutions: 2004—Continued 

Before nonresponse adjustment After nonres

Variable 

Unweighted 

respondents

Unweighted 

nonrespondents

Respondent 

mean 

weighted

Nonrespondent 

mean 

weighted

Estimated 

bias 

Relative 

bias

Overall 

mean, 

before 

adjustments

O

mean

adjustm

Urban fringe of mid-size city 20 # 4.12 1.31 0.65 0.19 3.48 Large town 10 # 2.49 8.83 -1.48 -0.37 3.92 Small town 70 10 25.07 26.82 -0.41 -0.02 25.46 Rural 20 # 6.93 1.41 1.29 0.23 5.69 Not assigned 10 # 1.40 0.51 0.21 0.17 1.20 Unavailable or unknown 10 # 3.65 1.21 0.57 0.18 3.10 

Bureau of Economic Analysis Code 

(Office of Business Economics [OBE]) Region1

New England 20 # 4.33 3.93 0.09 0.02 4.24 Mid East 40 10 8.86 10.22 -0.32 -0.03 9.17 Great Lakes 60 # 16.10 3.25 2.992 0.23 13.20 

Plains 40 10 12.38 5.66 1.57 0.14 10.87 Southeast 90 10 31.45 27.92 0.82 0.03 30.65 Southwest 40 # 12.01 1.99 2.332 0.24 9.75 Rocky Mountains # # 2.01 21.50 -4.54 -0.69 6.41 Far West 40 20 12.41 25.01 -2.93 -0.19 15.25 Outlying areas # # 0.45 0.51 -0.02 -0.03 0.46 

Historically Black college or 

university 

Yes # # 2.85 # # # 2.21 No 320 60 97.15 100.00 -0.66 -0.01 97.79 

Percent receiving federal grant aid 

<=25 80 10 22.83 19.47 0.78 0.04 22.07 >25, <=50 170 30 48.43 49.00 -0.13 # 48.56 >50, <=75 60 10 20.98 23.03 -0.48 -0.02 21.44 >75 10 # 3.95 7.30 -0.78 -0.16 4.71 Unavailable or unknown 10 # 3.81 1.21 0.61 0.19 3.22 

Percent receiving state/local grant 

aid 

<=25 150 30 48.11 49.92 -0.42 -0.01 48.52 >25, <=50 90 20 30.54 45.02 -3.37 -0.10 33.80 >50, <=75 50 10 11.16 3.45 1.792 0.19 9.42 

>75 30 # 6.38 0.40 1.392 0.28 5.03 Unavailable or unknown 10 # 3.81 1.21 0.61 0.19 3.22 

See notes at end of table. 
K-16 

Table K–3. Institution nonresponse bias before nonresponse adjustment and after weight adjustments for select

2-year institutions: 2004—Continued 

Before nonresponse adjustment After nonres

Variable 

Unweighted 

respondents 

Unweighted 

nonrespondents 

Respondent 

mean 

weighted 

Nonrespondent 

mean 

weighted 

Estimated 

bias 

Relative 

bias

Overall 

mean, 

before 

adjustments 

Ov

mean, 

adjustm

Percent receiving institutional grant 

aid 

<=25 280 50 75.29 81.95 -1.55 -0.02 76.79 7>25, <=50 30 # 15.03 0.40 3.412 0.29 11.73 1

>50, <=75 # # 4.86 16.44 -2.69 -0.36 7.48 >75 # # 1.00 # # # 0.78 Unavailable or unknown 10 # 3.81 1.21 0.61 0.19 3.22 

Percent receiving student loan aid 

<=25 250 40 74.81 74.88 -0.02 # 74.83 6>25, <=50 60 10 14.59 22.30 -1.80 -0.11 16.33 1>50, <=75 10 # 6.56 1.61 1.15 0.21 5.44 >75 # # 0.23 # # # 0.18 Unavailable or unknown 10 # 3.81 1.21 0.61 0.19 3.22 

Percent enrolled: Black, nonHispanic 

<=25 260 50 81.41 73.08 1.94 0.02 79.53 8>25, <=50 40 10 12.00 17.40 -1.26 -0.09 13.22 1>50, <=75 10 # 3.88 8.30 -1.03 -0.21 4.88 >75 # # 2.23 # # # 1.73 Unavailable or unknown # # 0.47 1.21 -0.17 -0.27 0.64 

Percent enrolled: Asian or Pacific 

Islander 

<=25 310 50 97.86 95.79 0.48 # 97.39 9>25, <=50 10 # 1.25 0.81 0.10 0.09 1.15 >50, <=75 # # 0.42 # # # 0.33 >75 # # # 2.20 -0.51 -1.00 0.50 Unavailable or unknown # # 0.47 1.21 -0.17 -0.27 0.64 

Percent enrolled: Hispanic 

<=25 280 40 89.64 90.58 -0.22 # 89.85 9>25, <=50 30 10 8.12 5.42 0.63 0.08 7.51 >50, <=75 10 # 1.06 0.40 0.15 0.17 0.91 >75 10 # 0.71 2.39 -0.39 -0.36 1.09 Unavailable or unknown # # 0.47 1.21 -0.17 -0.27 0.64 

See notes at end of table. 
K-17 

Table K–3. Institution nonresponse bias before nonresponse adjustment and after weight adjustments for select

2-year institutions: 2004—Continued 

Before nonresponse adjustment After nonre

Variable 

Unweighted 

respondents

Unweighted 

nonrespondents

Respondent 

mean 

weighted

Nonrespondent 

mean 

weighted

Estimated 

bias 

Relative 

bias

Overall 

mean, 

before 

adjustments

O

mean

adjustm

Total undergraduate enrollment3

<=3,564 80 10 33.29 43.40 -2.35 -0.07 35.57 >3,564, <=7,738 80 10 26.51 20.92 1.30 0.05 25.24 >7,738, <=16,918 80 10 25.52 17.79 1.80 0.08 23.78 >16,918 70 20 14.21 16.69 -0.58 -0.04 14.77 Unavailable or unknown # # 0.47 1.21 -0.17 -0.27 0.64 

Total male undergraduate 

enrollment3

<=1,355 80 10 36.08 44.31 -1.91 -0.05 37.94 >1,355, <=3,237 90 10 25.28 19.61 1.32 0.06 24.00 >3,237, <=7,322 80 10 24.40 19.72 1.09 0.05 23.35 >7,322 70 20 13.76 15.16 -0.33 -0.02 14.08 Unavailable or unknown # # 0.47 1.21 -0.17 -0.27 0.64 

Total female undergraduate 

enrollment3

<=2,204 80 10 31.61 36.50 -1.14 -0.03 32.71 >2,204, <=4,521 90 10 28.35 19.92 1.96 0.07 26.45 >4,521, <=9,679 80 10 26.04 25.68 0.08 # 25.96 >9,679 70 20 13.53 16.69 -0.74 -0.05 14.24 Unavailable or unknown # # 0.47 1.21 -0.17 -0.27 0.64 

† Not applicable. # Rounds to zero. 1 New England = Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Rhode Island, Vermont; Mid East = Delaware, District of Columbia, Maryland, New 

Pennsylvania; Great Lakes = Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Ohio, Wisconsin; Plains = Iowa, Kansas, Minnesota, Missouri, Nebraska, North Dakota, South D

Southeast = Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, North Carolina, South Carolina, Tennessee, Virginia, West Virginia; Mexico, Oklahoma, Texas; Rocky Mountains = Colorado, Idaho, Montana, Utah, Wyoming; Far West = Alaska, California, Hawaii, Nevada, Oregon, WashOutlying Areas = American Samoa, Federated States of Micronesia, Guam, Marshall Islands, Northern Mariana Islands, Puerto Rico, Palau, Virgin Island

2 Bias is significant at the 0.05/(c-1) level, where c is the number of categories within the primary variable. 3 Undergraduate enrollment categories were defined by quartiles. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 2004 National Postsecondary Student Aid Study (NPSAS:04). 
K-18 

Table K-4. Institution nonresponse bias before nonresponse adjustment and after weight adjustments for select

4-year non-doctorate-granting institutions: 2004 

Before nonresponse adjustment After nonre

Variable 

Unweighted 

respondents 

Unweighted 

nonrespondents 

Respondent 

mean 

weighted 

Nonrespondent 

mean 

weighted 

Estimated 

bias 

Relative 

bias

Overall 

mean, 

before 

adjustments 

O

mean

adjust

Carnegie classification code 

Doctorate-granting/research 

universities—extensive 

† † † † † † † 

Doctorate-granting/research 

universities—intensive 

† † † † † † † 

Master’s colleges and universities I 70 10 44.90 32.81 2.47 0.06 41.44 

Master’s (comprehensive) colleges 

and universities II 

10 # 4.20 7.59 -0.69 -0.14 5.17 

Baccalaureate colleges—liberal 

arts 

# # 2.69 0.82 0.38 0.17 2.16 

Baccalaureate colleges—general 10 # 19.48 50.75 -6.39 -0.25 28.42 

Baccalaureate/associate’s colleges 10 # 2.85 # # # 2.03 

Associate’s colleges # # 1.67 # # # 1.19 Theological seminaries and other 

specialized faith-related institutions 

† † † † † † † 

Medical schools and medical 

centers 

† † † † † † † 

Other separate health profession 

schools 

† † † † † † † 

Schools of engineering and 

technology 

# # 8.21 # # # 5.86 

Schools of business and 

management 

† † † † † † † 

Schools of art, music, and design † † † † † † † Schools of law † † † † † † † Teachers colleges † † † † † † † Other specialized institutions # # 14.68 0.82 2.83 0.24 10.72 

Tribal colleges and universities † † † † † † † 

Unavailable or unknown # # 1.32 7.20 -1.20 -0.48 3.00 

Degree of urbanization 

Large city 20 # 7.45 1.65 1.18 0.19 5.79 

Mid-size city 30 # 16.87 50.01 -6.77 -0.29 26.34 

Urban fringe of large city 20 # 10.59 8.02 0.52 0.05 9.85 

Urban fringe of mid-size city 10 # 9.62 3.19 1.31 0.16 7.78 Large town 10 # 12.08 # # # 8.63 Small town 30 10 36.25 35.48 0.16 # 36.03 

See notes at end of table. 
K-19 

Table K-4. Institution nonresponse bias before nonresponse adjustment and after weight adjustments for selecte

4-year non-doctorate-granting institutions: 2004—Continued 

Before nonresponse adjustment After nonre

Variable 

Unweighted 

respondents 

Unweighted 

nonrespondents 

Respondent 

mean 

weighted 

Nonrespondent 

mean 

weighted 

Estimated 

bias 

Relative 

bias

Overall 

mean, 

before 

adjustments 

O

mean

adjust

Rural # # 3.40 0.82 0.53 0.18 2.67 Not assigned # # 2.43 # # # 1.73 

Unavailable or unknown # # 1.32 0.82 0.10 0.08 1.18 

Bureau of Economic Analysis Code 

(Office of Business Economics [OBE]) Region1

New England 10 # 19.56 42.41 -4.67 -0.19 26.10 

Mid East 20 # 14.88 15.65 -0.16 -0.01 15.10 Great Lakes 20 # 6.87 7.73 -0.18 -0.02 7.12 

Plains 10 # 5.46 9.16 -0.75 -0.12 6.52 Southeast 30 # 24.85 3.99 4.26 0.21 18.88 

Southwest 10 # 4.54 14.47 -2.03 -0.31 7.38 

Rocky Mountains 10 # 14.07 # # # 10.05 

Far West 20 10 7.33 6.59 0.15 0.02 7.12 

Outlying areas # # 2.43 # # # 1.73 

Historically Black college or university 

Yes 10 # 8.61 # #2 # 6.15 

No 110 20 91.39 100.00 -1.762 -0.02 93.85 

Percent receiving federal grant aid 

<=25 30 10 39.31 16.00 4.76 0.14 32.64 

>25, <=50 60 10 42.09 67.16 -5.12 -0.11 49.26 >50, <=75 20 # 8.94 1.54 1.51 0.20 6.82 

>75 # # 6.16 14.47 -1.70 -0.22 8.54 Unavailable or unknown # # 3.50 0.82 0.55 0.19 2.74 

Percent receiving state/local grant aid 

<=25 20 10 25.47 70.86 -9.27 -0.27 38.45 

>25, <=50 50 10 53.16 23.45 6.07 0.13 44.67 >50, <=75 20 # 12.44 3.32 1.86 0.18 9.83 

>75 10 # 5.42 1.54 0.79 0.17 4.31 Unavailable or unknown # # 3.50 0.82 0.55 0.19 2.74 

Percent receiving institutional grant aid 

<=25 70 10 63.12 69.06 -1.21 -0.02 64.82 

>25, <=50 20 10 20.53 20.96 -0.09 # 20.66 

See notes at end of table. 
K-20 

Table K-4. Institution nonresponse bias before nonresponse adjustment and after weight adjustments for selecte

4-year non-doctorate-granting institutions: 2004—Continued 

Before nonresponse adjustment After nonre

Variable 

Unweighted 

respondents 

Unweighted 

nonrespondents 

Respondent 

mean 

weighted 

Nonrespondent 

mean 

weighted 

Estimated 

bias 

Relative 

bias

Overall 

mean, 

before 

adjustments 

O

mean

adjust

>50, <=75 10 # 12.85 9.16 0.75 0.06 11.79 >75 † † † † † † † 

Unavailable or unknown # # 3.50 0.82 0.55 0.19 2.74 

Percent receiving student loan aid 

<=25 30 # 14.23 14.79 -0.12 -0.01 14.39 

>25, <=50 50 10 43.26 20.82 4.58 0.12 36.84 >50, <=75 30 10 36.82 12.82 4.90 0.15 29.96 >75 # # 2.19 50.75 -9.92 -0.82 16.08 Unavailable or unknown # # 3.50 0.82 0.55 0.19 2.74 

Percent enrolled: Black, non-Hispanic 

<=25 100 20 88.56 53.59 7.14 0.09 78.56 

>25, <=50 10 # 3.83 3.99 -0.03 -0.01 3.88 

>50, <=75 † † † † † † † 

>75 10 # 7.61 # # # 5.43 

Unavailable or unknown # # # 42.41 -8.66 -1.00 12.13 

Percent enrolled: Asian or Pacific 

Islander 

<=25 110 20 97.96 55.94 8.59 0.10 85.95 

>25, <=50 # # 2.04 1.65 0.08 0.04 1.92 

>50, <=75 † † † † † † † 

>75 † † † † † † † Unavailable or unknown # # # 42.41 -8.66 -1.00 12.13 

Percent enrolled: Hispanic 

<=25 100 20 92.66 41.47 10.46 0.13 78.02 

>25, <=50 10 # 4.52 15.30 -2.20 -0.33 7.60 

>50, <=75 † † † † † † † 

>75 # # 2.82 0.82 0.41 0.17 2.25 

Unavailable or unknown # # # 42.41 -8.66 -1.00 12.13 

Total undergraduate enrollment3

<=3,892 30 10 49.62 26.10 4.80 0.11 42.90 

>3,892, <=6,690 30 # 22.19 19.91 0.47 0.02 21.54 >6,690, <=11,155 30 # 16.72 1.92 3.022 0.22 12.49 >11,155 30 10 11.47 9.65 0.37 0.03 10.95 Unavailable or unknown # # # 42.41 -8.66 -1.00 12.13 

See notes at end of table. 
K-21 

Table K-4. Institution nonresponse bias before nonresponse adjustment and after weight adjustments for selecte

4-year non-doctorate-granting institutions: 2004—Continued 

Before nonresponse adjustment After nonre

Variable 

Unweighted 

respondents 

Unweighted 

nonrespondents 

Respondent 

mean 

weighted 

Nonrespondent 

mean 

weighted 

Estimated 

bias 

Relative 

bias

Overall 

mean, 

before 

adjustments 

O

mean

adjust

Total male undergraduate enrollment3

<=1,505 30 10 53.23 26.10 5.54 0.12 45.47 

>1,505, <=2,664 30 # 18.19 15.65 0.52 0.03 17.46 >2,664, <=4,596 30 # 16.47 7.01 1.93 0.13 13.77 >4,596 30 10 12.10 8.83 0.67 0.06 11.17 Unavailable or unknown # # # 42.41 -8.66 -1.00 12.13 

Total female undergraduate 

enrollment3

<=2,317 30 10 43.21 39.25 0.81 0.02 42.08 

>2,317, <=4,181 30 # 29.47 6.76 4.64 0.19 22.98 >4,181, <=6,285 30 # 15.51 5.91 1.96 0.14 12.77 >6,285 30 10 11.80 5.66 1.25 0.12 10.05 Unavailable or unknown # # # 42.41 -8.66 -1.00 12.13 

Total graduate/first-professional 

enrollment4

<=1,384 50 10 39.90 87.60 -9.742 -0.20 53.54 

>1,384 50 10 25.68 11.58 2.88 0.13 21.64 

Total enrollment = 0 20 # 34.43 0.82 6.862 0.25 24.82 

Total male graduate/first-professional 

enrollment4

<=462 50 10 40.96 87.60 -9.532 -0.19 54.29 

>462 50 10 24.62 11.58 2.66 0.12 20.89 Total enrollment = 0 20 # 34.43 0.82 6.862 0.25 24.82 

Total female graduate/firstprofessional enrollment4

<=888 50 10 39.24 88.42 -10.052 -0.20 53.30 

>888 50 10 26.01 10.75 3.12 0.14 21.64 

Total enrollment = 0 20 # 34.76 0.82 6.932 0.25 25.05 

† Not applicable. # Rounds to zero. 1 New England = Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Rhode Island, Vermont; Mid East = Delaware, District of Columbia, Maryland, New 

Pennsylvania; Great Lakes = Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Ohio, Wisconsin; Plains = Iowa, Kansas, Minnesota, Missouri, Nebraska, North Dakota, South D

Southeast = Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, North Carolina, South Carolina, Tennessee, Virginia, West Virginia; Mexico, Oklahoma, Texas; Rocky Mountains = Colorado, Idaho, Montana, Utah, Wyoming; Far West = Alaska, California, Hawaii, Nevada, Oregon, WashOutlying Areas = American Samoa, Federated States of Micronesia, Guam, Marshall Islands, Northern Mariana Islands, Puerto Rico, Palau, Virgin Island

2 Bias is significant at the 0.05/(c-1) level, where c is the number of categories within the primary variable. 3 Undergraduate enrollment categories were defined by quartiles. 4 Graduate/first-professional enrollment categories were defined by the median. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 2004 National Postsecondary Student Aid Study (NPSAS:04). 
K-22 

Table K-5. Institution nonresponse bias before nonresponse adjustment and after weight adjustments for selecte

private not-for-profit 4-year non-doctorate-granting institutions: 2004 

Before nonresponse adjustment After nonre

Variable 

Unweighted 

respondents 

Unweighted 

nonrespondents 

Respondent 

mean 

weighted 

Nonrespondent 

mean 

weighted 

Estimated 

bias 

Relative 

bias

Overall 

mean, 

before 

adjustments 

Ov

mean, 

adjustm

Carnegie classification code 

Doctorate-granting/research 

universities—extensive 

† † † † † † † 

Doctorate-granting/research 

universities—intensive 

† † † † † † † 

Master’s colleges and universities I 40 10 13.72 18.23 -0.92 -0.06 14.57 1Master’s (comprehensive) colleges 

and universities II 

10 # 5.97 4.12 0.38 0.07 5.62 

Baccalaureate colleges—liberal 

arts 

40 10 13.92 11.86 0.42 0.03 13.53 1

Baccalaureate colleges—general 60 10 28.37 30.97 -0.53 -0.02 28.86 2Baccalaureate/associate’s colleges # # 0.81 5.35 -0.93 -0.53 1.67 Associate’s colleges 10 # 2.33 3.82 -0.30 -0.12 2.61 Theological seminaries and other 

specialized faith-related institutions 

10 # 20.14 6.17 2.86 0.17 17.50 1

Medical schools and medical 

centers 

† † † † † † † 

Other separate health profession 

schools 

10 # 2.99 2.03 0.20 0.07 2.81 

Schools of engineering and 

technology 

# # 1.40 # # # 1.14 

Schools of business and 

management 

10 # 1.87 2.97 -0.22 -0.11 2.08 

Schools of art, music, and design 10 10 3.02 7.35 -0.89 -0.23 3.84 Schools of law † † † † † † † Teachers colleges # # 0.58 # # # 0.47 Other specialized institutions # # 1.63 3.85 -0.45 -0.22 2.05 Tribal colleges and universities † † † † † † † Unavailable or unknown 10 # 3.23 3.28 -0.01 # 3.24 

Degree of urbanization 

Large city 50 10 13.80 32.48 -3.82 -0.22 17.33 1Mid-size city 60 20 21.32 29.97 -1.77 -0.08 22.95 2Urban fringe of large city 40 10 32.41 13.13 3.95 0.14 28.76 3Urban fringe of mid-size city 20 10 9.27 18.93 -1.98 -0.18 11.10 Large town 10 # 1.39 # # # 1.13 

See notes at end of table. 
K-23 

Table K-5. Institution nonresponse bias before nonresponse adjustment and after weight adjustments for selecte

private not-for-profit 4-year non-doctorate-granting institutions: 2004—Continued 

Before nonresponse adjustment After nonre

Variable 

Unweighted 

respondents 

Unweighted 

nonrespondents 

Respondent 

mean 

weighted 

Nonrespondent 

mean 

weighted 

Estimated 

bias 

Relative 

bias

Overall 

mean, 

before 

adjustments 

Ov

mean, 

adjustm

Small town 30 10 10.14 4.99 1.05 0.12 9.17 Rural 10 # 9.66 # # # 7.83 Not assigned # # 1.78 0.50 0.26 0.17 1.54 Unavailable or unknown # # 0.23 # # # 0.19 

Bureau of Economic Analysis Code 

(Office of Business Economics [OBE]) Region1

New England 20 # 8.88 12.17 -0.67 -0.07 9.50 1Mid East 20 10 12.51 14.71 -0.45 -0.03 12.93 1Great Lakes 50 10 27.28 26.98 0.06 # 27.22 2Plains 40 # 19.55 2.01 3.592 0.22 16.23 1

Southeast 50 10 16.69 29.35 -2.59 -0.13 19.08 1Southwest 10 # 1.66 6.89 -1.07 -0.39 2.65 Rocky Mountains # # 0.12 3.85 -0.76 -0.87 0.82 Far West 30 # 11.65 4.04 1.56 0.15 10.21 1Outlying areas # # 1.67 # # # 1.35 

Historically Black college or university 

Yes 10 # 3.38 7.73 -0.89 -0.21 4.21 No 210 50 96.62 92.27 0.89 0.01 95.79 9

Percent receiving federal grant aid 

<=25 80 20 29.12 33.08 -0.81 -0.03 29.87 2>25, <=50 100 20 41.73 43.42 -0.35 -0.01 42.05 4>50, <=75 30 # 14.85 10.40 0.91 0.07 14.00 1>75 10 # 10.26 9.88 0.08 0.01 10.18 1Unavailable or unknown 10 # 4.05 3.22 0.17 0.04 3.89 

Percent receiving state/local grant aid 

<=25 90 20 50.61 18.53 6.562 0.15 44.54 4>25, <=50 80 20 25.57 49.17 -4.83 -0.16 30.04 2

See notes at end of table. 
K-24 

Table K-5. Institution nonresponse bias before nonresponse adjustment and after weight adjustments for selecte

private not-for-profit 4-year non-doctorate-granting institutions: 2004—Continued 

Before nonresponse adjustment After nonre

Variable 

Unweighted 

respondents 

Unweighted 

nonrespondents 

Respondent 

mean 

weighted 

Nonrespondent 

mean 

weighted 

Estimated 

bias 

Relative 

bias

Overall 

mean, 

before 

adjustments 

Ov

mean, 

adjustm

>50, <=75 30 10 15.13 14.37 0.16 0.01 14.98 1>75 10 # 4.64 14.71 -2.06 -0.31 6.55 Unavailable or unknown 10 # 4.05 3.22 0.17 0.04 3.89 

Percent receiving institutional grant aid 

<=25 20 10 14.43 16.10 -0.34 -0.02 14.75 1>25, <=50 20 10 6.58 8.25 -0.34 -0.05 6.90 >50, <=75 40 10 16.64 24.47 -1.60 -0.09 18.12 1>75 120 20 58.31 47.95 2.12 0.04 56.35 5Unavailable or unknown 10 # 4.05 3.22 0.17 0.04 3.89 

Percent receiving student loan aid 

<=25 20 # 21.75 4.04 3.62 0.20 18.40 1>25, <=50 40 10 9.40 16.00 -1.35 -0.13 10.65 >50, <=75 100 30 38.97 54.99 -3.28 -0.08 42.00 3

>75 60 10 25.83 21.75 0.84 0.03 25.06 3Unavailable or unknown 10 # 4.05 3.22 0.17 0.04 3.89 

Percent enrolled: Black, non-Hispanic 

<=25 200 50 87.98 91.26 -0.67 -0.01 88.60 8>25, <=50 10 # 5.01 0.50 0.92 0.23 4.16 >50, <=75 # # 2.20 0.50 0.35 0.19 1.88 >75 10 # 3.74 7.23 -0.71 -0.16 4.40 Unavailable or unknown # # 1.06 0.50 0.11 0.12 0.96 

Percent enrolled: Asian or Pacific 

Islander 

<=25 220 50 92.86 99.50 -1.36 -0.01 94.11 9>25, <=50 # # 6.08 # # # 4.93 >50, <=75 † † † † † † † >75 † † † † † † † Unavailable or unknown # # 1.06 0.50 0.11 0.12 0.96 

See notes at end of table. 
K-25 

Table K-5. Institution nonresponse bias before nonresponse adjustment and after weight adjustments for selecte

not-for-profit 4-year non-doctorate-granting institutions: 2004—Continued 

Before nonresponse adjustment After nonre

Variable 

Unweighted 

respondents 

Unweighted 

nonrespondents 

Respondent 

mean 

weighted 

Nonrespondent 

mean 

weighted 

Estimated 

bias 

Relative 

bias

Overall 

mean, 

before 

adjustments 

Ov

mean, 

adjustm

Percent enrolled: Hispanic 

<=25 220 50 96.92 99.50 -0.53 -0.01 97.41 9>25, <=50 # # 0.34 # # # 0.28 >50, <=75 † † † † † † † >75 # # 1.67 # # # 1.35 Unavailable or unknown # # 1.06 0.50 0.11 0.12 0.96 

Total undergraduate enrollment3

<=893.5 60 10 40.72 19.77 4.29 0.12 36.75 4>893.5, <=1,631 60 10 21.62 32.73 -2.27 -0.10 23.72 2>1,631, <=2,530 60 10 18.95 30.02 -2.27 -0.11 21.05 2>2,530 50 10 17.65 16.97 0.14 0.01 17.52 1

Total male undergraduate enrollment3

<=300 60 10 39.17 14.91 4.96 0.15 34.58 3>300, <=625 50 20 22.94 41.64 -3.83 -0.14 26.48 2>625, <=1,020.5 60 10 20.74 22.89 -0.44 -0.02 21.15 2>1,020.5 50 20 16.08 20.06 -0.81 -0.05 16.84 1Unavailable or unknown # # 1.06 0.50 0.11 0.12 0.96 

Total female undergraduate 

enrollment3

<=513.5 60 10 39.75 19.27 4.19 0.12 35.87 4>513.5, <=896.5 60 10 22.35 18.11 0.87 0.04 21.54 2>896.5, <=1,533.5 50 20 19.58 46.37 -5.48 -0.22 24.65 1>1,533.5 60 10 17.26 15.75 0.31 0.02 16.97 1Unavailable or unknown # # 1.06 0.50 0.11 0.12 0.96 

Total graduate/first-professional 

enrollment4

<=325 80 10 35.75 26.46 1.90 0.06 33.99 3>325 70 20 24.02 29.00 -1.02 -0.04 24.96 2Total enrollment = 0 80 20 40.23 44.54 -0.88 -0.02 41.05 3

See notes at end of table. 
K-26 

Table K-5. Institution nonresponse bias before nonresponse adjustment and after weight adjustments for selecte

not-for-profit 4-year non-doctorate-granting institutions: 2004—Continued 

Before nonresponse adjustment After nonre

Variable 

Unweighted 

respondents 

Unweighted 

nonrespondents 

Respondent 

mean 

weighted 

Nonrespondent 

mean 

weighted 

Estimated 

bias 

Relative 

bias

Overall 

mean, 

before 

adjustments 

Ov

mean, 

adjustm

Total male graduate/first-professional 

enrollment4

<=111 70 10 37.58 28.61 1.84 0.05 35.88 3>111 70 20 21.84 26.85 -1.03 -0.04 22.78 2Total enrollment = 0 80 20 40.58 44.54 -0.81 -0.02 41.33 3

Total female graduate/firstprofessional enrollment4

<=203 80 10 32.90 26.59 1.29 0.04 31.70 3>203 70 20 26.87 28.87 -0.41 -0.01 27.25 2Total enrollment = 0 80 20 40.23 44.54 -0.88 -0.02 41.05 3

† Not applicable. # Rounds to zero. 1 New England = Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Rhode Island, Vermont; Mid East = Delaware, District of Columbia, Maryland, New 

Pennsylvania; Great Lakes = Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Ohio, Wisconsin; Plains = Iowa, Kansas, Minnesota, Missouri, Nebraska, North Dakota, South D

Southeast = Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, North Carolina, South Carolina, Tennessee, Virginia, West Virginia; Mexico, Oklahoma, Texas; Rocky Mountains = Colorado, Idaho, Montana, Utah, Wyoming; Far West = Alaska, California, Hawaii, Nevada, Oregon, WashOutlying Areas = American Samoa, Federated States of Micronesia, Guam, Marshall Islands, Northern Mariana Islands, Puerto Rico, Palau, Virgin Island

2 Bias is significant at the 0.05/(c-1) level, where c is the number of categories within the primary variable. 3 Undergraduate enrollment categories were defined by quartiles. 4 Graduate/first-professional enrollment categories were defined by the median. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 2004 National Postsecondary Student Aid Study (NPSAS:04). 
K-27 

Table K-6. Institution nonresponse bias before nonresponse adjustment and after weight adjustments for selecte

private not-for-profit 4-year doctorate-granting institutions: 2004 

Before nonresponse adjustment After nonres

Variable 

Unweighted 

respondents 

Unweighted 

nonrespondents 

Respondent 

mean 

weighted 

Nonrespondent 

mean 

weighted 

Estimated 

bias 

Relative 

bias 

Overall 

mean, 

before 

adjustments 

Ov

mean, 

adjustm

Carnegie classification code 

Doctorate-granting/research 

universities—extensive 

40 10 10.92 7.95 0.60 0.06 10.22 1

Doctorate-granting/research 

universities—intensive 

40 10 9.83 5.30 0.92 0.10 8.76 1

Master’s colleges and 

universities I 

30 10 19.44 22.52 -0.62 -0.03 20.17 1

Master’s (comprehensive) 

colleges and universities II 

# # 0.55 1.77 -0.25 -0.31 0.83 

Baccalaureate colleges—

liberal arts 

10 10 4.33 16.38 -2.44 -0.36 7.18 

Baccalaureate colleges—

general 

# # 0.27 6.19 -1.20 -0.81 1.67 

Baccalaureate/associate’s 

colleges 

† † † † † † † 

Associate’s colleges † † † † † † † Theological seminaries and 

other specialized faithrelated institutions 

20 10 37.78 5.69 6.50 0.21 30.20 3

Medical schools and medical 

centers 

20 # 4.10 3.53 0.11 0.03 3.96 

Other separate health 

profession schools 

5 1 5.40 0.88 0.91 0.20 4.33 

Schools of engineering and 

technology 

† † † † † † † 

Schools of business and 

management 

# # 0.57 # # # 0.44 

Schools of art, music, and 

design 

# # 1.60 # # # 1.22 

Schools of law # # 1.16 7.13 -1.21 -0.51 2.57 Teachers colleges † † † † † † † Other specialized institutions # # 2.66 2.42 0.05 0.02 2.60 Tribal colleges and universities † † † † † † † Unavailable or unknown # # 1.39 20.25 -3.82 -0.73 5.84 

Degree of urbanization 

Large city 70 20 43.83 41.88 0.40 0.01 43.37 4Mid-size city 40 10 13.70 7.25 1.31 0.11 12.18 1Urban fringe of large city 40 20 18.62 25.52 -1.40 -0.07 20.25 2

See notes at end of table. 
K-28 

Table K-6. Institution nonresponse bias before nonresponse adjustment and after weight adjustments for selecte

private not-for-profit 4-year doctorate-granting institutions: 2004—Continued 

Before nonresponse adjustment After nonres

Variable 

Unweighted 

respondents 

Unweighted 

nonrespondents 

Respondent 

mean 

weighted 

Nonrespondent 

mean 

weighted 

Estimated 

bias 

Relative 

bias 

Overall 

mean, 

before 

adjustments 

Ov

mean, 

adjustm

Urban fringe of mid-size city 10 # 18.32 15.51 0.57 0.03 17.66 1Large town # # 1.16 # # # 0.88 Small town 10 # 2.84 2.10 0.15 0.06 2.67 Rural # # 0.27 0.88 -0.12 -0.31 0.42 Not assigned # # 0.98 6.86 -1.19 -0.55 2.37 Unavailable or unknown # # 0.27 # # # 0.21 

Bureau of Economic Analysis 

Code (Office of Business Economics [OBE]) Region1

New England 20 # 10.84 16.39 -1.12 -0.09 12.16 1Mid East 40 10 17.95 33.33 -3.12 -0.15 21.59 2Great Lakes 20 10 7.47 9.81 -0.47 -0.06 8.02 Plains 20 # 14.03 3.53 2.13 0.18 11.55 1Southeast 20 10 28.40 11.82 3.36 0.13 24.49 2Southwest 20 # 5.25 1.77 0.71 0.16 4.43 Rocky Mountains # # 0.84 0.88 -0.01 -0.01 0.85 Far West 30 10 14.22 22.46 -1.67 -0.11 16.17 1Outlying areas # # 0.98 # # # 0.75 

Historically Black college or 

university 

Yes 10 # 2.26 7.07 -0.98 -0.30 3.40 No 160 50 97.74 92.93 0.98 0.01 96.60 9

Percent receiving federal grant aid 

<=25 80 20 30.15 28.57 0.32 0.01 29.78 2>25, <=50 30 10 23.29 26.28 -0.61 -0.03 24.00 2>50, <=75 10 # 3.79 2.98 0.16 0.05 3.60 >75 # # 0.63 6.19 -1.13 -0.64 1.94 Unavailable or unknown 50 10 42.14 35.98 1.25 0.03 40.68 4

Percent receiving state/local grant 

aid 

<=25 70 20 35.59 25.32 2.08 0.06 33.16 3>25, <=50 40 10 17.90 15.03 0.58 0.03 17.22 1>50, <=75 10 # 4.10 16.59 -2.53 -0.38 7.05 >75 # # 0.27 7.07 -1.38 -0.83 1.88 Unavailable or unknown 50 10 42.14 35.98 1.25 0.03 40.68 4

See notes at end of table. 
K-29 

Table K-6. Institution nonresponse bias before nonresponse adjustment and after weight adjustments for selecte

private not-for-profit 4-year doctorate-granting institutions: 2004—Continued 

Before nonresponse adjustment After nonres

Variable 

Unweighted 

respondents 

Unweighted 

nonrespondents 

Respondent 

mean 

weighted 

Nonrespondent 

mean 

weighted 

Estimated 

bias 

Relative 

bias 

Overall 

mean, 

before 

adjustments 

Ov

mean, 

adjustm

Percent receiving institutional 

grant aid 

<=25 10 # 3.93 3.53 0.08 0.02 3.83 >25, <=50 30 # 19.72 3.53 3.28 0.20 15.90 1>50, <=75 40 10 14.10 30.83 -3.39 -0.19 18.05 1>75 50 10 20.11 26.13 -1.22 -0.06 21.53 1Unavailable or unknown 50 10 42.14 35.98 1.25 0.03 40.68 4

Percent receiving student loan aid 

<=25 10 # 2.43 1.77 0.13 0.06 2.28 >25, <=50 50 10 28.94 23.30 1.14 0.04 27.61 2>50, <=75 60 20 24.05 28.89 -0.98 -0.04 25.19 2>75 10 10 2.44 10.07 -1.55 -0.39 4.24 Unavailable or unknown 50 10 42.14 35.98 1.25 0.03 40.68 4

Percent enrolled: Black, nonHispanic 

<=25 160 50 96.35 87.31 1.83 0.02 94.21 9>25, <=50 # # 0.85 # # # 0.65 >50, <=75 # # 0.27 0.88 -0.12 -0.31 0.42 >75 # # 1.99 6.19 -0.85 -0.30 2.98 Unavailable or unknown # # 0.55 5.62 -1.03 -0.65 1.74 

Percent enrolled: Asian or Pacific 

Islander 

<=25 160 50 98.36 94.38 0.81 0.01 97.42 9>25, <=50 # # 1.09 # # # 0.83 >50, <=75 † † † † † † † >75 † † † † † † † Unavailable or unknown # # 0.55 5.62 -1.03 -0.65 1.74 

Percent enrolled: Hispanic 

<=25 160 50 80.06 94.38 -2.90 -0.03 83.44 8>25, <=50 # # 17.59 # # # 13.44 1>50, <=75 # # 0.82 # # # 0.63 >75 # # 0.98 # # # 0.75 Unavailable or unknown # # 0.55 5.62 -1.03 -0.65 1.74 

See notes at end of table. 
K-30 

Table K-6. Institution nonresponse bias before nonresponse adjustment and after weight adjustments for selecte

private not-for-profit 4-year doctorate-granting institutions: 2004—Continued 

Before nonresponse adjustment After nonres

Variable 

Unweighted 

respondents 

Unweighted 

nonrespondents 

Respondent 

mean 

weighted 

Nonrespondent 

mean 

weighted 

Estimated 

bias 

Relative 

bias 

Overall 

mean, 

before 

adjustments 

Ov

mean, 

adjustm

Total undergraduate enrollment2

<=220 40 10 41.81 32.12 1.96 0.05 39.52 4>220, <=2,834.5 40 10 27.87 40.39 -2.54 -0.08 30.83 2>2,834.5, <=5,943.5 40 10 15.31 13.58 0.35 0.02 14.90 1>5,943.5 40 10 14.47 8.28 1.25 0.09 13.01 1Unavailable or unknown # # 0.55 5.62 -1.03 -0.65 1.74 

Total male undergraduate 

enrollment2

<=55.5 40 10 40.11 34.95 1.05 0.03 38.89 4>55.5, <=1,325 40 10 31.41 37.57 -1.25 -0.04 32.86 3>1,325, <=2,526.5 40 10 13.93 15.35 -0.29 -0.02 14.26 1>2,526.5 50 10 14.01 6.52 1.52 0.12 12.24 1

Unavailable or unknown # # 0.55 5.62 -1.03 -0.65 1.74 Total female undergraduate 

enrollment2

<=116 40 10 42.08 31.24 2.20 0.06 39.52 4>116, <=1,449.5 40 20 25.96 41.28 -3.10 -0.11 29.58 2>1,449.5, <=3,504 40 10 16.37 15.35 0.21 0.01 16.13 1>3,504 50 10 15.04 6.52 1.73 0.13 13.03 1Unavailable or unknown # # 0.55 5.62 -1.03 -0.65 1.74 

Total graduate/first-professional 

enrollment3

<=1,942 80 30 67.35 72.89 -1.12 -0.02 68.66 6>1,942 90 20 32.65 20.92 2.38 0.08 29.88 3Total enrollment = 0 # # # 6.19 -1.25 -1.00 1.46 

Total male graduate/firstprofessional enrollment3

<=979 80 30 70.72 71.12 -0.08 # 70.81 7>979 80 20 29.28 22.69 1.34 0.05 27.72 2Total enrollment = 0 # # # 6.19 -1.25 -1.00 1.46 

See notes at end of table. 
K-31 

Table K-6. Institution nonresponse bias before nonresponse adjustment and after weight adjustments for selecte

private not-for-profit 4-year doctorate-granting institutions: 2004—Continued 

Before nonresponse adjustment After nonres

Variable 

Unweighted 

respondents 

Unweighted 

nonrespondents 

Respondent 

mean 

weighted 

Nonrespondent 

mean 

weighted 

Estimated 

bias 

Relative 

bias 

Overall 

mean, 

before 

adjustments 

Ov

mean, 

adjustm

Total female graduate/firstprofessional enrollment3

<=1,073 80 30 67.57 71.95 -0.89 -0.01 68.60 6>1,073 90 20 32.43 21.86 2.14 0.07 29.93 3Total enrollment = 0 # # # 6.19 -1.25 -1.00 1.46 

† Not applicable. # Rounds to zero. 1 New England = Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Rhode Island, Vermont; Mid East = Delaware, District of Columbia, Maryland, New 

Pennsylvania; Great Lakes = Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Ohio, Wisconsin; Plains = Iowa, Kansas, Minnesota, Missouri, Nebraska, North Dakota, South D

Southeast = Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, North Carolina, South Carolina, Tennessee, Virginia, West Virginia; Mexico, Oklahoma, Texas; Rocky Mountains = Colorado, Idaho, Montana, Utah, Wyoming; Far West = Alaska, California, Hawaii, Nevada, Oregon, WashOutlying Areas = American Samoa, Federated States of Micronesia, Guam, Marshall Islands, Northern Mariana Islands, Puerto Rico, Palau, Virgin Island

2 Undergraduate enrollment categories were defined by quartiles. 3 Graduate/first-professional enrollment categories were defined by the median. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 2004 National Postsecondary Student Aid Study (NPSAS:04). 
K-32 

Table K-7. Institution nonresponse bias before nonresponse adjustment and after weight adjustments for selecte

private for-profit less-than-2-year institutions: 2004 

Before nonresponse adjustment After nonres

Variable 

Unweighted 

respondents 

Unweighted 

nonrespondents 

Respondent 

mean 

weighted 

Nonrespondent 

mean 

weighted 

Estimated 

bias 

Relative 

bias 

Overall 

mean, 

before 

adjustments 

Ove

mean, a

adjustme

Carnegie classification code 

Doctorate-granting/research 

universities—extensive 

† † † † † † † 

Doctorate-granting/research 

universities—intensive 

† † † † † † † 

Master’s colleges and 

universities I 

† † † † † † † 

Master’s (Comprehensive) 

Colleges And Universities II 

† † † † † † † 

Baccalaureate colleges—

liberal arts 

† † † † † † † 

Baccalaureate colleges—

general 

† † † † † † † 

Baccalaureate/associate’s 

colleges 

† † † † † † † 

Associate’s colleges # # # 0.27 -0.04 -1.00 0.07 Theological seminaries and 

other specialized faithrelated institutions 

† † † † † † † 

Medical schools and medical 

centers 

† † † † † † † 

Other separate health 

profession schools 

† † † † † † † 

Schools of engineering and 

technology 

† † † † † † † 

Schools of business and 

management 

† † † † † † † 

Schools of art, music, and 

design 

† † † † † † † 

Schools of law † † † † † † † Teachers colleges † † † † † † † Other specialized institutions † † † † † † † Tribal colleges and universities † † † † † † † Unavailable or unknown 140 30 100.00 99.73 0.04 # 99.93 100

Degree of urbanization 

Large city 40 10 22.11 31.92 -1.58 -0.07 24.71 25Mid-size city 30 10 25.68 21.95 0.60 0.02 24.69 25

See notes at end of table. 
K-33 

Table K-7. Institution nonresponse bias before nonresponse adjustment and after weight adjustments for selecte

private for-profit less-than-2-year institutions: 2004—Continued 

Before nonresponse adjustment After nonres

Variable 

Unweighted 

respondents 

Unweighted 

nonrespondents 

Respondent 

mean 

weighted 

Nonrespondent 

mean 

weighted 

Estimated 

bias 

Relative 

bias 

Overall 

mean, 

before 

adjustments 

Ov

mean, 

adjustm

Urban fringe of large city 30 10 16.14 5.80 1.67 0.12 13.39 1Urban fringe of mid-size city 10 # 6.10 0.97 0.83 0.16 4.74 Large town † † † † † † † Small town # # 1.13 # # # 0.83 Rural † † † † † † † Not assigned 10 # 4.53 # # # 3.33 Unavailable or unknown 20 # 24.31 39.36 -2.42 -0.09 28.31 2

Bureau of Economic Analysis 

Code (Office of Business Economics [OBE]) Region1

New England 10 # 4.73 2.27 0.40 0.09 4.08 Mid East 20 # 11.29 2.49 1.42 0.14 8.96 1Great Lakes 10 # 13.45 6.01 1.20 0.10 11.48 1Plains # # 3.34 # # # 2.46 Southeast 30 10 19.72 52.34 -5.25 -0.21 28.38 1Southwest 20 10 14.67 6.68 1.29 0.10 12.55 1Rocky Mountains # # 0.81 0.90 -0.02 -0.02 0.83 Far West 30 10 26.94 29.30 -0.38 -0.01 27.57 2Outlying areas 10 # 5.04 # # # 3.70 

Historically Black college or 

university 

Yes † † † † † † † No 140 30 100.00 100.00 # # 100.00 10

Percent receiving federal grant aid 

<=25 10 # 3.79 0.27 0.57 0.18 2.85 >25, <=50 30 # 31.31 31.02 0.05 # 31.24 2>50, <=75 30 10 15.96 17.70 -0.28 -0.02 16.42 1>75 60 10 40.79 38.22 0.41 0.01 40.11 4Unavailable or unknown 10 10 8.14 12.79 -0.75 -0.08 9.38 

Percent receiving state/local grant 

aid 

<=25 120 20 89.17 86.28 0.47 0.01 88.41 9>25, <=50 # # 0.54 0.67 -0.02 -0.04 0.57 

See notes at end of table. 
K-34 

Table K-7. Institution nonresponse bias before nonresponse adjustment and after weight adjustments for selecte

for-profit less-than-2-year institutions: 2004—Continued 

Before nonresponse adjustment After nonres

Variable 

Unweighted 

respondents 

Unweighted 

nonrespondents 

Respondent 

mean 

weighted 

Nonrespondent 

mean 

weighted 

Estimated 

bias 

Relative 

bias 

Overall 

mean, 

before 

adjustments 

Ove

mean, a

adjustme

>50, <=75 10 # 1.54 0.27 0.21 0.15 1.20 1>75 # # 0.60 # # # 0.44 0Unavailable or unknown 10 10 8.14 12.79 -0.75 -0.08 9.38 7

Percent receiving institutional 

grant aid 

<=25 120 20 83.88 57.19 4.30 0.05 76.79 85>25, <=50 # # 2.88 26.71 -3.84 -0.57 9.21 2>50, <=75 # # 2.61 3.31 -0.11 -0.04 2.79 2>75 # # 2.49 # # # 1.83 2Unavailable or unknown 10 10 8.14 12.79 -0.75 -0.08 9.38 7

Percent receiving student loan aid 

<=25 30 10 30.78 49.20 -2.97 -0.09 35.67 27>25, <=50 10 # 5.34 0.90 0.71 0.15 4.16 4>50, <=75 40 10 24.50 35.55 -1.78 -0.07 27.43 22>75 50 # 31.25 1.56 4.782 0.18 23.37 38

Unavailable or unknown 10 10 8.14 12.79 -0.75 -0.08 9.38 7

Percent enrolled: Black, nonHispanic 

<=25 90 20 70.03 65.74 0.69 0.01 68.89 70>25, <=50 30 10 10.10 8.77 0.21 0.02 9.74 9>50, <=75 10 # 7.51 21.39 -2.24 -0.23 11.19 7>75 10 # 10.50 # #2 # 7.71 9

Unavailable or unknown # # 1.86 4.09 -0.36 -0.16 2.46 2

Percent enrolled: Asian or Pacific 

Islander 

<=25 130 20 97.66 95.91 0.28 # 97.19 97>25, <=50 # # 0.48 # # # 0.35 0>50, <=75 † † † † † † † >75 † † † † † † † Unavailable or unknown # # 1.86 4.09 -0.36 -0.16 2.46 2

Percent enrolled: Hispanic 

<=25 70 10 68.12 62.66 0.88 0.01 66.67 63>25, <=50 30 10 16.94 9.80 1.15 0.07 15.05 16

See notes at end of table. 
K-35 

Table K-7. Institution nonresponse bias before nonresponse adjustment and after weight adjustments for selecte

private for-profit less-than-2-year institutions: 2004—Continued 

Before nonresponse adjustment After nonres

Variable 

Unweighted 

respondents 

Unweighted 

nonrespondents 

Respondent 

mean 

weighted 

Nonrespondent 

mean 

weighted 

Estimated 

bias 

Relative 

bias 

Overall 

mean, 

before 

adjustments 

Ove

mean, a

adjustme

>50, <=75 10 # 5.31 4.13 0.19 0.04 5.00 6>75 20 # 7.76 19.32 -1.86 -0.19 10.83 10Unavailable or unknown # # 1.86 4.09 -0.36 -0.16 2.46 2

Total undergraduate enrollment3

<=215 30 10 59.34 70.74 -1.84 -0.03 62.36 55>215, <=415 30 10 20.53 18.87 0.27 0.01 20.09 20>415, <=807 40 # 13.58 2.40 1.802 0.15 10.61 16

>807 30 10 6.12 3.89 0.36 0.06 5.53 7Unavailable or unknown # # 0.43 4.09 -0.59 -0.58 1.41 0

Total male undergraduate 

enrollment3

<=23 30 10 53.57 55.18 -0.26 # 54.00 50>23, <=65 40 10 25.92 33.53 -1.23 -0.05 27.94 27>65, <=211 40 # 12.02 3.01 1.45 0.14 9.63 12>211 30 10 8.06 4.18 0.62 0.08 7.03 9Unavailable or unknown # # 0.43 4.09 -0.59 -0.58 1.41 0

Total female undergraduate 

enrollment3

<=100 30 10 47.15 71.13 -3.86 -0.08 53.51 43>100, <=288 30 10 28.92 16.74 1.96 0.07 25.69 27>288, <=551 40 # 16.33 5.93 1.68 0.11 13.57 19>551 30 10 7.17 2.11 0.82 0.13 5.83 7Unavailable or unknown # # 0.43 4.09 -0.59 -0.58 1.41 0

† Not applicable. # Rounds to zero. 1 New England = Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Rhode Island, Vermont; Mid East = Delaware, District of Columbia, Maryland, New 

Pennsylvania; Great Lakes = Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Ohio, Wisconsin; Plains = Iowa, Kansas, Minnesota, Missouri, Nebraska, North Dakota, South D

Southeast = Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, North Carolina, South Carolina, Tennessee, Virginia, West Virginia; Mexico, Oklahoma, Texas; Rocky Mountains = Colorado, Idaho, Montana, Utah, Wyoming; Far West = Alaska, California, Hawaii, Nevada, Oregon, WashOutlying Areas = American Samoa, Federated States of Micronesia, Guam, Marshall Islands, Northern Mariana Islands, Puerto Rico, Palau, Virgin Island

2 Bias is significant at the 0.05/(c-1) level, where c is the number of categories within the primary variable. 3 Undergraduate enrollment categories were defined by quartiles. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 2004 National Postsecondary Student Aid Study (NPSAS:04). 
K-36 

Table K-8. Institution nonresponse bias before nonresponse adjustment and after weight adjustments for selecte

California public 2-year institutions: 2004 

Before nonresponse adjustment After nonres

Variable 

Unweighted 

respondents 

Unweighted 

nonrespondents 

Respondent 

mean 

weighted 

Nonrespondent 

mean 

weighted 

Estimated 

bias 

Relative 

bias 

Overall 

mean, 

before 

adjustments 

Ov

mean, 

adjustm

Carnegie classification code 

Doctorate-granting/research 

universities—extensive 

† † † † † † † 

Doctorate-granting/research 

universities—intensive 

† † † † † † † 

Master’s colleges and 

universities I 

† † † † † † † 

Master’s (comprehensive) 

colleges and universities II 

† † † † † † † 

Baccalaureate colleges—

liberal arts 

† † † † † † † 

Baccalaureate colleges—

general 

† † † † † † † 

Baccalaureate/associate’s 

colleges 

† † † † † † † 

Associate’s colleges 30 10 100.00 100.00 #1 # 100.00 10

Theological seminaries and 

other specialized faithrelated institutions 

† † † † † † † 

Medical schools and medical 

centers 

† † † † † † † 

Other separate health 

profession schools 

† † † † † † † 

Schools of engineering and 

technology 

† † † † † † † 

Schools of business and 

management 

† † † † † † † 

Schools of art, music, and 

design 

† † † † † † † 

Schools of law † † † † † † † Teachers colleges † † † † † † † Other specialized institutions † † † † † † † Tribal colleges and 

universities 

† † † † † † † 

Unavailable or unknown † † † † † † † 

Degree of urbanization 

Large city 10 # 16.21 9.61 2.25 0.16 13.90 1Mid-size city 10 # 29.85 32.13 -0.78 -0.03 30.65 3

See notes at end of table. 
K-37 

Table K-8. Institution nonresponse bias before nonresponse adjustment and after weight adjustments for selecte

California public 2-year institutions: 2004—Continued 

Before nonresponse adjustment After nonres

Variable 

Unweighted 

respondents 

Unweighted 

nonrespondents 

Respondent 

mean 

weighted 

Nonrespondent 

mean 

weighted 

Estimated 

bias 

Relative 

bias 

Overall 

mean, 

before 

adjustments 

Ov

mean, 

adjustm

Urban fringe of large city 10 10 44.60 45.85 -0.43 -0.01 45.03 4Urban fringe of mid-size city # # 9.35 # # # 6.07 1Large town † † † † † † † Small town # # # 12.42 -4.24 -1.00 4.35 Rural † † † † † † † Not assigned † † † † † † † Unavailable or unknown † † † † † † † 

Historically Black college or 

university 

Yes † † † † † † † No 30 10 100.00 100.00 #1 # 100.00 10

Percent receiving federal grant 

aid 

<=25 10 10 57.76 34.82 7.83 0.16 49.73 5>25, <=50 10 10 32.84 65.18 -11.04 -0.25 44.16 3>50, <=75 # # 9.40 # # # 6.11 >75 † † † † † † † Unavailable or unknown † † † † † † † 

Percent receiving state/local grant 

aid 

<=25 10 # 23.36 15.06 2.83 0.14 20.45 2>25, <=50 10 10 52.59 73.48 -7.13 -0.12 59.90 5>50, <=75 10 # 19.81 11.46 2.85 0.17 16.89 1>75 # # 4.24 # # # 2.76 Unavailable or unknown † † † † † † † 

Percent receiving institutional 

grant aid 

<=25 20 10 94.40 100.00 -1.91 -0.02 96.36 9>25, <=50 # # 5.60 # # # 3.64 >50, <=75 † † † † † † † >75 † † † † † † † Unavailable or unknown † † † † † † † 

Percent receiving student loan aid 

<=25 30 10 100.00 100.00 # # 100.00 10>25, <=50 † † † † † † † 

See notes at end of table. 
K-38 

Table K-8. Institution nonresponse bias before nonresponse adjustment and after weight adjustments for selecte

California public 2-year institutions: 2004—Continued 

Before nonresponse adjustment After nonres

Variable 

Unweighted 

respondents 

Unweighted 

nonrespondents 

Respondent 

mean 

weighted 

Nonrespondent 

mean 

weighted 

Estimated 

bias 

Relative 

bias 

Overall 

mean, 

before 

adjustments 

Ov

mean, 

adjustm

>50, <=75 † † † † † † † >75 † † † † † † † Unavailable or unknown † † † † † † † 

Percent enrolled: Black, nonHispanic 

<=25 30 10 100.00 100.00 # # 100.00 10>25, <=50 † † † † † † † >50, <=75 † † † † † † † >75 † † † † † † † Unavailable or unknown † † † † † † † 

Percent enrolled: Asian or Pacific 

Islander 

<=25 20 10 79.61 94.66 -5.14 -0.06 84.88 7>25, <=50 10 # 15.22 5.34 3.37 0.28 11.77 1>50, <=75 # # 5.17 # # # 3.36 >75 † † † † † † † Unavailable or unknown † † † † † † † 

Percent enrolled: Hispanic 

<=25 10 10 42.84 60.89 -6.16 -0.13 49.16 4>25, <=50 10 10 54.94 26.69 9.64 0.21 45.05 5>50, <=75 # # 2.22 # # # 1.44 >75 # # # 12.42 -4.24 -1.00 4.35 Unavailable or unknown † † † † † † † 

Total undergraduate enrollment2

<=17,576 10 # 45.75 47.96 -0.75 -0.02 46.52 4>17,576, <=29,617 10 # 30.09 12.37 6.05 0.25 23.89 2>29,617, <=41,593 # 10 8.09 36.29 -9.62 -0.54 17.96 >41,593 10 # 16.06 3.38 4.33 0.37 11.63 1Unavailable or unknown † † † † † † † 

Total male undergraduate 

enrollment2

<=7,467 10 # 41.56 47.96 -2.18 -0.05 43.80 4>7,467, <=12,738.5 10 # 24.94 18.06 2.35 0.10 22.53 2>12,738.5, <=19,584 # 10 17.02 30.60 -4.63 -0.21 21.78 1>19,584 10 # 16.48 3.38 4.47 0.37 11.89 1Unavailable or unknown † † † † † † † 

See notes at end of table. 
K-39 

Table K-8. Institution nonresponse bias before nonresponse adjustment and after weight adjustments for selecte

California public 2-year institutions: 2004—Continued 

Before nonresponse adjustment After nonres

Variable 

Unweighted 

respondents 

Unweighted 

nonrespondents 

Respondent 

mean 

weighted 

Nonrespondent 

mean 

weighted 

Estimated 

bias 

Relative 

bias 

Overall 

mean, 

before 

adjustments 

Ov

mean, 

adjustm

Total female undergraduate 

enrollment2

<=9,901 10 # 50.92 37.87 4.45 0.10 46.35 5>9,901, <=16,965 10 # 21.91 27.46 -1.89 -0.08 23.86 2>16,965, <=23,021 # 10 11.22 31.29 -6.85 -0.38 18.24 1>23,021 10 # 15.95 3.38 4.29 0.37 11.55 1Unavailable or unknown † † † † † † † 

† Not applicable. # Rounds to zero. 1 Bias is significant at the 0.05/(c-1) level, where c is the number of categories within the primary variable. 2 Undergraduate enrollment categories were defined by quartiles. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 2004 National Postsecondary Student Aid Study (NPSAS:04). 
K-40 

Table K-9. Institution nonresponse bias before nonresponse adjustment and after weight adjustments for selecte

California public 4-year institutions: 2004 

Before nonresponse adjustment After nonres

Variable 

Unweighted 

respondents 

Unweighted 

nonrespondents 

Respondent 

mean 

weighted 

Nonrespondent 

mean 

weighted 

Estimated 

bias 

Relative 

bias 

Overall 

mean, 

before 

adjustments 

Ov

mean, 

adjustm

Carnegie classification code 

Doctorate-granting/research 

universities—extensive 

10 # 26.32 21.43 2.31 0.10 24.24 2

Doctorate-granting/research 

universities—intensive 

# # 5.26 7.14 -0.89 -0.14 6.06 

Master’s colleges and 

universities I 

10 10 63.16 50.00 6.23 0.11 57.58 6

Master’s (comprehensive) 

colleges and universities II 

† † † † † † † 

Baccalaureate colleges—

liberal arts 

# # # 7.14 -3.38 -1.00 3.03 

Baccalaureate colleges—

general 

† † † † † † † 

Baccalaureate/associate’s 

colleges 

† † † † † † † 

Associate’s colleges † † † † † † † Theological seminaries and 

other specialized faithrelated institutions 

† † † † † † † 

Medical schools and medical 

centers 

† † † † † † † 

Other separate health 

profession schools 

† † † † † † † 

Schools of engineering and 

technology 

† † † † † † † 

Schools of business and 

management 

† † † † † † † 

Schools of art, music, and 

design 

† † † † † † † 

Schools of law # # 5.26 # # # 3.03 Teachers colleges † † † † † † † Other specialized institutions # # # 7.14 -3.38 -1.00 3.03 Tribal colleges and 

universities 

† † † † † † † 

Unavailable or unknown # # # 7.14 -3.38 -1.00 3.03 

Degree of urbanization 

Large city 10 10 31.58 42.86 -5.34 -0.14 36.36 2Mid-size city 10 # 42.11 21.43 9.78 0.30 33.33 3

See notes at end of table. 
K-41 

Table K-9. Institution nonresponse bias before nonresponse adjustment and after weight adjustments for selecte

California public 4-year institutions: 2004—Continued 

Before nonresponse adjustment After nonres

Variable 

Unweighted 

respondents 

Unweighted 

nonrespondents 

Respondent 

mean 

weighted 

Nonrespondent 

mean 

weighted 

Estimated 

bias 

Relative 

bias 

Overall 

mean, 

before 

adjustments 

Ov

mean, 

adjustm

Urban fringe of large city # # 21.05 14.29 3.20 0.18 18.18 2Urban fringe of mid-size city # # # 14.29 -6.76 -1.00 6.06 Large town † † † † † † † Small town # # 5.26 # # # 3.03 Rural † † † † † † † Not assigned † † † † † † † Unavailable or unknown # # # 7.14 -3.38 -1.00 3.03 

Historically Black college or 

university 

Yes † † † † † † † No 20 10 100.00 100.00 #1 # 100.00 10

Percent receiving federal grant 

aid 

<=25 10 # 26.32 28.57 -1.07 -0.04 27.27 3>25, <=50 10 10 57.89 57.14 0.36 0.01 57.58 5>50, <=75 # # 5.26 7.14 -0.89 -0.14 6.06 >75 † † † † † † † Unavailable or unknown # # 10.53 7.14 1.60 0.18 9.09 

Percent receiving state/local grant 

aid 

<=25 # # 10.53 14.29 -1.78 -0.14 12.12 1>25, <=50 10 10 73.68 78.57 -2.31 -0.03 75.76 7>50, <=75 # # 5.26 # # # 3.03 >75 † † † † † † † Unavailable or unknown # # 10.53 7.14 1.60 0.18 9.09 

Percent receiving institutional 

grant aid 

<=25 # # 15.79 14.29 0.71 0.05 15.15 2>25, <=50 10 10 57.89 71.43 -6.40 -0.10 63.64 5>50, <=75 # # 15.79 7.14 4.09 0.35 12.12 1>75 † † † † † † † Unavailable or unknown # # 10.53 7.14 1.60 0.18 9.09 

See notes at end of table. 
K-42 

Table K-9. Institution nonresponse bias before nonresponse adjustment and after weight adjustments for selecte

California public 4-year institutions: 2004—Continued 

Before nonresponse adjustment After nonres

Variable 

Unweighted 

respondents 

Unweighted 

nonrespondents 

Respondent 

mean 

weighted 

Nonrespondent 

mean 

weighted 

Estimated 

bias 

Relative 

bias 

Overall 

mean, 

before 

adjustments 

Ov

mean, 

adjustm

Percent receiving institutional 

grant aid 

<=25 10 # 36.84 21.43 7.29 0.25 30.30 3>25, <=50 10 10 52.63 71.43 -8.89 -0.14 60.61 5>50, <=75 † † † † † † † >75 † † † † † † † Unavailable or unknown # # 10.53 7.14 1.60 0.18 9.09 

Percent receiving student loan aid # # 

<=25 20 10 94.74 100.00 -2.49 -0.03 96.97 9>25, <=50 # # 5.26 # # # 3.03 >50, <=75 † † † † † † † >75 † † † † † † † Unavailable or unknown † † † † † † † 

Percent enrolled: Black, nonHispanic 

<=25 10 10 68.42 71.43 -1.42 -0.02 69.70 7>25, <=50 10 # 31.58 28.57 1.42 0.05 30.30 2>50, <=75 † † † † † † † >75 † † † † † † † Unavailable or unknown † † † † † † † 

Percent enrolled: Asian or Pacific 

Islander 

<=25 20 10 78.95 78.57 0.18 # 78.79 7>25, <=50 # # 21.05 14.29 3.20 0.18 18.18 2>50, <=75 † † † † † † † >75 # # # 7.14 -3.38 -1.00 3.03 Unavailable or unknown † † † † † † † 

Percent enrolled: Hispanic 

<=7,404 10 # 31.58 21.43 4.80 0.18 27.27 3>7,404, <=18,214 10 # 31.58 14.29 8.18 0.35 24.24 3>18,214, <=25,093 # # 21.05 28.57 -3.56 -0.14 24.24 1>25,093 # 10 15.79 35.71 -9.43 -0.37 24.24 1Unavailable or unknown † † † † † † † 

See notes at end of table. 
K-43 

Table K-9. Institution nonresponse bias before nonresponse adjustment and after weight adjustments for selecte

California public 4-year institutions: 2004—Continued 

Before nonresponse adjustment After nonres

Variable 

Unweighted 

respondents 

Unweighted 

nonrespondents 

Respondent 

mean 

weighted 

Nonrespondent 

mean 

weighted 

Estimated 

bias 

Relative 

bias 

Overall 

mean, 

before 

adjustments 

Ov

mean, 

adjustm

Total undergraduate enrollment2

<=2,818 10 # 31.58 21.43 4.80 0.18 27.27 3>2,818, <=7,245 10 # 31.58 14.29 8.18 0.35 24.24 3>7,245, <=11,069 10 # 26.32 21.43 2.31 0.10 24.24 2>11,069 # 10 10.53 42.86 -15.30 -0.59 24.24 1Unavailable or unknown † † † † † † † 

Total male undergraduate 

enrollment2

<=4,452 10 # 31.58 21.43 4.80 0.18 27.27 3>4,452, <=8,523 10 # 31.58 14.29 8.18 0.35 24.24 3>8,523, <=13,893 # 10 15.79 35.71 -9.43 -0.37 24.24 1>13,893 # # 21.05 28.57 -3.56 -0.14 24.24 1Unavailable or unknown † † † † † † † 

Total female undergraduate 

enrollment2

<=4,255 10 10 52.63 42.86 4.62 0.10 48.48 5>4,255 10 10 47.37 50.00 -1.25 -0.03 48.48 4Total enrollment = 0 # # # 7.14 -3.38 -1.00 3.03 

Total graduate/first-professional 

enrollment3

<=1,804 10 10 57.89 35.71 10.49 0.22 48.48 6>1,804 10 10 42.11 57.14 -7.11 -0.14 48.48 3Total enrollment = 0 # # # 7.14 -3.38 -1.00 3.03 

Total male graduate/firstprofessional enrollment3

<=1,966 10 10 52.63 42.86 4.62 0.10 48.48 5>1,966 10 10 47.37 50.00 -1.25 -0.03 48.48 4Total enrollment = 0 # # # 7.14 -3.38 -1.00 3.03 

† Not applicable. # Rounds to zero. 1 Bias is significant at the 0.05/(c-1) level, where c is the number of categories within the primary variable. 2 Undergraduate enrollment categories were defined by quartiles. 3 Graduate/first-professional enrollment categories were defined by the median. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 2004 National Postsecondary Student Aid Study (NPSAS:04). 
K-44 

Table K-10. Institution nonresponse bias before nonresponse adjustment and after weight adjustments for selec

California private not-for-profit 4-year institutions: 2004 

Before nonresponse adjustment After nonres

Variable 

Unweighted 

respondents 

Unweighted 

nonrespondents 

Respondent 

mean 

weighted 

Nonrespondent 

mean 

weighted 

Estimated 

bias 

Relative 

bias 

Overall 

mean, 

before 

adjustments 

Ov

mean, 

adjustm

Carnegie classification code 

Doctorate-granting/research 

universities—extensive 

# # 3.05 3.18 -0.03 -0.01 3.08 

Doctorate-granting/research 

universities—intensive 

10 # 6.09 3.18 0.62 0.11 5.39 

Master’s colleges and 

universities I 

10 # 19.61 6.57 2.79 0.17 16.46 2

Master’s (comprehensive) 

colleges and universities II 

# # # 19.19 -4.11 -1.00 4.65 

Baccalaureate colleges—

liberal arts 

# # 2.36 13.33 -2.35 -0.50 5.01 

Baccalaureate colleges—

general 

# # 11.49 # # # 8.71 1

Baccalaureate/associate’s 

colleges 

† † † † † † † 

Associate’s colleges † † † † † † † Theological seminaries and 

other specialized faithrelated institutions 

# # 28.75 # # # 21.79 2

Medical schools and medical 

centers 

# # 1.02 # # # 0.77 

Other separate health 

profession schools 

# # 7.89 # # # 5.98 

Schools of engineering and 

technology 

† † † † † † † 

Schools of business and 

management 

† † † † † † † 

Schools of art, music, and 

design 

# # 9.86 # # # 7.47 

Schools of law # # # 22.48 -4.82 -1.00 5.44 Teachers colleges † † † † † † † Other specialized institutions # # 9.87 8.69 0.25 0.03 9.59 Tribal colleges and 

universities 

† † † † † † † 

Unavailable or unknown # # # 23.39 -5.01 -1.00 5.66 

Degree of urbanization 

Large city 10 # 28.40 50.09 -4.64 -0.14 33.65 2Mid-size city 10 # 31.17 16.78 3.08 0.11 27.69 3

See notes at end of table. 
K-45 

Table K-10. Institution nonresponse bias before nonresponse adjustment and after weight adjustments for select

California private not-for-profit 4-year institutions: 2004—Continued 

Before nonresponse adjustment After nonres

Variable 

Unweighted 

respondents 

Unweighted 

nonrespondents 

Respondent 

mean 

weighted 

Nonrespondent 

mean 

weighted 

Estimated 

bias 

Relative 

bias 

Overall 

mean, 

before 

adjustments 

Ov

mean, 

adjustm

Urban fringe of large city 10 10 40.42 33.13 1.56 0.04 38.66 4Urban fringe of mid-size city † † † † † † † Large town † † † † † † † Small town † † † † † † † Rural † † † † † † † Not assigned † † † † † † † Unavailable or unknown † † † † † † † 

Historically Black college or 

university 

Yes † † † † † † † No 30 10 100.00 100.00 #1 # 100.00 10

Percent receiving federal grant 

aid 

<=25 10 # 23.22 15.33 1.69 0.08 21.31 2>25, <=50 10 # 25.25 16.51 1.87 0.08 23.13 2>50, <=75 # # 13.86 # # # 10.50 1>75 # # 22.93 13.60 2.00 0.10 20.67 2Unavailable or unknown 10 # 14.74 54.56 -8.53 -0.37 24.38 1

Percent receiving state/local grant 

aid 

<=25 20 # 45.64 25.48 4.32 0.10 40.76 4>25, <=50 10 # 39.62 6.36 7.12 0.22 31.57 4>50, <=75 † † † † † † † >75 # # # 13.60 -2.91 -1.00 3.29 Unavailable or unknown 10 # 14.74 54.56 -8.53 -0.37 24.38 1

Percent receiving institutional 

grant aid 

<=25 # # 8.91 # # # 6.75 >25, <=50 # # 3.05 # # # 2.31 >50, <=75 10 # 19.03 8.76 2.20 0.13 16.54 2>75 10 10 54.27 36.67 3.77 0.07 50.01 5Unavailable or unknown 10 # 14.74 54.56 -8.53 -0.37 24.38 1

See notes at end of table. 
K-46 

Table K-10. Institution nonresponse bias before nonresponse adjustment and after weight adjustments for select

California private not-for-profit 4-year institutions: 2004—Continued 

Before nonresponse adjustment After nonres

Variable 

Unweighted 

respondents 

Unweighted 

nonrespondents 

Respondent 

mean 

weighted 

Nonrespondent 

mean 

weighted 

Estimated 

bias 

Relative 

bias 

Overall 

mean, 

before 

adjustments 

Ov

mean, 

adjustm

Percent receiving student loan aid 

<=25 # # 23.95 3.18 4.45 0.23 18.92 2>25, <=50 10 # 17.29 8.76 1.83 0.12 15.23 1>50, <=75 10 # 29.67 3.39 5.63 0.23 23.31 3>75 # # 14.34 30.11 -3.38 -0.19 18.16 1Unavailable or unknown 10 # 14.74 54.56 -8.53 -0.37 24.38 1

Percent enrolled: Black, nonHispanic 

<=25 30 10 94.77 79.79 3.21 0.04 91.14 9>25, <=50 # # 5.23 # # # 3.96 >50, <=75 † † † † † † † >75 † † † † † † † Unavailable or unknown # # # 20.21 -4.33 -1.00 4.89 

Percent enrolled: Asian or Pacific 

Islander 

<=25 30 10 97.97 79.79 3.89 0.04 93.57 9>25, <=50 # # 2.03 # # # 1.54 >50, <=75 † † † † † † † >75 † † † † † † † Unavailable or unknown # # # 20.21 -4.33 -1.00 4.89 

Percent enrolled: Hispanic 

<=25 30 10 98.98 79.79 4.11 0.04 94.34 9>25, <=50 # # 1.02 # # # 0.77 >50, <=75 † † † † † † † >75 † † † † † † † Unavailable or unknown # # # 20.21 -4.33 -1.00 4.89 

Total undergraduate enrollment2

<=237.5 10 # 44.55 31.17 2.87 0.07 41.31 4>237.5, <=1,956.5 10 # 35.57 30.11 1.17 0.03 34.25 3>1,956.5, <=4,168.5 10 # 11.75 12.15 -0.09 -0.01 11.85 1>4,168.5 10 # 8.12 6.36 0.38 0.05 7.69 Unavailable or unknown # # # 20.21 -4.33 -1.00 4.89 

See notes at end of table. 
K-47 

Table K-10. Institution nonresponse bias before nonresponse adjustment and after weight adjustments for select

California private not-for-profit 4-year institutions: 2004—Continued 

Before nonresponse adjustment After nonres

Variable 

Unweighted 

respondents 

Unweighted 

nonrespondents 

Respondent 

mean 

weighted 

Nonrespondent 

mean 

weighted 

Estimated 

bias 

Relative 

bias 

Overall 

mean, 

before 

adjustments 

Ov

mean, 

adjustm

Total male undergraduate 

enrollment2

<=66.5 10 # 36.66 44.50 -1.68 -0.04 38.56 3>66.5, <=751 10 # 43.85 16.78 5.80 0.15 37.30 4>751, <=1,618.5 10 # 11.37 12.15 -0.17 -0.01 11.56 1>1,618.5 10 # 8.12 6.36 0.38 0.05 7.69 Unavailable or unknown # # # 20.21 -4.33 -1.00 4.89 

Total female undergraduate 

enrollment2

<=110.5 10 # 44.55 31.17 2.87 0.07 41.31 4>110.5, <=1,155 10 # 35.57 30.11 1.17 0.03 34.25 3>1,155, <=2,423.5 10 # 10.64 15.33 -1.01 -0.09 11.77 1>2,423.5 10 # 9.24 3.18 1.30 0.16 7.77 1Unavailable or unknown # # # 20.21 -4.33 -1.00 4.89 

Total graduate/first-professional 

enrollment3

<=1,668 10 10 74.31 87.08 -2.73 -0.04 77.40 7>1,668 20 # 15.83 12.92 0.62 0.04 15.12 1Total enrollment = 0 # # 9.86 # # # 7.47 

Total male graduate/firstprofessional enrollment3

<=636 20 10 75.43 83.90 -1.81 -0.02 77.48 7>636 10 10 14.71 16.10 -0.30 -0.02 15.05 1Total enrollment = 0 # # 9.86 # # # 7.47 

Total female graduate/firstprofessional enrollment3

<=1,073 10 10 70.31 90.26 -4.27 -0.06 75.14 7>1,073 20 # 19.82 9.74 2.16 0.12 17.38 2Total enrollment = 0 # # 9.86 # # # 7.47 

† Not applicable. # Rounds to zero. 1 Bias is significant at the 0.05/(c-1) level, where c is the number of categories within the primary variable. 2 Undergraduate enrollment categories were defined by quartiles. 3 Graduate/first-professional enrollment categories were defined by the median. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 2004 National Postsecondary Student Aid Study (NPSAS:04). 
K-48 

Table K-11. Institution nonresponse bias before nonresponse adjustment and after weight adjustments for selec

Illinois private not-for-profit 4-year institutions: 2004 

Before nonresponse adjustment After nonres

Variable 

Unweighted 

respondents 

Unweighted 

nonrespondents 

Respondent 

mean 

weighted 

Nonrespondent 

mean 

weighted 

Estimated 

bias 

Relative 

bias 

Overall 

mean, 

before 

adjustments 

Ov

mean, 

adjustm

Carnegie classification code 

Doctorate-granting/research 

universities—extensive 

# # 2.21 7.74 -1.31 -0.37 2.90 

Doctorate-granting/research 

universities—intensive 

# # 3.31 # # # 2.90 

Master’s colleges and 

universities I 

10 # 9.98 21.57 -2.75 -0.22 11.42 

Master’s (comprehensive) 

colleges and universities II 

† † † † † † † 

Baccalaureate colleges—

liberal arts 

# # 5.70 # # # 4.99 

Baccalaureate colleges—

general 

# # 6.46 42.24 -8.48 -0.57 10.93 

Baccalaureate/associate’s 

colleges 

† † † † † † † 

Associate’s colleges † † † † † † † Theological seminaries and 

other specialized faithrelated institutions 

# # 63.20 11.15 12.33 0.24 56.70 6

Medical schools and medical 

centers 

# # 2.21 7.74 -1.31 -0.37 2.90 

Other separate health 

profession schools 

† † † † † † † 

Schools of engineering and 

technology 

† † † † † † † 

Schools of business and 

management 

# # 6.93 # # # 6.07 

Schools of art, music, and 

design 

# # # 9.55 -2.26 -1.00 1.19 

Schools of law † † † † † † † Teachers colleges † † † † † † † Other specialized institutions † † † † † † † Tribal colleges and 

universities 

† † † † † † † 

Unavailable or unknown † † † † † † † 

Degree of urbanization 

Large city 10 # 9.41 17.29 -1.87 -0.17 10.39 1Mid-size city 10 # 13.96 7.74 1.47 0.12 13.19 1

See notes at end of table. 
K-49 

Table K-11. Institution nonresponse bias before nonresponse adjustment and after weight adjustments for selec

Illinois private not-for-profit 4-year institutions: 2004—Continued 

Before nonresponse adjustment After nonres

Variable 

Unweighted 

respondents 

Unweighted 

nonrespondents 

Respondent 

mean 

weighted 

Nonrespondent 

mean 

weighted 

Estimated 

bias 

Relative 

bias 

Overall 

mean, 

before 

adjustments 

Ov

mean, 

adjustm

Urban fringe of large city 10 # 70.66 32.72 8.99 0.15 65.92 6Urban fringe of mid-size city † † † † † † † Large town † † † † † † † Small town # # 5.98 42.24 -8.59 -0.59 10.50 1Rural † † † † † † † Not assigned † † † † † † † Unavailable or unknown † † † † † † † 

Historically Black college or 

university 

Yes † † † † † † † No 20 10 100.00 100.00 #1 # 100.00 10

Percent receiving federal grant 

aid 

<=25 10 # 11.14 17.29 -1.46 -0.12 11.91 1>25, <=50 10 # 21.39 32.72 -2.68 -0.11 22.81 2>50, <=75 # # 59.75 42.24 4.15 0.07 57.56 5>75 † † † † † † † Unavailable or unknown # # 7.72 7.74 -0.01 # 7.72 

Percent receiving state/local grant 

aid 

<=25 10 # 64.92 17.29 11.28 0.21 58.98 5>25, <=50 10 # 18.16 32.72 -3.45 -0.16 19.97 2>50, <=75 # # 7.78 42.24 -8.16 -0.51 12.08 >75 # # 1.42 # # # 1.25 Unavailable or unknown # # 7.72 7.74 -0.01 # 7.72 

Percent receiving institutional 

grant aid 

<=25 # # 58.33 # # # 51.05 5>25, <=50 # # 9.84 7.74 0.50 0.05 9.57 1>50, <=75 10 # 7.23 17.29 -2.38 -0.25 8.49 >75 10 # 16.89 67.22 -11.92 -0.41 23.17 1Unavailable or unknown # # 7.72 7.74 -0.01 # 7.72 

See notes at end of table. 
K-50 

Table K-11. Institution nonresponse bias before nonresponse adjustment and after weight adjustments for selec

Illinois private not-for-profit 4-year institutions: 2004—Continued 

Before nonresponse adjustment After nonres

Variable 

Unweighted 

respondents 

Unweighted 

nonrespondents 

Respondent 

mean 

weighted 

Nonrespondent 

mean 

weighted 

Estimated 

bias 

Relative 

bias 

Overall 

mean, 

before 

adjustments 

Ov

mean, 

adjustm

Percent receiving student loan aid 

<=25 # # 60.30 # # # 52.77 5>25, <=50 10 # 9.91 15.49 -1.32 -0.12 10.60 1>50, <=75 10 # 20.66 34.52 -3.29 -0.14 22.39 2>75 # # 1.42 42.24 -9.67 -0.87 6.52 Unavailable or unknown # # 7.72 7.74 -0.01 # 7.72 

Percent enrolled: Black, nonHispanic 

<=25 20 10 98.58 100.00 -0.34 # 98.75 9>25, <=50 # # 1.42 # # # 1.25 >50, <=75 † † † † † † † >75 † † † † † † † Unavailable or unknown † † † † † † † 

Percent enrolled: Asian or Pacific 

Islander 

<=25 20 10 41.67 100.00 -13.82 -0.25 48.95 4>25, <=50 # # 58.33 # # # 51.05 5>50, <=75 † † † † † † † >75 † † † † † † † Unavailable or unknown † † † † † † † 

Percent enrolled: Hispanic # 

<=25 20 10 100.00 100.00 # # 100.00 10>25, <=50 † † † † † † † >50, <=75 † † † † † † † >75 † † † † † † † Unavailable or unknown † † † † † † † 

Total undergraduate enrollment2

<=1,168 10 # 70.91 61.13 2.32 0.03 69.69 7>1,168, <=2,411 10 # 13.88 9.55 1.03 0.08 13.34 1>2,411, <=5,287 10 # 9.37 13.83 -1.06 -0.10 9.92 >5,287 10 # 5.84 15.49 -2.29 -0.28 7.04 Unavailable or unknown † † † † † † † 

See notes at end of table. 
K-51 

Table K-11. Institution nonresponse bias before nonresponse adjustment and after weight adjustments for selec

Illinois private not-for-profit 4-year institutions: 2004—Continued 

Before nonresponse adjustment After nonres

Variable 

Unweighted 

respondents 

Unweighted 

nonrespondents 

Respondent 

mean 

weighted 

Nonrespondent 

mean 

weighted 

Estimated 

bias 

Relative 

bias 

Overall 

mean, 

before 

adjustments 

Ov

mean, 

adjustm

Total male undergraduate 

enrollment2

<=496 10 # 70.91 61.13 2.32 0.03 69.69 7>496, <=1,017 10 # 14.13 9.55 1.09 0.08 13.56 1>1,017, <=1,928 10 # 8.01 21.57 -3.21 -0.29 9.70 >1,928 10 # 6.94 7.74 -0.19 -0.03 7.04 Unavailable or unknown † † † † † † † 

Total female undergraduate 

enrollment2

<=462 10 # 72.02 49.99 5.22 0.08 69.27 7>462, <=1,398 10 # 14.41 11.15 0.77 0.06 14.00 1>1,398, <=2,958 10 # 7.74 23.38 -3.71 -0.32 9.69 >2,958 10 # 5.84 15.49 -2.29 -0.28 7.04 Unavailable or unknown † † † † † † † 

Total graduate/first-professional 

enrollment3

<=1,441 10 # 25.08 20.70 1.04 0.04 24.54 3>1,441 10 # 9.60 37.06 -6.51 -0.40 13.02 1Total enrollment = 0 10 # 65.32 42.24 5.47 0.09 62.44 5

Total male graduate/firstprofessional enrollment3

<=628 10 # 25.34 17.29 1.91 0.08 24.33 3>628 10 # 9.34 40.46 -7.37 -0.44 13.23 1Total enrollment = 0 10 # 65.32 42.24 5.47 0.09 62.44 5

Total female graduate/firstprofessional enrollment3

<=890 10 # 23.98 28.44 -1.06 -0.04 24.54 3>890 10 # 10.70 29.32 -4.41 -0.29 13.02 1Total enrollment = 0 10 # 65.32 42.24 5.47 0.09 62.44 5

† Not applicable. # Rounds to zero. 1 Bias is significant at the 0.05/(c-1) level, where c is the number of categories within the primary variable. 2 Undergraduate enrollment categories were defined by quartiles. 3 Graduate/first-professional enrollment categories were defined by the median. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 2004 National Postsecondary Student Aid Study (NPSAS:04). 
K-52 

Table K-12. Institution nonresponse bias before nonresponse adjustment and after weight adjustments for selec

Nebraska public 2-year institutions: 2004 

Before nonresponse adjustment After nonres

Variable 

Unweighted 

respondents 

Unweighted 

nonrespondents 

Respondent 

mean 

weighted 

Nonrespondent 

mean 

weighted 

Estimated 

bias 

Relative 

bias 

Overall 

mean, 

before 

adjustments 

Ov

mean, 

adjustm

Carnegie classification code 

Doctorate-granting/research 

universities—extensive 

† † † † † † † 

Doctorate-granting/research 

universities—intensive 

† † † † † † † 

Master’s colleges and 

universities I 

† † † † † † † 

Master’s (comprehensive) 

colleges and universities II 

† † † † † † † 

Baccalaureate colleges—

liberal arts 

† † † † † † † 

Baccalaureate colleges—

general 

† † † † † † † 

Baccalaureate/associate’s 

colleges 

† † † † † † † 

Associate’s colleges # # 80.00 50.00 9.89 0.14 71.43 8Theological seminaries and 

other specialized faithrelated institutions 

† † † † † † † 

Medical schools and medical 

centers 

† † † † † † † 

Other separate health 

profession schools 

† † † † † † † 

Schools of engineering and 

technology 

† † † † † † † 

Schools of business and 

management 

† † † † † † † 

Schools of art, music, and 

design 

† † † † † † † 

Schools of law † † † † † † † Teachers colleges † † † † † † † Other specialized institutions † † † † † † † Tribal colleges and 

universities 

† † † † † † † 

Unavailable or unknown # # 20.00 50.00 -9.89 -0.33 28.57 1

See notes at end of table. 
K-53 

Table K-12. Institution nonresponse bias before nonresponse adjustment and after weight adjustments for selec

Nebraska public 2-year institutions: 2004—Continued 

Before nonresponse adjustment After nonres

Variable 

Unweighted 

respondents 

Unweighted 

nonrespondents 

Respondent 

mean 

weighted 

Nonrespondent 

mean 

weighted 

Estimated 

bias 

Relative 

bias 

Overall 

mean, 

before 

adjustments 

Ov

mean, 

adjustm

Degree of urbanization 

Large city # # # 50.00 -16.49 -1.00 14.29 Mid-size city # # 20.00 # # # 14.29 1Urban fringe of large city † † † † † † † Urban fringe of mid-size city † † † † † † † Large town # # 20.00 # # # 14.29 1Small town # # 60.00 # # # 42.86 7Rural # # # 50.00 -16.49 -1.00 14.29 Not assigned † † † † † † † Unavailable or unknown † † † † † † † 

Historically Black college or 

university 

Yes † † † † † † † No 10 # 100.00 100.00 #1 # 100.00 10

Percent receiving federal grant 

aid 

<=25 † † † † † † † >25, <=50 # # 80.00 50.00 9.89 0.14 71.43 6>50, <=75 # # 20.00 50.00 -9.89 -0.33 28.57 3>75 † † † † † † † Unavailable or unknown † † † † † † † 

Percent receiving state/local grant 

aid 

<=25 # # 80.00 50.00 9.89 0.14 71.43 8>25, <=50 # # 20.00 50.00 -9.89 -0.33 28.57 1>50, <=75 † † † † † † † >75 † † † † † † † Unavailable or unknown † † † † † † † 

Percent receiving institutional 

grant aid 

<=25 # # 40.00 # # # 28.57 3>25, <=50 # # 40.00 50.00 -3.30 -0.08 42.86 3>50, <=75 # # 20.00 50.00 -9.89 -0.33 28.57 3>75 † † † † † † † Unavailable or unknown † † † † † † † 

See notes at end of table. 
K-54 

Table K-12. Institution nonresponse bias before nonresponse adjustment and after weight adjustments for selec

Nebraska public 2-year institutions: 2004—Continued 

Before nonresponse adjustment After nonres

Variable 

Unweighted 

respondents 

Unweighted 

nonrespondents 

Respondent 

mean 

weighted 

Nonrespondent 

mean 

weighted 

Estimated 

bias 

Relative 

bias 

Overall 

mean, 

before 

adjustments 

Ov

mean, 

adjustm

Percent receiving student loan aid 

<=25 # # 40.00 50.00 -3.30 -0.08 42.86 4>25, <=50 # # 60.00 # #1 # 42.86 5

>50, <=75 # # # 50.00 -16.49 -1.00 14.29 >75 † † † † † † † Unavailable or unknown † † † † † † † 

Percent enrolled: Black, nonHispanic 

<=25 10 # 100.00 100.00 # # 100.00 10>25, <=50 † † † † † † † >50, <=75 † † † † † † † >75 † † † † † † † Unavailable or unknown † † † † † † † 

Percent enrolled: Asian or Pacific 

Islander 

<=25 10 # 100.00 100.00 # # 100.00 10>25, <=50 † † † † † † † >50, <=75 † † † † † † † >75 † † † † † † † Unavailable or unknown † † † † † † † 

Percent enrolled: Hispanic 

<=25 10 # 100.00 100.00 # # 100.00 10>25, <=50 † † † † † † † >50, <=75 † † † † † † † >75 † † † † † † † Unavailable or unknown † † † † † † † 

Total undergraduate enrollment2

<=3,964 # # 20.00 50.00 -9.89 -0.33 28.57 3>3,964, <=7,267 # # 40.00 # # # 28.57 3>7,267, <=15,568 # # 40.00 # # # 28.57 2>15,568 # # # 50.00 -16.49 -1.00 14.29 Unavailable or unknown † † † † † † † 

See notes at end of table. 
K-55 

Table K-12. Institution nonresponse bias before nonresponse adjustment and after weight adjustments for selec

Nebraska public 2-year institutions: 2004—Continued 

Before nonresponse adjustment After nonres

Variable 

Unweighted 

respondents 

Unweighted 

nonrespondents 

Respondent 

mean 

weighted 

Nonrespondent 

mean 

weighted 

Estimated 

bias 

Relative 

bias 

Overall 

mean, 

before 

adjustments 

Ov

mean, 

adjustm

Total male undergraduate 

enrollment2

<=1,500 # # 20.00 50.00 -9.89 -0.33 28.57 3>1,500, <=3,393 # # 40.00 # # # 28.57 3>3,393, <=7,064 # # 40.00 # # # 28.57 2>7,064 # # # 50.00 -16.49 -1.00 14.29 Unavailable or unknown † † † † † † † 

Total female undergraduate 

enrollment2

<=2,464 # # 20.00 50.00 -9.89 -0.33 28.57 3>2,464, <=3,874 # # 40.00 # # # 28.57 3>3,874, <=8,504 # # 40.00 # # # 28.57 2>8,504 # # # 50.00 -16.49 -1.00 14.29 Unavailable or unknown † † † † † † † 

† Not applicable. # Rounds to zero. 1 Bias is significant at the 0.05/(c-1) level, where c is the number of categories within the primary variable. 2 Undergraduate enrollment categories were defined by quartiles. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 2004 National Postsecondary Student Aid Study (NPSAS:04). 
K-56 

Table K-13. Institution nonresponse bias before nonresponse adjustment and after weight adjustments for selec

Nebraska private not-for-profit 4-year institutions: 2004 

Before nonresponse adjustment After nonres

Variable 

Unweighted 

respondents

Unweighted 

nonrespondents

Respondent 

mean 

weighted

Nonrespondent 

mean 

weighted

Estimated 

bias 

Relative 

bias

Overall 

mean, 

before 

adjustments

Ov

mean, 

adjustm

Carnegie classification code

Doctorate-granting/research 

universities—extensive 

† † † † † † † 

Doctorate-granting/research 

universities—intensive 

† † † † † † † 

Master’s colleges and 

universities I 

# # 7.69 50.00 -13.95 -0.64 13.33 

Master’s (comprehensive) 

colleges and universities II 

# # 15.38 # # # 13.33 1

Baccalaureate colleges—

liberal arts 

# # 15.38 # # # 13.33 1

Baccalaureate colleges—

general 

10 # 38.46 50.00 -3.81 -0.09 40.00 3

Baccalaureate/associate’s 

colleges 

† † † † † † † 

Associate’s colleges † † † † † † † Theological seminaries and 

other specialized faithrelated institutions 

# # 7.69 # # # 6.67 

Medical schools and medical 

centers 

† † † † † † † 

Other separate health 

profession schools 

# # 15.38 # # # 13.33 1

Schools of engineering and 

technology 

† † † † † † † 

Schools of business and 

management 

† † † † † † † 

Schools of art, music, and 

design 

† † † † † † † 

Schools of law † † † † † † † Teachers colleges † † † † † † † Other specialized institutions † † † † † † † Tribal colleges and universities † † † † † † † Unavailable or unknown † † † † † † † 

Degree of urbanization 

Large city # # 30.77 50.00 -6.34 -0.17 33.33 3Mid-size city # # 7.69 50.00 -13.95 -0.64 13.33 

See notes at end of table. 
K-57 

Table K-13. Institution nonresponse bias before nonresponse adjustment and after weight adjustments for selec

Nebraska private not-for-profit 4-year institutions: 2004—Continued 

Before nonresponse adjustment After nonres

Variable 

Unweighted 

respondents

Unweighted 

nonrespondents

Respondent 

mean 

weighted

Nonrespondent 

mean 

weighted

Estimated 

bias 

Relative 

bias

Overall 

mean, 

before 

adjustments

Ov

mean, 

adjustm

Urban fringe of large city # # 15.38 # # # 13.33 1Urban fringe of mid-size city † † † † † † † Large town † † † † † † † Small town 10 # 46.15 # #1 # 40.00 4

Rural † † † † † † † Not assigned † † † † † † † Unavailable or unknown † † † † † † † 

Historically Black college or 

university 

Yes † † † † † † † No 10 # 100.00 100.00 #1 # 100.00 10

Percent receiving federal grant aid 

<=25 # # 23.08 # # # 20.00 2>25, <=50 10 # 69.23 100.00 -10.15 -0.13 73.33 7>50, <=75 # # 7.69 # # # 6.67 >75 † † † † † † † Unavailable or unknown † † † † † † † 

Percent receiving state/local grant 

aid 

<=25 10 # 53.85 100.00 -15.221 -0.22 60.00 5

>25, <=50 10 # 46.15 # #1 # 40.00 4>50, <=75 † † † † † † † >75 † † † † † † † Unavailable or unknown † † † † † † † 

Percent receiving institutional 

grant aid 

<=25 # # 15.38 # # # 13.33 1>25, <=50 † † † † † † † >50, <=75 # # 7.69 50.00 -13.95 -0.64 13.33 1>75 10 # 76.92 50.00 8.88 0.13 73.33 7Unavailable or unknown † † † † † † † 

See notes at end of table. 
K-58 

Table K-13. Institution nonresponse bias before nonresponse adjustment and after weight adjustments for selec

Nebraska private not-for-profit 4-year institutions: 2004—Continued 

Before nonresponse adjustment After nonres

Variable 

Unweighted 

respondents

Unweighted 

nonrespondents

Respondent 

mean 

weighted

Nonrespondent 

mean 

weighted

Estimated 

bias 

Relative 

bias

Overall 

mean, 

before 

adjustments

Ov

mean, 

adjustm

Percent receiving student loan aid 

<=25 # # 15.38 # # # 13.33 1>25, <=50 # # # 100.00 -32.98 -1.00 13.33 >50, <=75 10 # 38.46 # #1 # 33.33 4

>75 10 # 46.15 # #1 # 40.00 4Unavailable or unknown † † † † † † † 

Percent enrolled: Black, nonHispanic 

<=25 10 # 100.00 100.00 # # 100.00 10>25, <=50 † † † † † † † >50, <=75 † † † † † † † >75 † † † † † † † Unavailable or unknown † † † † † † † 

Percent enrolled: Asian or Pacific 

Islander 

<=25 10 # 100.00 100.00 # # 100.00 10>25, <=50 † † † † † † † >50, <=75 † † † † † † † >75 † † † † † † † Unavailable or unknown † † † † † † † 

Percent enrolled: Hispanic 

<=25 10 # 100.00 100.00 # # 100.00 10>25, <=50 † † † † † † † >50, <=75 † † † † † † † >75 † † † † † † † Unavailable or unknown † † † † † † † 

Total undergraduate enrollment2

<=528 # # 30.77 # # # 26.67 2>528, <=1,040 # # 30.77 # # # 26.67 3>1,040, <=2,199 # # 23.08 50.00 -8.88 -0.28 26.67 2>2,199 # # 15.38 50.00 -11.42 -0.43 20.00 1Unavailable or unknown † † † † † † † 

See notes at end of table. 
K-59 

Table K-13. Institution nonresponse bias before nonresponse adjustment and after weight adjustments for selec

Nebraska private not-for-profit 4-year institutions: 2004—Continued 

Before nonresponse adjustment After nonres

Variable 

Unweighted 

respondents

Unweighted 

nonrespondents

Respondent 

mean 

weighted

Nonrespondent 

mean 

weighted

Estimated 

bias 

Relative 

bias

Overall 

mean, 

before 

adjustments

Ov

mean, 

adjustm

Total male undergraduate 

enrollment2

<=93 # # 30.77 # # # 26.67 2>93, <=408 # # 30.77 # # # 26.67 3>408, <=914 # # 23.08 50.00 -8.88 -0.28 26.67 2>914 # # 15.38 50.00 -11.42 -0.43 20.00 1Unavailable or unknown † † † † † † † 

Total female undergraduate 

enrollment2

<=333 # # 30.77 # # # 26.67 3>333, <=567 # # 30.77 # # # 26.67 3>567, <=1,267 # # 23.08 50.00 -8.88 -0.28 26.67 2>1,267 # # 15.38 50.00 -11.42 -0.43 20.00 1Unavailable or unknown † † † † † † † 

Total graduate/first-professional 

enrollment3

<=164.5 10 # 38.46 # #1 # 33.33 4

>164.5 # # 30.77 50.00 -6.34 -0.17 33.33 3Total enrollment = 0 # # 30.77 50.00 -6.34 -0.17 33.33 2

Total male graduate/firstprofessional enrollment3

<=58.5 # # 30.77 # #1 # 26.67 3

>58.5 # # 30.77 50.00 -6.34 -0.17 33.33 3Total enrollment = 0 10 # 38.46 50.00 -3.81 -0.09 40.00 3

Total female graduate/firstprofessional enrollment3

<=127.5 10 # 38.46 # #1 # 33.33 4

>127.5 # # 30.77 50.00 -6.34 -0.17 33.33 3Total enrollment = 0 # # 30.77 50.00 -6.34 -0.17 33.33 2

† Not applicable. # Rounds to zero. 1 Bias is significant at the 0.05/(c-1) level, where c is the number of categories within the primary variable. 2 Undergraduate enrollment categories were defined by quartiles. 3 Graduate/first-professional enrollment categories were defined by the median. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 2004 National Postsecondary Student Aid Study (NPSAS:04). 
K-60 

Table K-14. Institution nonresponse bias before nonresponse adjustment and after weight adjustments for selec

York private not-for-profit 4-year institutions: 2004 

Before nonresponse adjustment After nonres

Variable 

Unweighted 

respondents 

Unweighted 

nonrespondents 

Respondent 

mean 

weighted 

Nonrespondent 

mean 

weighted 

Estimated 

bias 

Relative 

bias 

Overall 

mean, 

before 

adjustments 

O

mean, 

adjustm

Carnegie classification code 

Doctorate-granting/research 

universities—extensive 

10 # 11.35 4.76 1.22 0.12 9.83 1

Doctorate-granting/research 

universities—intensive 

10 # 9.93 4.76 0.96 0.11 8.74 1

Master’s colleges and 

universities I 

10 # 38.63 6.56 5.94 0.18 31.26 3

Master’s (comprehensive) 

colleges and universities II 

† † † † † † † 

Baccalaureate colleges—

liberal arts 

# # 5.49 65.16 -11.06 -0.67 19.19 

Baccalaureate colleges—

general 

# # 15.01 # # # 11.56 

Baccalaureate/associate’s 

colleges 

† † † † † † † 

Associate’s colleges † † † † † † † Theological seminaries and 

other specialized faithrelated institutions 

† † † † † † † 

Medical schools and medical 

centers 

# # 2.84 4.76 -0.36 -0.11 3.28 

Other separate health 

profession schools 

† † † † † † † 

Schools of engineering and 

technology 

† † † † † † † 

Schools of business and 

management 

† † † † † † † 

Schools of art, music, and 

design 

# # # 14.00 -2.59 -1.00 3.21 

Schools of law † † † † † † † Teachers colleges † † † † † † † Other specialized institutions # # 13.80 # # # 10.63 1Tribal colleges and 

universities 

† † † † † † † 

Unavailable or unknown # # 2.96 # # # 2.28 

Degree of urbanization 

Large city 10 # 40.15 23.52 3.08 0.08 36.33 4Mid-size city 10 # 24.22 # # # 18.66 2

See notes at end of table. 
K-61 

Table K-14. Institution nonresponse bias before nonresponse adjustment and after weight adjustments for selec

York private not-for-profit 4-year institutions: 2004—Continued 

Before nonresponse adjustment After nonres

Variable 

Unweighted 

respondents 

Unweighted 

nonrespondents 

Respondent 

mean 

weighted 

Nonrespondent 

mean 

weighted 

Estimated 

bias 

Relative 

bias 

Overall 

mean, 

before 

adjustments 

O

mean, 

adjustm

Urban fringe of large city 10 # 27.31 11.32 2.96 0.12 23.64 2Urban fringe of mid-size city # # 5.49 28.20 -4.21 -0.43 10.70 Large town # # 1.42 # # # 1.09 Small town # # 1.42 # # # 1.09 Rural † † † † † † † Not assigned # # # 36.96 -6.85 -1.00 8.49 Unavailable or unknown † † † † † † † 

Historically Black college or 

university 

Yes † † † † † † † No 30 10 100.00 100.00 #1 # 100.00 10

Percent receiving federal grant 

aid 

<=25 10 # 24.82 69.92 -8.36 -0.25 35.18 2>25, <=50 10 # 34.53 25.32 1.71 0.05 32.41 3>50, <=75 # # 23.45 # # # 18.06 2>75 # # 4.31 # # # 3.32 Unavailable or unknown 10 # 12.89 4.76 1.51 0.13 11.02 1

Percent receiving state/local grant 

aid 

<=25 # # 9.74 60.48 -9.40 -0.49 21.39 >25, <=50 10 # 11.35 28.20 -3.12 -0.22 15.22 >50, <=75 10 # 50.34 6.56 8.111 0.19 40.29 4

>75 # # 15.68 # # # 12.08 Unavailable or unknown 10 # 12.89 4.76 1.51 0.13 11.02 1

Percent receiving institutional 

grant aid 

<=25 # # 16.26 # # # 12.53 >25, <=50 # # 11.07 4.76 1.17 0.12 9.62 1>50, <=75 10 # 15.08 76.48 -11.381 -0.43 29.18 >75 10 # 44.69 14.00 5.69 0.15 37.64 4Unavailable or unknown 10 # 12.89 4.76 1.51 0.13 11.02 1

See notes at end of table. 
K-62 

Table K-14. Institution nonresponse bias before nonresponse adjustment and after weight adjustments for selec

York private not-for-profit 4-year institutions: 2004—Continued 

Before nonresponse adjustment After nonres

Variable 

Unweighted 

respondents 

Unweighted 

nonrespondents 

Respondent 

mean 

weighted 

Nonrespondent 

mean 

weighted 

Estimated 

bias 

Relative 

bias 

Overall 

mean, 

before 

adjustments 

O

mean, 

adjustm

Percent receiving student loan aid 

<=25 # # 4.31 # # # 3.32 >25, <=50 10 # 21.90 4.76 3.18 0.17 17.97 2>50, <=75 10 10 30.62 90.48 -11.091 -0.27 44.37 2

>75 10 # 30.27 # # # 23.32 3Unavailable or unknown 10 # 12.89 4.76 1.51 0.13 11.02 1

Percent enrolled: Black, nonHispanic 

<=25 30 10 80.98 100.00 -3.52 -0.04 85.35 8>25, <=50 # # 5.21 # # # 4.02 >50, <=75 # # 13.80 # # # 10.63 >75 † † † † † † † Unavailable or unknown † † † † † † † 

Percent enrolled: Asian or Pacific 

Islander 

<=25 30 10 98.58 100.00 -0.26 # 98.91 9>25, <=50 # # 1.42 # # # 1.09 >50, <=75 † † † † † † † >75 † † † † † † † Unavailable or unknown † † † † † † † 

Percent enrolled: Hispanic 

<=25 30 10 97.25 100.00 -0.51 -0.01 97.88 9>25, <=50 # # 2.75 # # # 2.12 >50, <=75 † † † † † † † >75 † † † † † † † Unavailable or unknown † † † † † † † 

Total undergraduate enrollment2

<=1,806 10 # 40.26 41.72 -0.27 -0.01 40.59 3>1,806, <=3,828.5 10 # 29.08 42.20 -2.43 -0.08 32.10 2>3,828.5, <=8,159 10 # 16.13 16.08 0.01 # 16.12 1>8,159 10 # 14.53 # #1 # 11.20 

Unavailable or unknown † † † † † † † 

See notes at end of table. 
K-63 

Table K-14. Institution nonresponse bias before nonresponse adjustment and after weight adjustments for selec

York private not-for-profit 4-year institutions: 2004—Continued 

Before nonresponse adjustment After nonres

Variable 

Unweighted 

respondents 

Unweighted 

nonrespondents 

Respondent 

mean 

weighted 

Nonrespondent 

mean 

weighted 

Estimated 

bias 

Relative 

bias 

Overall 

mean, 

before 

adjustments 

O

mean, 

adjustm

Total male undergraduate 

enrollment2

<=528 10 # 48.00 4.76 8.011 0.20 38.07 4

>528, <=1,548 10 # 27.08 65.16 -7.06 -0.21 35.83 2>1,548, <=3,863 10 # 11.71 30.08 -3.40 -0.23 15.93 >3,863 10 # 13.20 # #1 # 10.17 

Unavailable or unknown † † † † † † † 

Total female undergraduate 

enrollment2

<=918 10 # 16.95 41.72 -4.59 -0.21 22.64 >918, <=1,925 10 # 50.98 28.20 4.22 0.09 45.75 4>1,925, <=4,813 10 # 16.50 30.08 -2.52 -0.13 19.62 >4,813 10 # 15.58 # #1 # 12.00 

Unavailable or unknown † † † † † † † 

Total graduate/first-professional 

enrollment3

<=3,042 20 # 73.08 55.72 3.22 0.05 69.10 7>3,042 20 # 26.92 16.08 2.01 0.08 24.43 2Total enrollment = 0 # # # 28.20 -5.23 -1.00 6.48 

Total male graduate/firstprofessional enrollment3

<=1,249 20 # 74.12 55.72 3.41 0.05 69.90 7>1,249 20 # 25.88 16.08 1.82 0.08 23.63 2Total enrollment = 0 # # # 28.20 -5.23 -1.00 6.48 

Total female graduate/firstprofessional enrollment3

<=1,394 20 # 73.08 55.72 3.22 0.05 69.10 7>1,394 20 # 26.92 16.08 2.01 0.08 24.43 2Total enrollment = 0 # # # 28.20 -5.23 -1.00 6.48 

† Not applicable. # Rounds to zero. 1 Bias is significant at the 0.05/(c-1) level, where c is the number of categories within the primary variable. 2 Undergraduate enrollment categories were defined by quartiles. 3 Graduate/first-professional enrollment categories were defined by the median. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 2004 National Postsecondary Student Aid Study (NPSAS:04). 
K-64 

Table K-15. Institution nonresponse bias before nonresponse adjustment and after weight adjustments for selec

Texas private not-for-profit 4-year institutions: 2004 

Before nonresponse adjustment After nonrespons

Variable 

Unweighted 

respondents 

Unweighted 

nonrespondents 

Respondent 

mean 

weighted 

Nonrespondent 

mean 

weighted 

Estimated 

bias 

Relative 

bias 

Overall 

mean, 

before 

adjustments 

Ov

mean, 

adjustm

Carnegie classification code 

Doctorate-granting/research 

universities—extensive 

# # 6.19 # # # 4.16 

Doctorate-granting/research 

universities—intensive 

# # 6.19 # # # 4.16 

Master’s colleges and 

universities I 

10 # 32.35 6.36 4.14 0.15 23.85 3

Master’s (comprehensive) 

colleges and universities II 

# # 3.09 12.72 -1.53 -0.33 6.24 

Baccalaureate colleges—

liberal arts 

# # 11.61 6.36 0.84 0.08 9.89 1

Baccalaureate colleges—

general 

# # 10.70 15.48 -0.76 -0.07 12.26 

Baccalaureate/associate’s 

colleges 

† † † † † † † 

Associate’s colleges † † † † † † † Theological seminaries and 

other specialized faithrelated institutions 

# # 13.68 59.08 -7.23 -0.35 28.54 1

Medical schools and medical 

centers 

# # 3.09 # # # 2.08 

Other separate health 

profession schools 

† † † † † † † 

Schools of engineering and 

technology 

† † † † † † † 

Schools of business and 

management 

† † † † † † † 

Schools of art, music, and 

design 

† † † † † † † 

Schools of law # # 13.10 # # # 8.82 1

Teachers colleges † † † † † † † 

Other specialized institutions † † † † † † † Tribal colleges and 

universities 

† † † † † † † 

Unavailable or unknown † † † † † † † 

Degree of urbanization 

Large city 10 # 56.30 71.80 -2.47 -0.04 61.38 5

Mid-size city # # 17.92 12.72 0.83 0.05 16.22 1

See notes at end of table. 
K-65 

Table K-15. Institution nonresponse bias before nonresponse adjustment and after weight adjustments for selec

Texas private not-for-profit 4-year institutions: 2004—Continued 

Before nonresponse adjustment After nonrespons

Variable 

Unweighted 

respondents 

Unweighted 

nonrespondents 

Respondent 

mean 

weighted 

Nonrespondent 

mean 

weighted 

Estimated 

bias 

Relative 

bias 

Overall 

mean, 

before 

adjustments 

Ov

mean, 

adjustm

Urban fringe of large city # # 10.57 15.48 -0.78 -0.07 12.18 1Urban fringe of mid-size city # # 3.09 # # # 2.08 

Large town # # 3.82 # # # 2.57 Small town # # 8.29 # # # 5.58 Rural † † † † † † † 

Not assigned † † † † † † † Unavailable or unknown † † † † † † † 

Historically Black college or 

university 

Yes † † † † † † † 

No 20 10 100.00 100.00 #1 # 100.00 10

Percent receiving federal grant 

aid 

<=25 10 # 27.03 12.72 2.28 0.09 22.35 2

>25, <=50 10 # 39.69 80.92 -6.56 -0.14 53.18 4>50, <=75 # # 8.60 6.36 0.36 0.04 7.86 

>75 † † † † † † † 

Unavailable or unknown # # 24.68 # # # 16.61 2

Percent receiving state/local grant 

aid 

<=25 # # 6.19 12.72 -1.04 -0.14 8.32 

>25, <=50 10 # 39.15 80.92 -6.65 -0.15 52.81 4

>50, <=75 10 # 26.89 6.36 3.27 0.14 20.17 2>75 # # 3.09 # # # 2.08 

Unavailable or unknown # # 24.68 # # # 16.61 2

Percent receiving institutional 

grant aid 

<=25 # # # 6.36 -1.01 -1.00 2.08 

>25, <=50 # # 3.82 # # # 2.57 >50, <=75 10 # 46.71 6.36 6.421 0.16 33.51 5

>75 10 # 24.79 87.28 -9.951 -0.29 45.24 2Unavailable or unknown # # 24.68 # # # 16.61 2

See notes at end of table. 
K-66 

Table K-15. Institution nonresponse bias before nonresponse adjustment and after weight adjustments for selec

Texas private not-for-profit 4-year institutions: 2004—Continued 

Before nonresponse adjustment After nonrespons

Variable 

Unweighted 

respondents 

Unweighted 

nonrespondents 

Respondent 

mean 

weighted 

Nonrespondent 

mean 

weighted 

Estimated 

bias 

Relative 

bias 

Overall 

mean, 

before 

adjustments 

Ov

mean, 

adjustm

Percent receiving student loan aid 

<=25 † † † † † † † 

>25, <=50 10 # 21.65 # #1 # 14.57 2

>50, <=75 10 # 40.00 34.56 0.87 0.02 38.22 3>75 # # 13.67 65.44 -8.24 -0.38 30.61 1Unavailable or unknown # # 24.68 # # # 16.61 2

Percent enrolled: Black, nonHispanic 

<=25 20 10 100.00 100.00 # # 100.00 10

>25, <=50 † † † † † † † 

>50, <=75 † † † † † † † >75 † † † † † † † Unavailable or unknown † † † † † † † 

Percent enrolled: Asian or Pacific 

Islander 

<=25 20 10 100.00 100.00 # # 100.00 10

>25, <=50 † † † † † † † 

>50, <=75 † † † † † † † >75 † † † † † † † Unavailable or unknown † † † † † † † 

Percent enrolled: Hispanic 

<=25 20 10 87.63 100.00 -1.97 -0.02 91.68 8

>25, <=50 # # 3.09 # # # 2.08 

>50, <=75 # # 9.28 # # # 6.24 >75 † † † † † † † 

Unavailable or unknown † † † † † † † 

Total undergraduate enrollment2

<=1,318 10 # 36.29 74.56 -6.09 -0.14 48.81 3

>1,318, <=2,284.5 10 # 22.77 12.72 1.60 0.08 19.48 2>2,284.5, <=3,991 10 # 22.38 6.36 2.55 0.13 17.14 2>3,991 10 # 18.56 6.36 1.94 0.12 14.57 1Unavailable or unknown † † † † † † † 

See notes at end of table. 
K-67 

Table K-15. Institution nonresponse bias before nonresponse adjustment and after weight adjustments for select

Texas private not-for-profit 4-year institutions: 2004—Continued 

Before nonresponse adjustment After nonrespons

Variable 

Unweighted 

respondents 

Unweighted 

nonrespondents 

Respondent 

mean 

weighted 

Nonrespondent 

mean 

weighted 

Estimated 

bias 

Relative 

bias 

Overall 

mean, 

before 

adjustments 

Ov

mean, 

adjustm

Total male undergraduate 

enrollment2

<=566 10 # 36.29 74.56 -6.09 -0.14 48.81 3

>566, <=858.5 10 # 20.67 12.72 1.27 0.07 18.07 2>858.5, <=1,712 10 # 24.48 6.36 2.88 0.13 18.55 2>1,712 10 # 18.56 6.36 1.94 0.12 14.57 1Unavailable or unknown † † † † † † † 

Total female undergraduate 

enrollment2

<=777 10 # 36.29 74.56 -6.09 -0.14 48.81 3

>777, <=1,323 10 # 22.81 12.72 1.61 0.08 19.51 2>1,323, <=2,243 10 # 22.34 6.36 2.54 0.13 17.11 2>2,243 10 # 18.56 6.36 1.94 0.12 14.57 1Unavailable or unknown † † † † † † † 

Total graduate/first-professional 

enrollment3

<=1,241 10 # 37.59 28.20 1.50 0.04 34.52 4

>1,241 10 # 46.33 12.72 5.35 0.13 35.34 4Total enrollment = 0 # # 16.08 59.08 -6.85 -0.30 30.15 1

Total male graduate/firstprofessional enrollment3

<=510 10 # 37.59 28.20 1.50 0.04 34.52 4

>510 10 # 46.33 12.72 5.35 0.13 35.34 4Total enrollment = 0 # # 16.08 59.08 -6.85 -0.30 30.15 1

Total female graduate/firstprofessional enrollment3

<=664 10 # 49.21 28.20 3.34 0.07 42.33 4

>664 10 # 34.72 12.72 3.50 0.11 27.52 3Total enrollment = 0 # # 16.08 59.08 -6.85 -0.30 30.15 1

† Not applicable. # Rounds to zero. 1 Bias is significant at the 0.05/(c-1) level, where c is the number of categories within the primary variable. 2 Undergraduate enrollment categories were defined by quartiles. 3 Graduate/first-professional enrollment categories were defined by the median. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 2004 National Postsecondary Student Aid Study (NPSAS:04). 

Appendix K. Nonresponse Bias Analysis 

K-69 

Student Nonresponse Bias Analysis 
K-70 

Table K-16. Student nonresponse bias before nonresponse adjustment and after weight adjustments for selected 

students in public 2-year institutions: 2004 

Before nonresponse adjustment After nonres

Variable 

Unweighted 

respondents 

Unweighted 

nonrespondents 

Respondent 

mean 

weighted 

Nonrespondent 

mean 

weighted 

Estimated 

bias 

Relative 

bias 

Overall 

mean, 

before 

adjustments 

O

mean

adjustm

Bureau of Economic Analysis 

Code (Office of Business Economics [OBE]) Region1

New England 810 310 2.47 3.84 -0.14 -0.05 2.72 Mid East 3,000 920 9.64 7.73 0.20 0.02 9.29 Great Lakes 4,290 700 18.64 12.41 0.64 0.04 17.50 Plains 2,090 610 6.32 6.09 0.02 # 6.28 Southeast 7,250 820 24.20 12.17 1.232 0.05 22.00 

Southwest 3,770 460 15.72 8.40 0.752 0.05 14.37 Rocky Mountains 370 210 1.34 0.88 0.05 0.04 1.26 Far West 4,730 2,130 21.64 48.33 -2.732 -0.11 26.54 Outlying areas 10 80 0.02 0.15 -0.01 -0.44 0.04 

Student type 

Undergraduate student 26,320 6,220 100.00 100.00 # # 100.00 1Graduate student † † † † † † † 

First-professional † † † † † † † Unknown † † † † † † † 

CPS record available 

No 14,190 # 51.63 # # # 42.16 4

Yes 12,130 6,220 48.37 100.00 -5.292 -0.10 57.84 

Applied for federal aid 

No 16,300 300 57.93 3.19 5.612 0.11 47.89 4

Yes 10,020 4,330 42.07 77.35 -3.612 -0.08 48.54 

Unknown # 1,590 # 19.46 -1.992 -1.00 3.57 

Pell Grant status 

Received 8,610 190 31.31 2.09 2.992 0.11 25.95 

Did not receive 17,700 5,580 68.62 90.78 -2.272 -0.03 72.68 Unknown 16 450 0.07 7.14 -0.72 -0.91 1.37 

Total Pell amount received3

<=$1,300 2,160 60 23.22 28.85 -0.58 -0.02 23.31 

>1,300, <=2,025 2,110 50 23.52 22.82 0.07 # 23.51 2>2,025, <=3,544 2,160 50 25.95 28.73 -0.28 -0.01 25.99 >3,544 2,100 30 26.25 16.04 1.052 0.04 26.10 Unknown 80 # 1.05 3.56 -0.26 -0.20 1.08 

See notes at end of table. 
K-71 

Table K-16. Student nonresponse bias before nonresponse adjustment and after weight adjustments for selected 

students in public 2-year institutions: 2004—Continued 

Before nonresponse adjustment After nonres

Variable 

Unweighted 

respondents 

Unweighted 

nonrespondents 

Respondent 

mean 

weighted 

Nonrespondent 

mean 

weighted 

Estimated 

bias 

Relative 

bias 

Overall 

mean, 

before 

adjustments 

O

mean

adjustm

Stafford Loan status 

Received 4,590 190 17.89 2.03 1.622 0.10 14.98 

Did not receive 21,710 5,580 82.04 90.83 -0.90 -0.01 83.65 Unknown 20 450 0.07 7.14 -0.72 -0.91 1.37 

Total Stafford amount received3

<=$2,200 1,140 60 23.11 25.81 -0.28 -0.01 23.17 

>2,200, <=2,625 1,330 60 23.45 21.87 0.16 0.01 23.41 2>2,625, <=5,023.5 950 30 24.24 22.86 0.14 0.01 24.20 2>5,023.5 1,140 50 28.56 28.33 0.02 # 28.55 Unknown 40 # 0.65 1.13 -0.05 -0.07 0.66 

Institution undergraduate 

enrollment3

<=7,053 7,270 960 26.63 11.39 1.562 0.06 23.83 

>7,053, <=12,179 6,420 1,610 22.67 19.50 0.33 0.01 22.09 2>12,179, <=26,798 6,110 1,900 21.66 32.60 -1.12 -0.05 23.67 2>26,798 6,380 1,710 28.56 36.04 -0.77 -0.03 29.93 Unknown 140 50 0.48 0.46 # # 0.48 

Tuiton4 

Low 8,170 2,280 34.10 47.96 -1.422 -0.04 36.64 

Medium 8,700 1,520 28.84 17.68 1.142 0.04 26.79 High 8,370 1,970 33.21 28.73 0.46 0.01 32.39 Unknown 1,070 450 3.85 5.64 -0.18 -0.05 4.18 

Percent PT enrollment 

<= 25 220 80 0.37 0.16 0.02 0.06 0.33 >25, <=50 6,190 810 21.82 10.83 1.132 0.05 19.81 >50, <=75 18,200 4,590 70.23 72.51 -0.23 # 70.64 >75 1,570 700 7.08 16.04 -0.92 -0.11 8.73 Unknown 150 50 0.50 0.46 # 0.01 0.49 

† Not applicable. # Rounds to zero. 1 New England = Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Rhode Island, Vermont; Mid East = Delaware, District of Columbia, Maryland, New 

Pennsylvania; Great Lakes = Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Ohio, Wisconsin; Plains = Iowa, Kansas, Minnesota, Missouri, Nebraska, North Dakota, South D

Southeast = Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, North Carolina, South Carolina, Tennessee, Virginia, West Virginia; 

Mexico, Oklahoma, Texas; Rocky Mountains = Colorado, Idaho, Montana, Utah, Wyoming; Far West = Alaska, California, Hawaii, Nevada, Oregon, WashOutlying Areas = American Samoa, Federated States of Micronesia, Guam, Marshall Islands, Northern Mariana Islands, Puerto Rico, Palau, Virgin Island

2 Bias is significant at the 0.05/(c-1) level, where c is the number of categories within the primary variable. 3 Undergraduate enrollment, Pell grant amount, and Stafford loan amount categories were defined by quartiles. 4 Tuition categories were defined by thirds. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 2004 National Postsecondary Student Aid Study (NPSAS:04). 
K-72 

Table K-17. Student nonresponse bias before nonresponse adjustment and after weight adjustments for selected 

students in California public 2-year institutions: 2004 

Before nonresponse adjustment After nonresp

Variable 

Unweighted 

respondents 

Unweighted 

nonrespondents 

Respondent 

mean 

weighted 

Nonrespondent 

mean 

weighted 

Estimated 

bias 

Relative 

bias 

Overall 

mean, before 

adjustments 

Ov

mean, a

adjustm

Student type 

Undergraduate student 2,850 2,960 100.00 100.00 #1 # 100.00 10

Graduate student † † † † † † † 

First-professional † † † † † † † Unknown † † † † † † † 

CPS record available 

No 1,270 # 43.26 # #1 # 26.53 2

Yes 1,590 # 56.74 # #1 # 34.80 7

Unknown # 1,960 # 100.00 -10.24 -1.00 38.67 

Applied for federal aid 

No 1,500 10 50.33 0.45 5.111 0.11 31.04 3

Yes 1,360 1,600 49.67 83.81 -3.501 -0.07 62.87 6

Unknown # 350 # 15.75 -1.61 -1.00 6.09 

Pell Grant status 

Received 660 # 22.70 0.21 2.301 0.11 14.00 1

Did not receive 2,200 1,800 77.23 92.49 -1.561 -0.02 83.13 8Unknown # 180 0.08 7.30 -0.74 -0.91 2.87 

Total Pell amount received2

<=$1,425 2,360 1,770 82.80 92.55 -1.00 -0.01 86.57 8>1,425, <=2,462 160 # 5.54 0.06 0.561 0.11 3.42 

>2,462, <=3,750 170 # 5.97 0.06 0.611 0.11 3.69 >3,750 160 # 5.70 0.02 0.581 0.11 3.50 Unknown # 180 # 7.30 -0.75 -1.00 2.82 

Stafford Loan status 

Received 200 10 7.13 0.30 0.701 0.11 4.49 

Did not receive 2,650 1,770 92.79 92.39 0.04 # 92.64 9Unknown # 180 0.08 7.30 -0.74 -0.91 2.87 

Total Stafford amount received2

<=$2,625 2,720 1,770 95.21 92.49 0.28 # 94.16 9>2,625, <=3,500 40 # 1.23 # #1 # 0.76 

>3,500, <=6,125 50 # 1.62 0.17 0.151 0.10 1.06 

>6,125 50 # 1.93 0.04 0.191 0.11 1.20 

Unknown # 180 # 7.30 -0.75 -1.00 2.82 

See notes at end of table. 
K-73 

Table K-17. Student nonresponse bias before nonresponse adjustment and after weight adjustments for selected 

students in California public 2-year institutions: 2004—Continued 

Before nonresponse adjustment After nonresp

Variable 

Unweighted 

respondents 

Unweighted 

nonrespondents 

Respondent 

mean 

weighted 

Nonrespondent 

mean 

weighted 

Estimated 

bias 

Relative 

bias 

Overall 

mean, before 

adjustments 

Ov

mean, a

adjustm

Institution undergraduate 

enrollment2

<=17,925 810 530 32.01 32.10 -0.01 # 32.04 3>17,925, <=29,583 740 470 24.68 22.00 0.27 0.01 23.64 2>29,583, <=46,027 750 560 19.79 23.00 -0.33 -0.02 21.03 2>46,027 560 390 23.52 22.90 0.06 # 23.28 2Unknown † † † † † † † 

Tuiton2 

Low 1,470 1,170 47.95 53.36 -0.55 -0.01 50.04 4Medium 260 70 11.02 4.15 0.701 0.07 8.36 1

High 930 570 31.93 32.09 -0.02 # 32.00 3Unknown 200 150 9.09 10.40 -0.13 -0.01 9.60 

Percent PT enrollment 

<= 25 † † † † † † † 

>25, <=50 † † † † † † † >50, <=75 2,430 1,480 83.58 74.27 0.95 0.01 79.98 8>75 420 480 16.42 25.73 -0.95 -0.05 20.02 1Unknown † † † † † † † 

† Not applicable. # Rounds to zero. 1 Bias is significant at the 0.05/(c-1) level, where c is the number of categories within the primary variable. 2 Undergraduate enrollment, Pell grant amount, and Stafford loan amount categories were defined by quartiles. 3 Tuition categories were defined by thirds. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 2004 National Postsecondary Student Aid Study (NPSAS:04). 
K-74 

Table K-18. Student nonresponse bias before nonresponse adjustment and after weight adjustments for selected 

students in Connecticut public 2-year institutions: 2004 

Before nonresponse adjustment After nonre

Variable 

Unweighted 

respondents 

Unweighted 

nonrespondents 

Respondent 

mean 

weighted 

Nonrespondent 

mean 

weighted 

Estimated 

bias 

Relative 

bias 

Overall 

mean, 

before 

adjustments 

Ov

mean, 

adjustm

Student type 

Undergraduate student 420 150 100.00 100.00 #1 # 100.00 10

Graduate student † † † † † † † 

First-professional † † † † † † † Unknown † † † † † † † 

CPS record available 

No 270 # 63.37 # #1 # 47.25 4

Yes 150 # 36.63 # #1 # 27.32 5

Unknown # 150 # 100.00 -10.24 -1.00 25.43 

Applied for federal aid 

No 290 # 65.60 # #1 # 48.92 5

Yes 130 140 34.40 98.55 -6.571 -0.16 50.71 4

Unknown # 20 # 1.45 -0.151 -1.00 0.37 

Pell Grant status 

Received 160 # 35.86 # #1 # 26.74 2

Did not receive 260 140 64.14 99.69 -3.641 -0.05 73.18 7Unknown # 10 # 0.31 -0.031 -1.00 0.08 

Total Pell amount received2

<=$1,012 300 140 74.28 99.69 -2.601 -0.03 80.74 8

>1,012, <=1,975 40 # 8.23 # #1 # 6.13 >1,975, <=2,906 40 # 8.23 # #1 # 6.13 >2,906 40 # 9.27 # #1 # 6.91 Unknown # 10 # 0.31 -0.031 -1.00 0.08 

Stafford Loan status 

Received 30 # 8.82 # #1 # 6.57 

Did not receive 390 140 91.18 99.69 -0.871 -0.01 93.35 9

Unknown # 10 # 0.31 -0.031 -1.00 0.08 

See notes at end of table. 
K-75 

Table K-18. Student nonresponse bias before nonresponse adjustment and after weight adjustments for selected 

students in Connecticut public 2-year institutions: 2004—Continued 

Before nonresponse adjustment After nonre

Variable 

Unweighted 

respondents 

Unweighted 

nonrespondents 

Respondent 

mean 

weighted 

Nonrespondent 

mean 

weighted 

Estimated 

bias 

Relative 

bias 

Overall 

mean, 

before 

adjustments 

Ov

mean, 

adjustm

Total Stafford amount received2

<=$2,500 400 140 93.39 99.69 -0.641 -0.01 94.99 9

>2,500, <=2,625 10 # 2.68 # #1 # 2.00 

>2,625, <=4,500 10 # 1.46 # # # 1.09 >4,500 10 # 2.46 # #1 # 1.84 Unknown # 10 # 0.31 -0.031 -1.00 0.08 

Institution undergraduate 

enrollment2

<=5,178 130 40 34.76 30.89 0.40 0.01 33.77 3>5,178, <=7,353 140 40 32.79 30.47 0.24 0.01 32.20 3>7,353, <=8,220 50 20 11.54 10.38 0.12 0.01 11.24 1>8,220 90 40 20.86 27.95 -0.731 -0.03 22.66 2

Unknown 10 10 0.06 0.31 -0.031 -0.31 0.12 

Tuiton3

Low 410 140 99.94 99.69 0.031 # 99.88 9

Medium † † † † † † † 

High † † † † † † † Unknown 10 10 0.06 0.31 -0.031 -0.31 0.12 

Percent PT enrollment 

<= 25 † † † † † † † 

>25, <=50 † † † † † † † >50, <=75 410 140 99.94 99.69 0.031 # 99.88 9

>75 † † † † † † † 

Unknown 10 10 0.06 0.31 -0.031 -0.31 0.12 

† Not applicable. # Rounds to zero. 1 Bias is significant at the 0.05/(c-1) level, where c is the number of categories within the primary variable. 2 Undergraduate enrollment, Pell grant amount, and Stafford loan amount categories were defined by quartiles. 3 Tuition categories were defined by thirds. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 2004 National Postsecondary Student Aid Study (NPSAS:04). 
K-76 

Table K-19. Student nonresponse bias before nonresponse adjustment and after weight adjustments for selected 

students in Delaware public 2-year institutions: 2004

Before nonresponse adjustment 

Variable 

Unweighted 

respondents 

Unweighted 

nonrespondents 

Respondent 

mean 

weighted 

Nonrespondent 

mean 

weighted 

Estimated 

bias 

Relative 

bias 

Overall 

mean, 

before 

adjustments 

Ov

mean, 

adjustm

Student type 

Undergraduate student 460 380 100.00 100.00 #1 # 100.00 10

Graduate student † † † † † † † 

First-professional † † † † † † † Unknown † † † † † † † 

CPS record available 

No 40 # 8.22 # #1 # 4.57 

Yes 420 # 91.78 # #1 # 51.09 9Unknown # 380 # 100.00 -10.24 -1.00 44.34 

Applied for federal aid 

No 430 # 93.19 # #1 # 51.87 9

Yes 30 # 6.81 # #1 # 3.79 Unknown # 380 # 100.00 -10.241 -1.00 44.34 

Pell Grant status 

Received 30 # 6.01 # #1 # 3.35 

Did not receive 430 380 93.99 100.00 -0.621 -0.01 96.65 9Unknown † † † † † † † 

Total Pell amount received2

<=$1,000 440 380 95.59 100.00 -0.451 # 97.55 9

>1,000, <=2,055.5 10 # 1.40 # #1 # 0.78 >2,055.5, <=3,544 10 # 1.80 # #1 # 1.00 

>3,544 10 # 1.20 # #1 # 0.67 Unknown † † † † † † † 

Stafford Loan status 

Received 20 # 3.61 # #1 # 2.01 

Did not receive 450 380 96.39 100.00 -0.371 # 97.99 9Unknown † † † † † † † 

Total Stafford amount received2

<=$1,661 450 380 97.40 100.00 -0.271 # 98.55 9

>1,661, <=2,625 10 # 2.20 # #1 # 1.23 >2,625, <=2,625 † † † † † † † 

>2,625 # # 0.40 # # # 0.22 Unknown † † † † † † † 

† Not applicable. # Rounds to zero. 1 Bias is significant at the 0.05/(c-1) level, where c is the number of categories within the primary variable. 2 Pell grant amount and Stafford loan amount categories were defined by quartiles. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 2004 National Postsecondary Student Aid Study (NPSAS:04). 
K-77 

Table K-20. Student nonresponse bias before nonresponse adjustment and after weight adjustments for selected 

students in Minnesota public 2-year institutions: 2004 

Before nonresponse adjustment After nonres

Variable 

Unweighted 

respondents 

Unweighted 

nonrespondents 

Respondent 

mean 

weighted 

Nonrespondent 

mean 

weighted 

Estimated 

bias 

Relative 

bias 

Overall 

mean, 

before 

adjustments 

Ov

mean, 

adjustm

Student type 

Undergraduate student 790 530 100.00 100.00 #1 # 100.00 10

Graduate student † † † † † † † 

First-professional † † † † † † † Unknown † † † † † † † 

CPS record available 

No 480 # 60.22 # #1 # 35.72 4

Yes 310 # 39.78 # #1 # 23.60 5Unknown # 530 # 100.00 -10.24 -1.00 40.68 

Applied for federal aid 

No 750 200 95.85 37.26 6.001 0.07 72.01 9

Yes 50 50 4.15 9.83 -0.581 -0.12 6.46 

Unknown # 270 # 52.91 -5.421 -1.00 21.53 

Pell Grant status 

Received 220 120 28.66 21.86 0.701 0.02 25.89 2

Did not receive 570 410 71.34 78.14 -0.701 -0.01 74.11 7Unknown † † † † † † † 

Total Pell amount received2

<=$1,100 630 440 78.44 84.59 -0.631 -0.01 80.95 8

>1,100, <=2,025 50 40 6.20 7.41 -0.12 -0.02 6.69 >2,025, <=3,544 60 30 7.14 4.69 0.25 0.04 6.15 >3,544 60 20 8.21 3.31 0.501 0.07 6.21 Unknown † † † † † † † 

Stafford Loan status 

Received 290 150 39.20 29.11 1.031 0.03 35.09 3

Did not receive 500 380 60.80 70.89 -1.031 -0.02 64.91 6Unknown † † † † † † † 

Total Stafford amount received2

<=$2,500 560 430 69.90 80.55 -1.091 -0.02 74.23 7

>2,500, <=2,625 110 50 10.36 7.47 0.30 0.03 9.18 >2,625, <=4,455 50 20 8.65 5.46 0.33 0.04 7.35 >4,455 70 40 11.10 6.53 0.47 0.04 9.24 Unknown † † † † † † † 

See notes at end of table. 
K-78 

Table K-20. Student nonresponse bias before nonresponse adjustment and after weight adjustments for selected 

students in Minnesota public 2-year institutions: 2004—Continued 

Before nonresponse adjustment After nonres

Variable 

Unweighted 

respondents 

Unweighted 

nonrespondents 

Respondent 

mean 

weighted 

Nonrespondent 

mean 

weighted 

Estimated 

bias 

Relative 

bias 

Overall 

mean, 

before 

adjustments 

Ov

mean, 

adjustm

Institution undergraduate 

enrollment2

<=5,012 200 130 26.25 22.11 0.42 0.02 24.57 2>5,012, <=8,175 190 160 23.24 31.39 -0.831 -0.03 26.56 2

>8,175,<=9,038 180 100 22.69 18.58 0.421 0.02 21.02 2>9,038 190 120 21.24 21.54 -0.03 # 21.36 2Unknown 30 20 6.58 6.38 0.02 # 6.50 

Tuiton3

Low 270 170 34.88 35.02 -0.01 # 34.94 3Medium 290 210 31.52 36.45 -0.501 -0.02 33.53 3

High 240 140 33.60 28.53 0.521 0.02 31.54 3Unknown † † † † † † † 

Percent PT Enrollment 

<= 25 † † † † † † † >25, <=50 230 160 28.09 29.38 -0.13 # 28.62 2>50, <=75 530 350 65.33 64.24 0.11 # 64.89 6>75 † † † † † † † Unknown 30 20 6.58 6.38 0.02 # 6.50 

† Not applicable. # Rounds to zero. 1 Bias is significant at the 0.05/(c-1) level, where c is the number of categories within the primary variable. 2 Undergraduate enrollment, Pell grant amount, and Stafford loan amount categories were defined by quartiles. 3 Tuition categories were defined by thirds. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 2004 National Postsecondary Student Aid Study (NPSAS:04). 
K-79 

Table K-21. Student nonresponse bias before nonresponse adjustment and after weight adjustments for selected 

students in Minnesota public 4-year institutions: 2004 

Before nonresponse adjustment After nonresponse 

Variable 

Unweighted 

respondents 

Unweighted 

nonrespondents 

Respondent 

mean 

weighted 

Nonrespondent 

mean 

weighted 

Estimated 

bias 

Relative 

bias 

Overall 

mean, 

before 

adjustments 

Ov

mean, 

adjustm

Student type 

Undergraduate student 490 130 80.00 87.23 -0.741 -0.01 81.46 7

Graduate student 110 10 17.68 12.77 0.50 0.03 16.69 1First-professional 20 # 2.32 # #1 # 1.85 Unknown † † † † † † † 

CPS record available 

No 390 # 61.23 # #1 # 48.86 5

Yes 230 # 38.77 # #1 # 30.94 4Unknown # 140 # 100.00 -10.24 -1.00 20.20 

Applied for federal aid 

No 460 70 76.65 47.89 2.941 0.04 70.84 7

Yes 160 20 23.35 10.50 1.321 0.06 20.76 2Unknown # 50 # 41.60 -4.261 -1.00 8.40 

Pell Grant status 

Received 110 30 17.47 19.63 -0.22 -0.01 17.91 1

Did not receive 510 110 82.53 80.37 0.22 # 82.09 8Unknown † † † † † † † 

Total Pell amount received2

<=$1,400 540 110 87.54 85.92 0.17 # 87.21 8>1,400, <=2,300 20 10 4.14 5.68 -0.16 -0.04 4.45 >2,300, <=3,800 30 10 4.05 5.26 -0.12 -0.03 4.29 >3,800 30 # 4.27 3.14 0.12 0.03 4.04 Unknown † † † † † † † 

Stafford Loan status 

Received 320 60 51.13 42.95 0.84 0.02 49.48 4Did not receive 300 80 48.87 57.05 -0.84 -0.02 50.52 5Unknown † † † † † † † 

Total Stafford amount received2

<=$2,625 440 100 65.58 69.16 -0.37 -0.01 66.31 6>2,625, <=3,500 40 10 8.23 5.97 0.23 0.03 7.77 >3,500, <=5,500 70 20 12.93 12.94 # # 12.93 1>5,500 80 10 13.26 11.93 0.14 0.01 12.99 1Unknown † † † † † † † 

See notes at end of table. 
K-80 

Table K-21. Student nonresponse bias before nonresponse adjustment and after weight adjustments for selected 

students in Minnesota public 4-year institutions: 2004—Continued 

Before nonresponse adjustment After nonresponse 

Variable 

Unweighted 

respondents 

Unweighted 

nonrespondents 

Respondent 

mean 

weighted 

Nonrespondent 

mean 

weighted 

Estimated 

bias 

Relative 

bias 

Overall 

mean, 

before 

adjustments 

Ov

mean, 

adjustm

Institution undergraduate 

enrollment2

<=8,531 160 50 27.38 39.06 -1.201 -0.04 29.74 2

>8,531, <=17,475 190 80 30.72 53.78 -2.361 -0.07 35.38 3>17,475,<=41,272 270 10 41.91 7.16 3.561 0.09 34.89 4>41,272 † † † † † † † 

Unknown † † † † † † † 

Tuiton3

Low 190 110 35.13 79.24 -4.521 -0.11 44.04 3

Medium 340 30 53.27 18.75 3.541 0.07 46.30 5High 90 # 11.59 2.00 0.981 0.09 9.66 1Unknown † † † † † † † 

Percent PT enrollment 

<= 25 540 100 87.71 76.80 1.121 0.01 85.50 8

>25, <=50 30 10 3.04 4.60 -0.161 -0.05 3.35 

>50, <=75 50 30 9.25 18.60 -0.961 -0.09 11.14 

>75 † † † † † † † 

Unknown † † † † † † † 

† Not applicable. # Rounds to zero. 1 Bias is significant at the 0.05/(c-1) level, where c is the number of categories within the primary variable. 2 Undergraduate enrollment, Pell grant amount, and Stafford loan amount categories were defined by quartiles. 3 Tuition categories were defined by thirds. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 2004 National Postsecondary Student Aid Study (NPSAS:04). 
K-81 

Table K-22. Student nonresponse bias before nonresponse adjustment and after weight adjustments for selected 

students in New York public 2-year institutions: 2004

Before nonresponse adjustment After nonres

Variable 

Unweighted 

respondents 

Unweighted 

nonrespondents 

Respondent 

mean 

weighted 

Nonrespondent 

mean 

weighted 

Estimated 

bias 

Relative 

bias 

Overall 

mean, 

before 

adjustments 

Ov

mean, 

adjustm

Student type 

Undergraduate student 1,230 220 81.00 74.77 0.64 0.01 79.88 8

Graduate student 280 50 17.60 25.23 -0.78 -0.04 18.97 1First-professional 40 # 1.40 # #1 # 1.15 Unknown † † † † † † † 

CPS record available 

No 1,050 # 65.23 # #1 # 53.55 6

Yes 510 # 34.77 # #1 # 28.55 3Unknown # 270 # 100.00 -10.24 -1.00 17.90 

Applied for federal aid 

No 1,160 10 71.35 1.36 7.171 0.11 58.82 6

Yes 390 190 28.65 74.18 -4.661 -0.14 36.80 3Unknown # 80 # 24.46 -2.501 -1.00 4.38 

Pell Grant status 

Received 446 # 29.12 1.03 2.881 0.11 24.09 2

Did not receive 1,100 210 70.74 84.40 -1.40 -0.02 73.19 7Unknown 2 60 0.14 14.57 -1.48 -0.92 2.72 

Total Pell amount received2

<=$1,500 1,220 210 78.07 84.83 -0.69 -0.01 79.28 7>1,500, <=2,100 120 # 7.55 # #1 # 6.20 

>2,100, <=4,000 220 # 14.38 0.60 1.411 0.11 11.91 1>4,000 † † † † † † † 

Unknown # 60 # 14.57 -1.49 -1.00 2.61 

Stafford Loan status 

Received 630 # 36.20 0.33 3.671 0.11 29.78 3

Did not receive 920 210 63.61 84.48 -2.14 -0.03 67.34 6Unknown # 60 0.19 15.20 -1.54 -0.89 2.88 

Total Stafford amount received2

<=$2,000 1,130 210 73.21 84.70 -1.18 -0.02 75.26 7>2,000, <=2,625 110 # 7.69 # #1 # 6.32 

>2,625, <=3,500 160 # 10.95 # #1 # 8.99 1>3,500 160 # 8.15 0.11 0.821 0.11 6.71 Unknown # 60 # 15.20 -1.56 -1.00 2.72 

See notes at end of table. 
K-82 

Table K-22. Institution nonresponse bias before nonresponse adjustment and after weight adjustments for selec

students in New York public 2-year institutions: 2004—Continued 

Before nonresponse adjustment After nonres

Variable 

Unweighted 

respondents 

Unweighted 

nonrespondents 

Respondent 

mean 

weighted 

Nonrespondent 

mean 

weighted 

Estimated 

bias 

Relative 

bias 

Overall 

mean, 

before 

adjustments 

Ov

mean, 

adjustm

Institution undergraduate 

enrollment2

<=6,638 460 40 19.33 6.48 1.321 0.07 17.03 1

>6,638, <=15,635 350 70 23.71 28.45 -0.48 -0.02 24.56 2>15,635,<=24,010 370 110 29.81 43.60 -1.41 -0.05 32.28 3>24,010 380 50 27.14 21.48 0.58 0.02 26.13 2Unknown † † † † † † † 

Tuiton3

low 480 150 41.89 67.49 -2.62 -0.06 46.47 4

medium 1,020 100 56.83 29.85 2.76 0.05 52.00 5high † † † † † † † 

Unknown 50 30 1.27 2.65 -0.141 -0.10 1.52 

Percent PT enrollment 

<= 25 920 50 52.51 17.70 3.561 0.07 46.28 5

>25, <=50 520 150 43.05 67.49 -2.50 -0.05 47.42 4>50, <=75 60 50 3.16 12.15 -0.92 -0.23 4.77 >75 † † † † † † † 

Unknown 50 30 1.27 2.65 -0.141 -0.10 1.52 

† Not applicable. # Rounds to zero. 1 Bias is significant at the 0.05/(c-1) level, where c is the number of categories within the primary variable. 2 Undergraduate enrollment, Pell grant amount, and Stafford loan amount categories were defined by quartiles. 3 Tuition categories were defined by thirds. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 2004 National Postsecondary Student Aid Study (NPSAS:04). 
Appendix K. Nonresponse Bias Analysis 

K-83 

Item-Level Nonresponse Bias Analysis 
K-84 

Table K-23. Item nonresponse bias before imputation for DEPCHILD for all institutions: 2004 

Before nonresponse adjustment 

Characteristic 

Unweighted 

respondents 

Unweighted nonrespondents Respondent mean weighted Nonrespondent mean weighted 

Institution strata 

Public less-than-2-year 1,560 360 2.01 2.81 

Public 2-year 21,800 4,520 28.01 34.99 Public 4-year, non-doctorate-granting 7,190 970 9.23 7.51 Public 4-year, doctorate-granting 18,140 2,460 23.31 19.02 Private not-for-profit, less-than-4 year 2,140 430 2.75 3.36 Private not-for-profit, 4-year, non-doctorate-granting 7,760 790 9.96 6.15 Private not-for-profit, 4-year, doctorate-granting 8,370 1,150 10.75 8.88 Private for-profit, less-than-2-year 5,630 1,520 7.24 11.73 Private for-profit, 2-year or more 5,250 720 6.75 5.56 

Bureau of Economic Analysis Code (Office of Business 

Economics [OBE]) Region2

New England 4,530 700 5.82 5.41 

Mid East 12,140 1,720 15.59 13.30 

Great Lakes 11,660 2,110 14.98 16.30 Plains 6,310 690 8.11 5.32 

Southeast 18,690 3,190 24.01 24.67 Southwest 8,230 1,890 10.58 14.64 

Rocky Mountains 3,120 540 4.00 4.15 Far West 11,580 1,910 14.88 14.75 

Outlying areas 1,570 190 2.02 1.46 

Student type 

Undergraduate student 68,570 11,280 88.11 87.32 Graduate student 8,100 1,520 10.41 11.73 First-professional 1,160 120 1.49 0.95 

Gender 

Male 32,230 5,240 41.41 40.54 

Female 45,600 7,670 58.59 59.38 Unknown # 10 # 0.09 

Age group 

15-23 45,130 5,680 57.99 43.94 24-29 14,350 2,900 18.44 22.48 30 or above 18,340 4,330 23.57 33.49 Unknown # 10 # 0.10 

CPS record available 

No 53,700 3,200 69.00 24.73 

Yes 24,130 9,730 31.00 75.27 

See notes at end of table. 
K-85 

Table K-23. Item nonresponse bias before imputation for DEPCHILD for all institutions: 2004—Continued 

Before nonresponse adjustment 

Characteristic 

Unweighted 

respondents 

Unweighted nonrespondents Respondent mean weighted Nonrespondent mean weighted 

Applied for federal aid 

No 55,380 3,570 71.16 27.64 

Yes 19,930 8,880 25.61 68.69 Unknown 2,510 470 3.23 3.67 

Pell Grant status 

Received 26,290 2,960 33.78 22.89 Did not receive 51,350 9,960 65.98 77.09 Unknown 190 # 0.24 0.02 

Total Pell amount received2

$0-1,487 6,550 760 24.92 25.79 1,488-2,500 6,500 850 24.72 28.77 2,501-4,000 6,770 590 25.76 19.84 

4,001 or more 6,470 760 24.60 25.59 

Stafford loan status 

Received 32,270 1,670 41.47 12.96 Did not receive 45,330 11,250 58.25 87.03 Unknown 220 # 0.29 0.02 

Total Stafford amount received2

$0-2,625 10,950 460 33.94 27.24 

2,626-4,237 5,230 330 16.21 19.95 4,238-6,625 9,570 630 29.67 37.46 6,626 or more 6,520 260 20.19 15.35 

Institution undergraduate enrollment2

0-2,103 19,030 3,480 24.45 26.90 

2,104-7,998 19,670 2,870 25.28 22.24 7,999-18,375 19,360 3,260 24.87 25.21 18,376 or more 19,150 3,190 24.60 24.66 Unknown 630 130 0.80 0.99 

Institution graduate/first-professional enrollment3

1-4,087 19,980 2,640 25.67 20.44 

4,088 or more 19,160 2,590 24.61 20.02 0 graduate/first-professional students 38,700 7,690 49.72 59.54 

# Rounds to zero. 1 Bias is significant at the 0.05/(c-1) level, where c is the number of categories within the primary variable. 2 Undergraduate enrollment, Pell grant amount, and Stafford loan amount categories were defined by quartiles. 3 Graduate enrollment defined by the median. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 2004 National Postsecondary Student Aid Study (NPSAS:04). 
K-86 

Table K-24. Summary of item nonresponse bias analysis for all students and by institutional sector: 2004 

Variable Variable label 

All 

students 

Public 

less-than2-year Public 2-year 

Public 4-

year nondoctoral 

Public 4-

year 

doctoral 

Private notfor-profit 

less-than4-year 

Private notfor-profit 4-

year nondoctoral 

Privat

for

4

do

ATTENDA Reason for attending NPSAS: 

complete associate’s degree 

Mean estimated bias 0.14 0.06 0.10 0.23 0.25 0.08 0.21 

Median estimated bias 0.05 0.05 0.03 0.15 0.16 0.07 0.13 Percent significant bias 54.55 21.62 29.27 11.36 30.95 7.69 16.28 

ATTENDB Reason for attending NPSAS: 

complete certificate 

Mean estimated bias 0.14 0.06 0.10 0.23 0.25 0.08 0.21 

Median estimated bias 0.05 0.05 0.03 0.15 0.16 0.07 0.13 Percent significant bias 54.55 21.62 29.27 11.36 30.95 7.69 16.28 

ATTENDC Reason for attending NPSAS: learn 

job skills 

Mean estimated bias 0.14 0.06 0.10 0.23 0.25 0.08 0.21 

Median estimated bias 0.05 0.05 0.03 0.15 0.16 0.07 0.13 Percent significant bias 54.55 21.62 29.27 11.36 30.95 7.69 16.28 

ATTENDD Reason for attending NPSAS: 

personal interest or enrichment 

Mean estimated bias 0.14 0.06 0.10 0.23 0.25 0.08 0.21 

Median estimated bias 0.05 0.05 0.03 0.15 0.16 0.07 0.13 Percent significant bias 54.55 21.62 29.27 11.36 30.95 7.69 16.28 

ATTENDE Reason for attending NPSAS: transfer 

to 2-year school 

Mean estimated bias 0.14 0.06 0.10 0.23 0.25 0.08 0.21 

Median estimated bias 0.05 0.05 0.03 0.15 0.16 0.07 0.13 Percent significant bias 54.55 21.62 29.27 11.36 30.95 7.69 16.28 

ATTENDF Reason for attending NPSAS: transfer 

to 4-year school 

Mean estimated bias 0.14 0.06 0.10 0.23 0.25 0.08 0.21 

Median estimated bias 0.05 0.05 0.03 0.15 0.16 0.07 0.13 Percent significant bias 54.55 21.62 29.27 11.36 30.95 7.69 16.28 

ATTENDG Reason for attending NPSAS: transfer 

to another school 

Mean estimated bias 0.14 0.06 0.10 0.23 0.25 0.08 0.21 

Median estimated bias 0.05 0.05 0.03 0.15 0.16 0.07 0.13 Percent significant bias 54.55 21.62 29.27 11.36 30.95 7.69 16.28 

See notes at end of table. 
K-87 

Table K-24. Summary of item nonresponse bias analysis for all students and by institutional sector: 2004—Conti

Variable Variable label 

All 

students 

Public 

less-than2-year Public 2-year 

Public 4-

year nondoctoral 

Public 4-

year 

doctoral 

Private notfor-profit 

less-than4-year 

Private notfor-profit 4-

year nondoctoral 

Privat

for

4

do

BAYEAR Year received bachelor's degree 

Mean estimated bias 0.05 † † 0.06 0.03 † 0.12 Median estimated bias 0.01 † † 0.04 0.01 † 0.04 Percent significant bias 6.98 † † # 14.29 † 2.86 

CLASSA Type of class: business 

Mean estimated bias 0.19 0.33 0.13 0.23 0.25 0.34 0.21 

Median estimated bias 0.11 0.20 0.06 0.14 0.17 0.25 0.15 Percent significant bias 41.82 11.76 26.83 13.64 33.33 2.70 16.28 

CLASSB Type of class: health 

Mean estimated bias 0.19 0.33 0.13 0.23 0.25 0.34 0.21 

Median estimated bias 0.11 0.20 0.06 0.14 0.17 0.25 0.15 Percent significant bias 41.82 11.76 26.83 13.64 33.33 2.70 16.28 

CLASSC Type of class: education 

Mean estimated bias 0.19 0.33 0.13 0.23 0.25 0.34 0.21 

Median estimated bias 0.11 0.20 0.06 0.14 0.17 0.25 0.15 Percent significant bias 41.82 11.76 26.83 13.64 33.33 2.70 16.28 

CLASSD Type of class: engineering and 

engineering technology 

Mean estimated bias 0.19 0.33 0.13 0.23 0.25 0.34 0.21 

Median estimated bias 0.11 0.20 0.06 0.14 0.17 0.25 0.15 Percent significant bias 41.82 11.76 26.83 13.64 33.33 2.70 16.28 

CLASSE Type of class: computer and 

information sciences 

Mean estimated bias 0.19 0.33 0.13 0.23 0.25 0.34 0.21 

Median estimated bias 0.11 0.20 0.06 0.14 0.17 0.25 0.15 Percent significant bias 41.82 11.76 26.83 13.64 33.33 2.70 16.28 

CLASSF Type of class: social sciences 

Mean estimated bias 0.19 0.33 0.13 0.23 0.25 0.34 0.21 

Median estimated bias 0.11 0.20 0.06 0.14 0.17 0.25 0.15 Percent significant bias 41.82 11.76 26.83 13.64 33.33 2.70 16.28 

CLASSG Type of class: natural sciences and 

mathematics 

Mean estimated bias 0.19 0.33 0.13 0.23 0.25 0.34 0.21 

Median estimated bias 0.11 0.20 0.06 0.14 0.17 0.25 0.15 Percent significant bias 41.82 11.76 26.83 13.64 33.33 2.70 16.28 

See notes at end of table. 
K-88 

Table K-24. Summary of item nonresponse bias analysis for all students and by institutional sector: 2004—Conti

Variable Variable label 

All 

students 

Public 

less-than2-year Public 2-year 

Public 4-

year nondoctoral 

Public 4-

year 

doctoral 

Private notfor-profit 

less-than4-year 

Private notfor-profit 4-

year nondoctoral 

Privat

for

4

do

CLASSH Type of class: arts and humanities 

Mean estimated bias 0.19 0.33 0.13 0.23 0.25 0.34 0.21 

Median estimated bias 0.11 0.20 0.06 0.14 0.17 0.25 0.15 Percent significant bias 41.82 11.76 26.83 13.64 33.33 2.70 16.28 

CLASSI Type of class: communications 

Mean estimated bias 0.19 0.33 0.13 0.23 0.25 0.34 0.21 

Median estimated bias 0.11 0.20 0.06 0.14 0.17 0.25 0.15 Percent significant bias 41.82 11.76 26.83 13.64 33.33 2.70 16.28 

CLASSJ Type of class: vocational program 

Mean estimated bias 0.19 0.33 0.13 0.23 0.25 0.34 0.21 

Median estimated bias 0.11 0.20 0.06 0.14 0.17 0.25 0.15 Percent significant bias 41.82 11.76 26.83 13.64 33.33 2.70 16.28 

CLASSK Type of class: university transfer 

Mean estimated bias 0.19 0.33 0.13 0.23 0.25 0.34 0.21 

Median estimated bias 0.11 0.20 0.06 0.14 0.17 0.25 0.15 Percent significant bias 41.82 11.76 26.83 13.64 33.33 2.70 16.28 

CLASSL Type of class: general education 

Mean estimated bias 0.19 0.33 0.13 0.23 0.25 0.34 0.21 

Median estimated bias 0.11 0.20 0.06 0.14 0.17 0.25 0.15 Percent significant bias 41.82 11.76 26.83 13.64 33.33 2.70 16.28 

CLASSX Type of class: other 

Mean estimated bias 0.19 0.33 0.13 0.23 0.25 0.34 0.21 

Median estimated bias 0.11 0.20 0.06 0.14 0.17 0.25 0.15 Percent significant bias 41.82 11.76 26.83 13.64 33.33 2.70 16.28 

COMHOUR Number of hours volunteered per 

month 

Mean estimated bias 0.25 0.18 0.20 0.22 0.15 0.45 0.13 

Median estimated bias 0.14 0.14 0.10 0.11 0.07 0.20 0.08 Percent significant bias 60.00 8.33 36.59 27.27 40.91 17.95 13.95 

COMONE One time event 

Mean estimated bias 0.24 0.18 0.18 0.20 0.13 0.40 0.11 

Median estimated bias 0.13 0.13 0.08 0.09 0.05 0.19 0.06 Percent significant bias 58.18 11.11 34.15 25.00 40.91 12.82 13.95 

See notes at end of table. 
K-89 

Table K-24. Summary of item nonresponse bias analysis for all students and by institutional sector: 2004—Conti

Variable Variable label 

All 

students 

Public 

less-than2-year Public 2-year 

Public 4-

year nondoctoral 

Public 4-

year 

doctoral 

Private notfor-profit 

less-than4-year 

Private notfor-profit 4-

year nondoctoral 

Privat

for

4

do

COMREQ Volunteer work required for 

graduation/class 

Mean estimated bias 0.24 0.18 0.19 0.20 0.13 0.39 0.12 

Median estimated bias 0.13 0.13 0.09 0.09 0.05 0.17 0.07 Percent significant bias 54.72 25.00 31.71 25.58 30.95 15.38 30.95 

COMSERV Community service/volunteer in last 

year 

Mean estimated bias 0.12 0.09 0.12 0.12 0.09 0.18 0.06 

Median estimated bias 0.06 0.06 0.04 0.05 0.02 0.10 0.03 Percent significant bias 50.91 32.43 24.39 18.18 28.26 15.38 13.95 

COMSERVA Volunteer: fundraising (political and 

non-political) 

Mean estimated bias 0.23 0.18 0.19 0.20 0.13 0.38 0.11 

Median estimated bias 0.13 0.12 0.08 0.10 0.05 0.17 0.07 Percent significant bias 58.18 13.89 36.59 25.00 38.64 15.38 13.95 

COMSERVB Volunteer: homeless shelter/soup 

kitchen 

Mean estimated bias 0.23 0.18 0.19 0.20 0.13 0.38 0.11 

Median estimated bias 0.13 0.12 0.08 0.10 0.05 0.17 0.07 Percent significant bias 58.18 13.89 36.59 25.00 38.64 15.38 13.95 

COMSERVC Volunteer: health services 

Mean estimated bias 0.23 0.18 0.19 0.20 0.13 0.38 0.11 

Median estimated bias 0.13 0.12 0.08 0.10 0.05 0.17 0.07 Percent significant bias 58.18 13.89 36.59 25.00 38.64 15.38 13.95 

COMSERVD Volunteer: neighborhood 

improvement 

Mean estimated bias 0.23 0.18 0.19 0.20 0.13 0.38 0.11 

Median estimated bias 0.13 0.12 0.08 0.10 0.05 0.17 0.07 Percent significant bias 58.18 13.89 36.59 25.00 38.64 15.38 13.95 

COMSERVE Volunteer: service to the church 

Mean estimated bias 0.23 0.18 0.19 0.20 0.13 0.38 0.11 

Median estimated bias 0.13 0.12 0.08 0.10 0.05 0.17 0.07 Percent significant bias 58.18 13.89 36.59 25.00 38.64 15.38 13.95 

COMSERVF Volunteer: tutoring/education-related 

Mean estimated bias 0.23 0.18 0.19 0.20 0.13 0.38 0.11 

Median estimated bias 0.13 0.12 0.08 0.10 0.05 0.17 0.07 Percent significant bias 58.18 13.89 36.59 25.00 38.64 15.38 13.95 

See notes at end of table. 
K-90 

Table K-24. Summary of item nonresponse bias analysis for all students and by institutional sector: 2004—Conti

Variable Variable label 

All 

students 

Public 

less-than2-year Public 2-year 

Public 4-

year nondoctoral 

Public 4-

year 

doctoral 

Private notfor-profit 

less-than4-year 

Private notfor-profit 4-

year nondoctoral 

Privat

for

4

do

COMSERVG Volunteer: other work with kids 

Mean estimated bias 0.23 0.18 0.19 0.20 0.13 0.38 0.11 

Median estimated bias 0.13 0.12 0.08 0.10 0.05 0.17 0.07 Percent significant bias 58.18 13.89 36.59 25.00 38.64 15.38 13.95 

COMSERVX Volunteer: other 

Mean estimated bias 0.23 0.18 0.19 0.20 0.13 0.38 0.11 

Median estimated bias 0.13 0.12 0.08 0.10 0.05 0.17 0.07 Percent significant bias 58.18 13.89 36.59 25.00 38.64 15.38 13.95 

CONSIDRA Consider campus safety 

Mean estimated bias 0.13 0.09 0.12 0.13 0.08 0.17 0.06 

Median estimated bias 0.06 0.06 0.04 0.04 0.02 0.09 0.04 Percent significant bias 45.28 32.43 19.51 20.93 25.00 15.38 16.67 

CONSIDRB Consider graduation rate 

Mean estimated bias 0.13 0.09 0.12 0.13 0.08 0.17 0.06 

Median estimated bias 0.06 0.06 0.04 0.04 0.02 0.09 0.04 Percent significant bias 45.28 32.43 19.51 20.93 25.00 15.38 16.67 

CONSIDRC Consider job rate 

Mean estimated bias 0.17 0.10 † † † 0.39 † Median estimated bias 0.05 0.06 † † † 0.32 † 

Percent significant bias 20.00 10.81 † † † 6.25 † 

CRBALDUE Balance due on all credit cards 

Mean estimated bias 0.25 0.39 0.24 0.32 0.12 0.31 0.24 

Median estimated bias 0.15 0.31 0.14 0.20 0.10 0.22 0.17 Percent significant bias 41.18 3.03 30.77 36.59 40.54 14.29 25.00 

DEGEARN Earned prior degree/certificates 

Mean estimated bias 0.10 0.05 0.09 0.09 0.08 0.08 0.04 

Median estimated bias 0.04 0.04 0.03 0.03 0.02 0.08 0.03 Percent significant bias 50.91 13.51 34.15 18.18 30.43 7.69 16.28 

DEGEARNA Already earned bachelor’s degree 

Mean estimated bias 0.33 0.15 0.23 0.32 0.25 0.35 0.25 

Median estimated bias 0.20 0.12 0.13 0.16 0.14 0.26 0.14 Percent significant bias 60.00 5.41 36.59 45.45 68.18 23.68 32.56 

DEGEARNB Already earned associate’s degree 

Mean estimated bias 0.33 0.15 0.23 0.32 0.25 0.35 0.25 

Median estimated bias 0.20 0.12 0.13 0.16 0.14 0.26 0.14 Percent significant bias 60.00 5.41 36.59 45.45 68.18 23.68 32.56 

See notes at end of table. 
K-91 

Table K-24. Summary of item nonresponse bias analysis for all students and by institutional sector: 2004—Conti

Variable Variable label 

All 

students 

Public 

less-than2-year Public 2-year 

Public 4-

year nondoctoral 

Public 4-

year 

doctoral 

Private notfor-profit 

less-than4-year 

Private notfor-profit 4-

year nondoctoral 

Privat

for

4

do

DEGEARNC Already earned undergraduate 

certificate/diploma 

Mean estimated bias 0.33 0.15 0.23 0.32 0.25 0.35 0.25 

Median estimated bias 0.20 0.12 0.13 0.16 0.14 0.26 0.14 Percent significant bias 60.00 5.41 36.59 45.45 68.18 23.68 32.56 

DEGEARND Already earned post-BA certificate 

Mean estimated bias 0.33 0.15 0.23 0.32 0.25 0.35 0.25 

Median estimated bias 0.20 0.12 0.13 0.16 0.14 0.26 0.14 Percent significant bias 60.00 5.41 36.59 45.45 68.18 23.68 32.56 

DEGEARNE Already earned master’s degree 

Mean estimated bias 0.33 0.15 0.23 0.32 0.25 0.35 0.25 

Median estimated bias 0.20 0.12 0.13 0.16 0.14 0.26 0.14 Percent significant bias 60.00 5.41 36.59 45.45 68.18 23.68 32.56 

DEGEARNF Already earned post-MA certificate 

Mean estimated bias 0.33 0.15 0.23 0.32 0.25 0.35 0.25 

Median estimated bias 0.20 0.12 0.13 0.16 0.14 0.26 0.14 Percent significant bias 60.00 5.41 36.59 45.45 68.18 23.68 32.56 

DEGEARNG Already earned first professional 

degree 

Mean estimated bias 0.33 0.15 0.23 0.32 0.25 0.35 0.25 

Median estimated bias 0.20 0.12 0.13 0.16 0.14 0.26 0.14 Percent significant bias 60.00 5.41 36.59 45.45 68.18 23.68 32.56 

DEGEARNH Already earned doctoral degree 

Mean estimated bias 0.33 0.15 0.23 0.32 0.25 0.35 0.25 

Median estimated bias 0.20 0.12 0.13 0.16 0.14 0.26 0.14 Percent significant bias 60.00 5.41 36.59 45.45 68.18 23.68 32.56 

DELIVE Distance education: live 

Mean estimated bias 0.37 0.44 0.23 0.40 0.23 0.38 0.31 

Median estimated bias 0.21 0.27 0.12 0.17 0.12 0.21 0.18 Percent significant bias 47.27 19.44 19.51 15.91 29.55 15.79 23.26 

DEPCARE Have dependent children in daycare 

Mean estimated bias 0.15 0.12 0.12 0.10 0.09 0.19 0.05 

Median estimated bias 0.07 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.03 0.10 0.03 Percent significant bias 29.09 2.78 7.32 11.90 4.35 2.63 # 

See notes at end of table. 
K-92 

Table K-24. Summary of item nonresponse bias analysis for all students and by institutional sector: 2004—Conti

Variable Variable label 

All 

students 

Public 

less-than2-year Public 2-year 

Public 4-

year nondoctoral 

Public 4-

year 

doctoral 

Private notfor-profit 

less-than4-year 

Private notfor-profit 4-

year nondoctoral 

Privat

for

4

do

DEPCHILD Dependents - has dependent children 

Mean estimated bias 0.08 0.08 0.10 † † 0.07 † Median estimated bias 0.03 0.05 0.03 † † 0.04 † Percent significant bias 56.36 32.43 36.59 † † 15.38 † 

DEPCLAIM Claimed as a dependent 

Mean estimated bias 0.12 0.15 0.13 0.12 0.04 0.11 0.06 

Median estimated bias 0.04 0.07 0.03 0.04 0.02 0.07 0.03 Percent significant bias 43.14 # 25.64 24.39 27.03 8.11 17.50 

DEPCOST Monthly daycare costs 

Mean estimated bias 0.24 0.21 0.18 0.19 0.15 0.39 0.13 

Median estimated bias 0.12 0.14 0.08 0.09 0.07 0.19 0.06 Percent significant bias 32.73 5.56 19.51 11.90 8.70 5.26 # 

DEPINC Dependent parent income derived 

Mean estimated bias 0.09 0.06 0.12 † † † † Median estimated bias 0.03 0.01 0.03 † † † † 

Percent significant bias 50.00 27.27 27.50 † † † † 

DEPNUMCH Dependents - number of dependent 

children 

Mean estimated bias 0.09 0.06 0.11 0.10 † 0.08 0.05 

Median estimated bias 0.05 0.04 0.05 0.05 † 0.06 0.02 Percent significant bias 56.36 32.43 39.02 34.09 † 28.21 37.21 

DEPOLD Dependent children - age of oldest 

Mean estimated bias 0.09 0.08 0.11 0.10 0.08 0.09 0.05 

Median estimated bias 0.05 0.04 0.06 0.05 0.03 0.06 0.02 Percent significant bias 49.09 32.43 39.02 36.36 41.30 28.21 37.21 

DEPOTHER Dependents - has dependent other 

than children 

Mean estimated bias 0.08 0.08 0.10 † † 0.07 † Median estimated bias 0.03 0.05 0.03 † † 0.04 † Percent significant bias 54.55 32.43 36.59 † † 15.38 † 

DEPYNG Dependent children - age of youngest 

Mean estimated bias 0.09 0.08 0.11 0.10 0.08 0.09 0.05 

Median estimated bias 0.05 0.04 0.06 0.05 0.03 0.06 0.02 Percent significant bias 49.09 32.43 39.02 36.36 41.30 28.21 37.21 

See notes at end of table. 
K-93 

Table K-24. Summary of item nonresponse bias analysis for all students and by institutional sector: 2004—Conti

Variable Variable label 

All 

students 

Public 

less-than2-year Public 2-year 

Public 4-

year nondoctoral 

Public 4-

year 

doctoral 

Private notfor-profit 

less-than4-year 

Private notfor-profit 4-

year nondoctoral 

Privat

for

4

do

DERECR Distance education: pre-recorded 

Mean estimated bias 0.37 0.44 0.23 0.40 0.23 0.38 0.31 

Median estimated bias 0.21 0.27 0.12 0.17 0.12 0.21 0.18 Percent significant bias 47.27 19.44 19.51 15.91 29.55 15.79 23.26 

DEWWW Distance education: Internet 

Mean estimated bias 0.37 0.44 0.23 0.40 0.23 0.38 0.31 

Median estimated bias 0.21 0.27 0.12 0.17 0.12 0.21 0.18 Percent significant bias 47.27 19.44 19.51 15.91 29.55 15.79 23.26 

DISABLE Disability Flag 

Mean estimated bias 0.11 0.06 0.10 0.11 0.08 0.08 0.04 

Median estimated bias 0.05 0.06 0.04 0.04 0.02 0.06 0.03 Percent significant bias 47.27 27.03 26.83 20.45 28.26 5.13 4.65 

DISMOBIL Condition that limits physical activities 

Mean estimated bias 0.11 0.06 0.10 0.11 0.08 0.08 0.04 

Median estimated bias 0.05 0.06 0.04 0.04 0.02 0.06 0.03 Percent significant bias 47.27 27.03 26.83 20.45 28.26 5.13 4.65 

DISOTHER Other condition lasting six months or 

more 

Mean estimated bias 0.11 0.06 0.10 0.11 0.08 0.08 0.04 

Median estimated bias 0.05 0.06 0.04 0.04 0.02 0.06 0.03 Percent significant bias 47.27 21.62 26.83 20.45 28.26 5.13 4.65 

DISOTHRA Difficulty: dressing, bathing, etc 

Mean estimated bias 0.27 0.28 0.31 0.43 0.17 0.26 0.20 

Median estimated bias 0.10 0.17 0.09 0.18 0.08 0.18 0.09 Percent significant bias 21.82 22.22 14.63 22.73 20.45 8.11 2.33 

DISOTHRB Difficulty: getting to school to attend 

class 

Mean estimated bias 0.27 0.27 0.31 0.43 0.17 0.26 0.20 

Median estimated bias 0.09 0.17 0.09 0.18 0.08 0.18 0.09 Percent significant bias 21.82 22.22 14.63 22.73 20.45 8.11 2.33 

DISOTHRC Difficulty: learning, remembering 

Mean estimated bias 0.27 0.28 0.31 0.43 0.17 0.26 0.20 

Median estimated bias 0.10 0.17 0.09 0.18 0.08 0.18 0.09 Percent significant bias 21.82 22.22 14.63 22.73 20.45 8.11 2.33 

See notes at end of table. 
K-94 

Table K-24. Summary of item nonresponse bias analysis for all students and by institutional sector: 2004—Conti

Variable Variable label 

All 

students 

Public 

less-than2-year Public 2-year 

Public 4-

year nondoctoral 

Public 4-

year 

doctoral 

Private notfor-profit 

less-than4-year 

Private notfor-profit 4-

year nondoctoral 

Privat

for

4

do

DISOTHRD Difficulty: working at a job 

Mean estimated bias 0.27 0.28 0.31 0.43 0.17 0.26 0.20 

Median estimated bias 0.10 0.17 0.09 0.18 0.08 0.18 0.09 Percent significant bias 21.82 22.22 14.63 22.73 20.45 8.11 2.33 

DISSENSR Have a long-lasting sensory condition 

Mean estimated bias 0.11 0.06 0.10 0.11 0.08 0.08 0.04 

Median estimated bias 0.05 0.06 0.04 0.04 0.02 0.06 0.03 Percent significant bias 47.27 21.62 26.83 20.45 28.26 5.13 4.65 

DISTALL Distance education: entire program 

Mean estimated bias 0.36 0.44 0.23 0.39 0.22 0.34 0.29 

Median estimated bias 0.19 0.27 0.11 0.17 0.11 0.18 0.16 Percent significant bias 43.64 16.67 21.95 18.18 38.64 15.79 16.28 

DISTEDUC Distance education: took courses 

Mean estimated bias 0.12 0.09 0.11 0.13 0.09 0.12 0.06 

Median estimated bias 0.06 0.06 0.04 0.05 0.02 0.08 0.03 Percent significant bias 49.09 32.43 26.83 18.18 26.09 10.26 13.95 

DISTLOC Distance education: location of 

course(s) 

Mean estimated bias 0.36 0.44 0.23 0.39 0.22 0.34 0.30 

Median estimated bias 0.19 0.27 0.11 0.16 0.11 0.18 0.16 Percent significant bias 45.45 13.89 24.39 15.91 38.64 15.79 16.28 

DISTNUM Distance education: number of 

courses 

Mean estimated bias 0.37 0.45 0.23 0.40 0.23 0.34 0.33 

Median estimated bias 0.21 0.26 0.12 0.16 0.12 0.17 0.19 Percent significant bias 43.64 16.67 17.07 20.45 40.91 15.79 16.28 

DISTSATF Distance education: satisfaction 

Mean estimated bias 0.36 0.44 0.23 0.39 0.22 0.34 0.30 

Median estimated bias 0.19 0.27 0.12 0.16 0.11 0.19 0.15 Percent significant bias 45.45 13.89 26.83 15.91 31.82 15.79 16.28 

DISTYPES Main limiting condition 

Mean estimated bias 0.22 0.24 0.26 0.32 0.17 0.22 0.15 

Median estimated bias 0.08 0.18 0.10 0.14 0.08 0.17 0.07 Percent significant bias 27.27 27.78 17.07 18.18 31.82 5.41 4.65 

See notes at end of table. 
K-95 

Table K-24. Summary of item nonresponse bias analysis for all students and by institutional sector: 2004—Conti

Variable Variable label 

All 

students 

Public 

less-than2-year Public 2-year 

Public 4-

year nondoctoral 

Public 4-

year 

doctoral 

Private notfor-profit 

less-than4-year 

Private notfor-profit 4-

year nondoctoral 

Privat

for

4

do

DSTUINC Dependent student earnings derived 

Mean estimated bias 0.25 0.16 0.32 0.28 0.24 0.21 0.21 Median estimated bias 0.08 0.05 0.12 0.11 0.06 0.08 0.07 Percent significant bias 54.90 27.27 33.33 24.39 48.72 40.54 35.00 

EMPLYAM2 Employer (parents) tuition aid 

Mean estimated bias 0.10 0.05 0.09 0.09 0.08 0.08 0.04 

Median estimated bias 0.05 0.04 0.03 0.03 0.02 0.07 0.03 Percent significant bias 54.55 10.81 31.71 22.73 30.43 7.69 16.28 

EVER2PUB Ever attended community college 

Mean estimated bias 0.14 0.09 † 0.12 0.10 0.12 0.06 

Median estimated bias 0.06 0.04 † 0.04 0.03 0.08 0.04 

Percent significant bias 51.85 32.43 † 13.64 36.36 17.95 9.30 

EVER4YR Ever attended 4-year school 

Mean estimated bias 0.12 0.06 0.10 † † 0.12 † 

Median estimated bias 0.04 0.06 0.03 † † 0.08 † 

Percent significant bias 41.67 27.03 24.39 † † 10.26 † 

FORESCH Ever attended elementary or 

secondary school outside of the U.S. 

Mean estimated bias 0.11 0.07 0.10 0.11 0.07 0.08 0.05 

Median estimated bias 0.05 0.06 0.04 0.04 0.02 0.05 0.03 Percent significant bias 45.28 30.56 25.00 19.05 36.36 # 19.05 

GAINSUR Health insurance with assistantship 

Mean estimated bias 0.07 † † 0.17 0.05 † 0.16 

Median estimated bias 0.04 † † 0.08 0.03 † # Percent significant bias 23.81 † † # 28.57 † 43.33 

GPA Grad point average 

Mean estimated bias † 0.11 † † † 0.11 † 

Median estimated bias † 0.09 † † † 0.06 † Percent significant bias † 37.84 † † † 20.51 † 

GRADPYR Year began graduate degree 

Mean estimated bias 0.07 † † 0.11 0.04 † 0.12 

Median estimated bias 0.02 † † 0.05 0.01 † 0.06 

Percent significant bias 6.98 † † 8.57 11.43 † 11.43 

See notes at end of table. 
K-96 

Table K-24. Summary of item nonresponse bias analysis for all students and by institutional sector: 2004—Conti

Variable Variable label 

All 

students 

Public 

less-than2-year Public 2-year 

Public 4-

year nondoctoral 

Public 4-

year 

doctoral 

Private notfor-profit 

less-than4-year 

Private notfor-profit 4-

year nondoctoral 

Privat

for

4

do

GRADTAA TA duties: student email 

Mean estimated bias 0.05 † † 0.10 0.06 † 0.15 Median estimated bias 0.02 † † 0.06 0.03 † # Percent significant bias 9.52 † † 3.13 22.86 † 24.14 

GRADTAB TA duties: grading 

Mean estimated bias 0.05 † † 0.10 0.06 † 0.15 

Median estimated bias 0.02 † † 0.06 0.03 † # Percent significant bias 9.52 † † 3.13 22.86 † 24.14 

GRADTAC TA duties: teaching 

Mean estimated bias 0.05 † † 0.10 0.06 † 0.15 

Median estimated bias 0.02 † † 0.06 0.03 † # Percent significant bias 9.52 † † 3.13 22.86 † 24.14 

GRADTAD TA duties: office hours 

Mean estimated bias 0.05 † † 0.10 0.06 † 0.15 

Median estimated bias 0.02 † † 0.06 0.03 † # Percent significant bias 9.52 † † 3.13 22.86 † 24.14 

GRADTAE TA duties: discussion 

Mean estimated bias 0.05 † † 0.10 0.06 † 0.15 

Median estimated bias 0.02 † † 0.06 0.03 † # Percent significant bias 9.52 † † 3.13 22.86 † 24.14 

GRADTAF TA duties: lab 

Mean estimated bias 0.05 † † 0.10 0.06 † 0.15 

Median estimated bias 0.02 † † 0.06 0.03 † # Percent significant bias 9.52 † † 3.13 22.86 † 24.14 

GRASTUIT Tuition paid by assistantship 

Mean estimated bias 0.08 † † 0.22 0.07 † 0.18 

Median estimated bias 0.07 † † 0.07 0.06 † 0.02 Percent significant bias 4.88 † † # 22.86 † 41.38 

GRENRST Graduate enrollment status (all years) 

Mean estimated bias 0.07 † † 0.10 0.04 † 0.07 

Median estimated bias 0.02 † † 0.04 0.02 † 0.03 

Percent significant bias 6.98 † † # 11.43 † 11.43 

See notes at end of table. 
K-97 

Table K-24. Summary of item nonresponse bias analysis for all students and by institutional sector: 2004—Conti

Variable Variable label 

All 

students 

Public 

less-than2-year Public 2-year 

Public 4-

year nondoctoral 

Public 4-

year 

doctoral 

Private notfor-profit 

less-than4-year 

Private notfor-profit 4-

year nondoctoral 

Privat

for

4

do

HIGHLVEX Highest level of education ever 

expected 

Mean estimated bias 0.13 0.09 0.11 0.12 0.08 0.12 0.06 

Median estimated bias 0.06 0.05 0.03 0.04 0.02 0.09 0.03 Percent significant bias 50.91 32.43 29.27 18.18 30.43 10.26 6.98 

HOMEDIST Distance from NPSAS school to home 

Mean estimated bias 0.13 0.10 0.11 0.13 0.09 0.18 0.07 

Median estimated bias 0.06 0.06 0.03 0.05 0.02 0.09 0.03 Percent significant bias 50.91 32.43 31.71 13.64 32.61 12.82 9.30 

HOMEPAR Parents own home 

Mean estimated bias 0.12 0.15 0.13 0.12 0.04 0.13 0.06 

Median estimated bias 0.04 0.07 0.03 0.05 0.02 0.09 0.03 Percent significant bias 43.14 6.06 25.64 26.83 27.03 5.41 17.50 

HOMESTUD Own home 

Mean estimated bias 0.19 0.14 0.16 0.14 0.17 0.26 0.12 

Median estimated bias 0.11 0.09 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.14 0.07 Percent significant bias 47.27 13.51 26.83 26.19 30.43 30.77 16.28 

HSDEG High school degree type 

Mean estimated bias † † † † † 0.07 † Median estimated bias † † † † † 0.03 † Percent significant bias † † † † † 23.08 † 

HSGRADYY High school graduation year 

Mean estimated bias † 0.06 † † † 0.08 † 

Median estimated bias † 0.04 † † † 0.05 † Percent significant bias † 29.73 † † † 15.38 † 

HSTYPE Type of high school attended 

Mean estimated bias 0.12 0.10 0.12 0.13 0.09 0.13 0.06 

Median estimated bias 0.05 0.06 0.04 0.05 0.02 0.08 0.03 Percent significant bias 47.17 30.56 29.27 23.26 33.33 10.26 16.67 

INDEPINC Independent student & spouse income 

derived 

Mean estimated bias 0.09 0.08 0.12 0.12 0.09 † 0.06 

Median estimated bias 0.03 0.04 0.06 0.05 0.03 † 0.03 Percent significant bias 47.27 29.73 36.59 25.00 32.61 † 27.91 

See notes at end of table. 
K-98 

Table K-24. Summary of item nonresponse bias analysis for all students and by institutional sector: 2004—Conti

Variable Variable label 

All 

students 

Public 

less-than2-year Public 2-year 

Public 4-

year nondoctoral 

Public 4-

year 

doctoral 

Private notfor-profit 

less-than4-year 

Private notfor-profit 4-

year nondoctoral 

Privat

for

4

do

JOBAFFOR Afford school without working 

Mean estimated bias 0.19 0.21 0.17 0.18 0.12 0.19 0.16 

Median estimated bias 0.09 0.15 0.07 0.07 0.06 0.14 0.08 Percent significant bias 60.00 36.11 26.83 38.64 45.65 12.82 30.23 

JOBCLASS Job related to coursework 

Mean estimated bias 0.16 0.09 0.11 0.21 0.18 0.37 0.16 

Median estimated bias 0.10 0.05 0.04 0.15 0.11 0.21 0.10 Percent significant bias 45.45 8.33 24.39 13.64 30.23 18.42 2.33 

JOBEARN Total amount earned during the 

school year 

Mean estimated bias 0.15 0.11 0.13 0.14 0.09 0.19 0.07 

Median estimated bias 0.06 0.07 0.04 0.05 0.03 0.09 0.04 Percent significant bias 45.45 13.51 29.27 25.00 26.09 7.69 9.30 

JOBEFFA Job helped with career preparation 

Mean estimated bias 0.19 0.21 0.17 0.18 0.12 0.19 0.14 

Median estimated bias 0.10 0.15 0.07 0.07 0.06 0.14 0.07 Percent significant bias 60.00 36.11 26.83 38.64 47.83 12.82 30.23 

JOBEFFB Job helped with coursework 

Mean estimated bias 0.19 0.21 0.17 0.18 0.12 0.19 0.14 

Median estimated bias 0.10 0.15 0.07 0.07 0.06 0.14 0.07 Percent significant bias 60.00 36.11 26.83 38.64 47.83 12.82 30.23 

JOBEFFC Job restricted class choice 

Mean estimated bias 0.19 0.21 0.17 0.18 0.12 0.19 0.14 

Median estimated bias 0.10 0.15 0.07 0.07 0.06 0.14 0.07 Percent significant bias 60.00 36.11 26.83 38.64 47.83 12.82 30.23 

JOBEFFD Job limited class schedule 

Mean estimated bias 0.19 0.21 0.17 0.18 0.12 0.19 0.14 

Median estimated bias 0.10 0.15 0.07 0.07 0.06 0.14 0.07 Percent significant bias 60.00 36.11 26.83 38.64 47.83 12.82 30.23 

JOBEFFE Job limited facility access 

Mean estimated bias 0.19 0.21 0.17 0.18 0.12 0.19 0.14 

Median estimated bias 0.10 0.15 0.07 0.07 0.06 0.14 0.07 Percent significant bias 60.00 36.11 26.83 38.64 47.83 12.82 30.23 

See notes at end of table. 
K-99 

Table K-24. Summary of item nonresponse bias analysis for all students and by institutional sector: 2004—Conti

Variable Variable label 

All 

students 

Public 

less-than2-year Public 2-year 

Public 4-

year nondoctoral 

Public 4-

year 

doctoral 

Private notfor-profit 

less-than4-year 

Private notfor-profit 4-

year nondoctoral 

Privat

for

4

do

JOBEFFF Job limited number of classes 

Mean estimated bias 0.19 0.21 0.17 0.18 0.12 0.19 0.14 

Median estimated bias 0.10 0.15 0.07 0.07 0.06 0.14 0.07 Percent significant bias 60.00 36.11 26.83 38.64 47.83 12.82 30.23 

JOBEFFGR Effect of job on grades 

Mean estimated bias 0.12 0.17 0.13 0.09 0.04 0.17 0.09 

Median estimated bias 0.05 0.10 0.05 0.06 0.02 0.12 0.05 Percent significant bias 52.73 19.44 19.51 28.57 27.27 15.38 30.23 

JOBEMPL Type of employer 

Mean estimated bias 0.15 0.12 0.12 0.14 0.10 0.18 0.08 

Median estimated bias 0.06 0.07 0.03 0.05 0.04 0.11 0.04 Percent significant bias 49.09 13.51 26.83 27.27 36.96 12.82 11.63 

JOBEXPT Parents expect you to have a job 

Mean estimated bias 0.19 0.20 0.17 0.16 0.10 0.19 0.12 

Median estimated bias 0.09 0.10 0.06 0.07 0.04 0.13 0.06 Percent significant bias 51.92 25.71 27.50 30.95 26.19 7.89 29.27 

JOBHOUR Hours worked weekly during the 

school year 

Mean estimated bias 0.14 0.10 0.13 0.13 0.09 0.19 0.06 

Median estimated bias 0.06 0.06 0.04 0.05 0.03 0.09 0.04 Percent significant bias 49.09 10.81 26.83 29.55 26.09 10.26 16.28 

JOBMAIN Main reason for working 

Mean estimated bias 0.19 0.21 0.17 0.18 0.12 0.19 0.14 

Median estimated bias 0.10 0.15 0.07 0.07 0.06 0.15 0.07 Percent significant bias 61.82 36.11 26.83 38.64 47.83 12.82 30.23 

JOBMAJOR Job related to major 

Mean estimated bias 0.20 0.22 0.17 0.16 0.11 0.17 0.09 

Median estimated bias 0.10 0.14 0.06 0.06 0.04 0.11 0.05 Percent significant bias 56.36 33.33 12.20 25.00 43.48 15.38 9.30 

JOBNUM Number of jobs during NPSAS year 

Mean estimated bias 0.10 0.05 0.10 0.09 0.08 0.08 0.04 

Median estimated bias 0.05 0.05 0.03 0.04 0.02 0.07 0.03 Percent significant bias 54.55 8.11 29.27 18.18 28.26 2.56 16.28 

See notes at end of table. 
K-100 

Table K-24. Summary of item nonresponse bias analysis for all students and by institutional sector: 2004—Conti

Variable Variable label 

All 

students 

Public 

less-than2-year Public 2-year 

Public 4-

year nondoctoral 

Public 4-

year 

doctoral 

Private notfor-profit 

less-than4-year 

Private notfor-profit 4-

year nondoctoral 

Privat

for

4

do

JOBONOFF Job on or off campus 

Mean estimated bias 0.15 0.11 0.12 0.14 0.10 0.14 0.08 

Median estimated bias 0.06 0.06 0.03 0.05 0.03 0.11 0.04 Percent significant bias 50.91 8.11 26.83 34.09 34.78 15.38 11.63 

JOBPRIOR Had job prior to enrollment at NPSAS 

Mean estimated bias 0.15 0.11 0.12 0.14 0.10 0.15 0.08 

Median estimated bias 0.06 0.06 0.04 0.05 0.03 0.11 0.04 Percent significant bias 50.91 8.11 26.83 31.82 30.43 15.38 11.63 

JOBROLE Working student/employee taking 

classes 

Mean estimated bias 0.15 0.11 0.12 0.13 0.09 0.12 0.06 

Median estimated bias 0.06 0.06 0.03 0.04 0.02 0.08 0.03 Percent significant bias 49.09 10.81 26.83 29.55 26.09 7.69 18.60 

JOBSAVE Amount saved from summer earnings 

Mean estimated bias 0.16 0.15 0.14 0.16 0.09 0.21 0.09 

Median estimated bias 0.08 0.08 0.04 0.06 0.02 0.10 0.05 Percent significant bias 48.08 11.43 27.50 26.19 25.58 10.53 24.39 

JOBSCHA Combine school and work: class 

outside work 

Mean estimated bias 0.30 0.18 0.24 0.42 0.33 0.21 0.25 

Median estimated bias 0.13 0.12 0.14 0.22 0.26 0.18 0.16 Percent significant bias 60.00 13.51 34.15 50.00 50.00 15.38 30.23 

JOBSCHB Combine school and work: distance 

ed 

Mean estimated bias 0.30 0.18 0.24 0.42 0.33 0.21 0.25 

Median estimated bias 0.13 0.12 0.14 0.22 0.26 0.18 0.16 Percent significant bias 60.00 13.51 34.15 50.00 50.00 15.38 30.23 

JOBSCHC Combine school and work: modify 

schedule 

Mean estimated bias 0.30 0.18 0.24 0.42 0.33 0.21 0.25 

Median estimated bias 0.13 0.12 0.14 0.22 0.26 0.18 0.16 Percent significant bias 60.00 13.51 34.15 50.00 50.00 15.38 30.23 

JOBSUMMR Work during summer 2003 

Mean estimated bias 0.13 0.11 0.12 0.13 0.08 0.13 0.07 

Median estimated bias 0.06 0.07 0.04 0.05 0.02 0.07 0.04 Percent significant bias 53.85 20.00 25.00 19.05 30.23 10.53 19.51 

See notes at end of table. 
K-101 

Table K-24. Summary of item nonresponse bias analysis for all students and by institutional sector: 2004—Conti

Variable Variable label 

All 

students 

Public 

less-than2-year Public 2-year 

Public 4-

year nondoctoral 

Public 4-

year 

doctoral 

Private notfor-profit 

less-than4-year 

Private notfor-profit 4-

year nondoctoral 

Privat

for

4

do

JOBWEEK Weeks worked while enrolled 

Mean estimated bias 0.15 0.12 0.12 0.14 0.10 0.13 0.08 

Median estimated bias 0.06 0.07 0.04 0.05 0.03 0.09 0.04 Percent significant bias 47.27 8.11 26.83 29.55 30.43 7.69 9.30 

LOCALRES Housing 

Mean estimated bias 0.06 0.08 0.10 0.07 † 0.10 † 

Median estimated bias 0.03 0.05 0.03 0.04 † 0.06 † 

Percent significant bias 63.64 35.14 31.71 38.64 † 25.64 † 

MAJORS Field of study/major (detailed) 

Mean estimated bias † 0.03 0.03 † † 0.09 † 

Median estimated bias † 0.02 0.01 † † 0.05 † Percent significant bias † 11.11 2.44 † † 28.21 † 

MILTYPE Military service type 

Mean estimated bias 0.07 0.07 0.10 † † † † Median estimated bias 0.02 0.03 0.03 † † † † Percent significant bias 43.64 37.84 29.27 † † † † 

NPFIRST NPSAS was first school attended after 

high school 

Mean estimated bias 0.11 0.05 0.11 0.09 0.07 0.09 0.04 

Median estimated bias 0.05 0.04 0.03 0.03 0.02 0.07 0.03 Percent significant bias 47.17 29.73 26.83 20.93 31.82 7.69 14.29 

NUMCRED Number of credit cards in own name 

Mean estimated bias 0.12 0.15 0.13 0.13 0.04 0.12 0.06 

Median estimated bias 0.04 0.08 0.03 0.05 0.02 0.07 0.03 Percent significant bias 47.06 6.06 25.64 26.83 32.43 2.70 15.00 

OWNINVST Own investments, business or farm 

over $10,000 

Mean estimated bias 0.18 0.13 0.16 0.18 0.18 0.25 0.11 

Median estimated bias 0.11 0.08 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.16 0.06 Percent significant bias 49.09 13.51 29.27 29.55 32.61 23.08 18.60 

PARALLOW Monthly allowance amount from 

parents 

Mean estimated bias 0.09 0.10 0.11 0.10 0.04 0.10 0.05 

Median estimated bias 0.03 0.08 0.03 0.03 0.02 0.06 0.02 Percent significant bias 49.09 33.33 29.27 31.82 40.91 18.42 23.26 

See notes at end of table. 
K-102 

Table K-24. Summary of item nonresponse bias analysis for all students and by institutional sector: 2004—Conti

Variable Variable label 

All 

students 

Public 

less-than2-year Public 2-year 

Public 4-

year nondoctoral 

Public 4-

year 

doctoral 

Private notfor-profit 

less-than4-year 

Private notfor-profit 4-

year nondoctoral 

Privat

for

4

do

PARBORN Student's parents were born in the 

United States 

Mean estimated bias 0.12 0.09 0.11 0.12 0.09 0.12 0.06 

Median estimated bias 0.06 0.06 0.04 0.04 0.02 0.09 0.03 Percent significant bias 50.91 32.43 26.83 18.18 26.09 15.38 13.95 

PARCOLL Parents taking college courses in 

2003–2004 

Mean estimated bias 0.12 0.15 0.13 0.12 0.04 0.13 0.05 

Median estimated bias 0.04 0.07 0.04 0.05 0.02 0.09 0.03 Percent significant bias 47.06 6.06 23.08 26.83 24.32 10.81 15.00 

PARESTA Parents own other real estate 

Mean estimated bias 0.12 0.15 0.13 0.12 0.04 0.13 0.06 

Median estimated bias 0.04 0.08 0.03 0.05 0.02 0.07 0.03 Percent significant bias 45.10 6.06 20.51 24.39 27.03 2.70 10.00 

PARHELPA Help from parents: housing 

Mean estimated bias 0.12 0.15 0.13 0.12 0.04 0.15 0.06 

Median estimated bias 0.04 0.07 0.03 0.04 0.02 0.07 0.03 Percent significant bias 43.14 # 25.64 24.39 27.03 8.11 20.00 

PARHELPB Help from parents: other educational 

expenses 

Mean estimated bias 0.12 0.15 0.13 0.12 0.04 0.15 0.06 

Median estimated bias 0.04 0.07 0.03 0.04 0.02 0.07 0.03 Percent significant bias 43.14 # 25.64 24.39 27.03 8.11 20.00 

PARHELPC Help from parents: other living 

expenses 

Mean estimated bias 0.12 0.15 0.13 0.12 0.04 0.15 0.06 

Median estimated bias 0.04 0.07 0.03 0.04 0.02 0.07 0.03 Percent significant bias 43.14 # 25.64 24.39 27.03 8.11 20.00 

PARHELPD Help from parents: tuition and fees 

Mean estimated bias 0.12 0.15 0.13 0.12 0.04 0.15 0.06 

Median estimated bias 0.04 0.07 0.03 0.04 0.02 0.07 0.03 Percent significant bias 43.14 # 25.64 24.39 27.03 8.11 20.00 

PARLIVE Lived with parents while not enrolled 

Mean estimated bias 0.12 0.15 0.13 0.11 0.04 0.14 0.04 

Median estimated bias 0.03 0.16 0.04 0.04 0.02 0.10 0.02 Percent significant bias 43.14 12.90 20.51 14.63 18.92 10.81 10.00 

See notes at end of table. 
K-103 

Table K-24. Summary of item nonresponse bias analysis for all students and by institutional sector: 2004—Conti

Variable Variable label 

All 

students 

Public 

less-than2-year Public 2-year 

Public 4-

year nondoctoral 

Public 4-

year 

doctoral 

Private notfor-profit 

less-than4-year 

Private notfor-profit 4-

year nondoctoral 

Privat

for

4

do

PARPAYCR Parents help pay credit bills 

Mean estimated bias 0.19 0.30 0.18 0.19 0.07 0.21 0.10 

Median estimated bias 0.08 0.19 0.10 0.09 0.05 0.17 0.06 Percent significant bias 58.82 6.06 25.64 29.27 32.43 8.33 17.50 

PAYOFBAL Payoff or carry credit balance 

Mean estimated bias 0.19 0.30 0.18 0.19 0.07 0.20 0.10 

Median estimated bias 0.08 0.19 0.10 0.09 0.04 0.17 0.06 Percent significant bias 60.78 6.06 25.64 29.27 32.43 8.33 17.50 

PAYTUIT Use credit to pay for tuition 

Mean estimated bias 0.19 0.30 0.18 0.19 0.07 0.20 0.10 

Median estimated bias 0.08 0.17 0.10 0.09 0.05 0.17 0.06 Percent significant bias 56.86 6.06 25.64 29.27 32.43 8.33 25.00 

PDADED Father’s highest education level 

Mean estimated bias 0.07 0.09 0.10 † † † † Median estimated bias 0.02 0.04 0.03 † † † † 

Percent significant bias 50.91 32.43 31.71 † † † † 

PMOMED Mothers highest education level 

Mean estimated bias 0.07 0.08 0.10 † † † † Median estimated bias 0.02 0.04 0.03 † † † † 

Percent significant bias 52.73 32.43 31.71 † † † † 

PRIMLANG English as primary language 

Mean estimated bias 0.12 0.09 0.12 0.13 0.09 0.12 0.06 

Median estimated bias 0.06 0.05 0.04 0.05 0.02 0.09 0.03 Percent significant bias 50.91 32.43 24.39 18.18 26.09 15.38 13.95 

RAINDTRB State/federally recognized tribe 

Mean estimated bias 0.14 0.13 0.08 0.12 0.12 0.30 0.14 

Median estimated bias 0.05 0.09 0.04 0.06 0.04 0.18 0.06 Percent significant bias 1.82 29.03 2.78 # # # # 

REMEDIA Took remedial course: English 

Mean estimated bias 0.36 0.34 0.30 0.20 0.18 0.38 0.22 

Median estimated bias 0.19 0.22 0.11 0.16 0.15 0.24 0.12 Percent significant bias 43.40 19.44 36.59 26.83 43.59 12.82 19.05 

REMEDIB Took remedial course: math 

Mean estimated bias 0.36 0.34 0.30 0.20 0.18 0.38 0.22 

Median estimated bias 0.19 0.22 0.11 0.16 0.15 0.24 0.12 Percent significant bias 43.40 19.44 36.59 26.83 43.59 12.82 19.05 

See notes at end of table. 
K-104 

Table K-24. Summary of item nonresponse bias analysis for all students and by institutional sector: 2004—Conti

Variable Variable label 

All 

students 

Public 

less-than2-year Public 2-year 

Public 4-

year nondoctoral 

Public 4-

year 

doctoral 

Private notfor-profit 

less-than4-year 

Private notfor-profit 4-

year nondoctoral 

Privat

for

4

do

REMEDIC Took remedial course: reading 

Mean estimated bias 0.36 0.34 0.30 0.20 0.18 0.38 0.22 

Median estimated bias 0.19 0.22 0.11 0.16 0.15 0.24 0.12 Percent significant bias 43.40 19.44 36.59 26.83 43.59 12.82 19.05 

REMEDID Took remedial course: study skills 

Mean estimated bias 0.36 0.34 0.30 0.20 0.18 0.38 0.22 

Median estimated bias 0.19 0.22 0.11 0.16 0.15 0.24 0.12 Percent significant bias 43.40 19.44 36.59 26.83 43.59 12.82 19.05 

REMEDIE Took remedial course: writing 

Mean estimated bias 0.36 0.34 0.30 0.20 0.18 0.38 0.22 

Median estimated bias 0.19 0.22 0.11 0.16 0.15 0.24 0.12 Percent significant bias 43.40 19.44 36.59 26.83 43.59 12.82 19.05 

REMETOOK Took remedial courses this school 

year 

Mean estimated bias 0.26 0.23 0.20 0.13 0.11 0.33 0.14 

Median estimated bias 0.11 0.11 0.07 0.11 0.07 0.18 0.05 Percent significant bias 39.62 22.22 12.20 24.39 33.33 7.69 9.52 

REMEVER Ever taken remedial courses 

Mean estimated bias 0.12 0.05 0.11 0.09 0.07 0.12 0.04 

Median estimated bias 0.05 0.05 0.03 0.04 0.02 0.08 0.03 Percent significant bias 49.06 21.62 24.39 20.93 25.00 7.69 14.29 

SERNEEDA Adaptive equipment and technology 

Mean estimated bias 0.23 0.24 0.25 0.32 0.18 0.27 0.18 

Median estimated bias 0.08 0.18 0.12 0.12 0.08 0.22 0.08 Percent significant bias 32.73 27.78 17.07 20.45 31.82 8.11 4.65 

SERNEEDB Alternative exam formats or additional 

time 

Mean estimated bias 0.23 0.24 0.25 0.32 0.18 0.27 0.18 

Median estimated bias 0.08 0.18 0.12 0.12 0.08 0.22 0.08 Percent significant bias 32.73 27.78 17.07 20.45 31.82 8.11 4.65 

SERNEEDC Course substitution or waiver 

Mean estimated bias 0.23 0.24 0.25 0.32 0.18 0.27 0.18 

Median estimated bias 0.08 0.18 0.12 0.12 0.08 0.22 0.08 Percent significant bias 32.73 27.78 17.07 20.45 31.82 8.11 4.65 

See notes at end of table. 
K-105 

Table K-24. Summary of item nonresponse bias analysis for all students and by institutional sector: 2004—Conti

Variable Variable label 

All 

students 

Public 

less-than2-year Public 2-year 

Public 4-

year nondoctoral 

Public 4-

year 

doctoral 

Private notfor-profit 

less-than4-year 

Private notfor-profit 4-

year nondoctoral 

Privat

for

4

do

SERNEEDD Readers, note takers, or scribes 

Mean estimated bias 0.23 0.24 0.25 0.32 0.18 0.27 0.18 

Median estimated bias 0.08 0.18 0.12 0.12 0.08 0.22 0.08 Percent significant bias 32.73 27.78 17.07 20.45 31.82 8.11 4.65 

SERNEEDE Registration assistance or priority 

class registration 

Mean estimated bias 0.23 0.24 0.25 0.32 0.18 0.27 0.18 

Median estimated bias 0.08 0.18 0.12 0.12 0.08 0.22 0.08 Percent significant bias 32.73 27.78 17.07 20.45 31.82 8.11 4.65 

SERNEEDF Sign language or oral interpreters 

Mean estimated bias 0.23 0.24 0.25 0.33 0.18 0.29 0.18 

Median estimated bias 0.09 0.18 0.12 0.13 0.09 0.22 0.08 Percent significant bias 30.91 27.78 17.07 20.45 34.09 8.11 4.65 

SERNEEDG Tutors to assist with homework 

Mean estimated bias 0.23 0.24 0.25 0.32 0.18 0.27 0.18 

Median estimated bias 0.08 0.18 0.12 0.12 0.08 0.22 0.08 Percent significant bias 32.73 27.78 17.07 20.45 31.82 8.11 4.65 

SERNEEDX Needs: other 

Mean estimated bias 0.23 0.24 0.25 0.32 0.18 0.27 0.18 

Median estimated bias 0.08 0.18 0.12 0.12 0.08 0.22 0.08 Percent significant bias 32.73 27.78 17.07 20.45 31.82 8.11 4.65 

SERRECVA Service: adaptive equipment and 

technology 

Mean estimated bias 0.23 0.25 0.26 0.32 0.18 0.26 0.17 

Median estimated bias 0.09 0.20 0.11 0.14 0.08 0.20 0.07 Percent significant bias 30.91 27.78 14.63 20.45 31.82 8.11 4.65 

SERRECVB Service: alternative exam 

formats/additional time 

Mean estimated bias 0.23 0.25 0.26 0.32 0.18 0.26 0.17 

Median estimated bias 0.09 0.20 0.11 0.14 0.08 0.20 0.07 Percent significant bias 30.91 27.78 14.63 20.45 31.82 8.11 4.65 

SERRECVC Service: course substitution or waiver 

Mean estimated bias 0.23 0.25 0.26 0.32 0.18 0.26 0.17 

Median estimated bias 0.09 0.20 0.11 0.14 0.08 0.20 0.07 Percent significant bias 30.91 27.78 14.63 20.45 31.82 8.11 4.65 

See notes at end of table. 
K-106 

Table K-24. Summary of item nonresponse bias analysis for all students and by institutional sector: 2004—Conti

Variable Variable label 

All 

students 

Public 

less-than2-year Public 2-year 

Public 4-

year nondoctoral 

Public 4-

year 

doctoral 

Private notfor-profit 

less-than4-year 

Private notfor-profit 4-

year nondoctoral 

Privat

for

4

do

SERRECVD Service: readers, note takers, or 

scribes 

Mean estimated bias 0.23 0.25 0.26 0.32 0.18 0.26 0.17 

Median estimated bias 0.09 0.20 0.11 0.14 0.08 0.20 0.07 Percent significant bias 30.91 27.78 14.63 20.45 31.82 8.11 4.65 

SERRECVE Service: registration priority or 

assistance 

Mean estimated bias 0.23 0.25 0.26 0.32 0.18 0.26 0.17 

Median estimated bias 0.09 0.20 0.11 0.14 0.08 0.20 0.07 Percent significant bias 30.91 27.78 14.63 20.45 31.82 8.11 4.65 

SERRECVF Service: sign language or oral 

interpreters 

Mean estimated bias 0.23 0.25 0.26 0.32 0.18 0.26 0.17 

Median estimated bias 0.09 0.20 0.11 0.14 0.08 0.20 0.07 Percent significant bias 30.91 27.78 14.63 20.45 31.82 8.11 4.65 

SERRECVG Service: tutors to assist with 

homework 

Mean estimated bias 0.23 0.25 0.26 0.32 0.18 0.26 0.17 

Median estimated bias 0.09 0.20 0.11 0.14 0.08 0.20 0.07 Percent significant bias 30.91 27.78 14.63 20.45 31.82 8.11 4.65 

SERRECVX Service: other 

Mean estimated bias 0.23 0.25 0.26 0.32 0.18 0.26 0.17 

Median estimated bias 0.09 0.20 0.11 0.14 0.08 0.20 0.07 Percent significant bias 30.91 27.78 14.63 20.45 31.82 8.11 4.65 

SIBCOLB4 Siblings in college before respondent 

Mean estimated bias 0.12 0.15 0.13 0.12 0.04 0.13 0.06 

Median estimated bias 0.04 0.07 0.04 0.05 0.02 0.08 0.03 Percent significant bias 47.06 6.06 25.64 26.83 27.03 10.81 15.00 

SINCOL Number in college (independent 

students) 

Mean estimated bias 0.08 0.08 0.10 † † † † Median estimated bias 0.02 0.03 0.04 † † † † Percent significant bias 50.91 35.14 36.59 † † † † 

SJCOMSER Work-study: community service 

Mean estimated bias 0.12 0.24 0.18 0.11 0.09 0.10 0.09 

Median estimated bias 0.04 0.10 0.05 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 Percent significant bias 13.21 # 15.38 10.00 13.16 2.63 7.32 

See notes at end of table. 
K-107 

Table K-24. Summary of item nonresponse bias analysis for all students and by institutional sector: 2004—Conti

Variable Variable label 

All 

students 

Public 

less-than2-year Public 2-year 

Public 4-

year nondoctoral 

Public 4-

year 

doctoral 

Private notfor-profit 

less-than4-year 

Private notfor-profit 4-

year nondoctoral 

Privat

for

4

do

SJHOURS Work study: hours worked per week 

Mean estimated bias 0.08 † 0.10 0.07 0.05 0.10 0.04 

Median estimated bias 0.01 † 0.04 0.04 0.02 0.08 0.01 Percent significant bias 20.00 † 15.00 7.14 2.38 7.69 6.98 

SJMAJOR Work study: related to major 

Mean estimated bias 0.08 0.24 0.11 0.11 0.09 0.12 0.07 

Median estimated bias 0.04 0.11 0.04 0.07 0.04 0.08 0.03 Percent significant bias 9.80 9.09 13.16 17.07 12.50 2.63 7.14 

SJONOFF Work study: on/off campus 

Mean estimated bias 0.11 0.22 0.17 0.10 0.08 0.09 0.06 

Median estimated bias 0.04 0.12 0.06 0.06 0.04 0.04 0.04 Percent significant bias 20.75 6.06 17.50 17.07 17.50 2.56 7.14 

SJSCHOOL Work study: for school 

Mean estimated bias 0.11 0.22 0.17 0.10 0.08 0.09 0.06 

Median estimated bias 0.04 0.12 0.07 0.06 0.04 0.04 0.04 Percent significant bias 18.87 6.06 17.50 17.07 17.50 2.56 7.14 

SJTUTOR Work study: tutoring 

Mean estimated bias 0.12 0.24 0.18 0.10 0.08 0.10 0.09 

Median estimated bias 0.04 0.08 0.05 0.05 0.04 0.04 0.04 Percent significant bias 13.21 # 15.38 10.00 13.16 2.63 7.32 

SPINCOL Spouse in college 

Mean estimated bias 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.14 0.06 0.17 0.06 

Median estimated bias 0.07 0.08 0.05 0.06 0.03 0.14 0.03 Percent significant bias 34.55 25.00 21.95 13.64 16.67 7.89 4.65 

SPSINC Spouse of student earnings derived 

Mean estimated bias 0.46 0.26 0.54 0.53 0.59 0.26 0.35 

Median estimated bias 0.26 0.15 0.29 0.28 0.23 0.09 0.22 Percent significant bias 54.55 38.89 43.90 25.00 34.09 20.51 25.58 

SSISSDI Receive SSI/SSDI 

Mean estimated bias 0.23 0.24 0.26 0.34 0.17 0.25 0.17 

Median estimated bias 0.09 0.18 0.11 0.13 0.08 0.18 0.06 Percent significant bias 29.09 27.78 14.63 18.18 29.55 8.11 4.65 

STUDMULT Number of institutions attended 

Mean estimated bias 0.06 0.06 0.08 † † † † Median estimated bias 0.02 0.03 0.01 † † † † Percent significant bias 54.55 29.73 26.83 † † † † 

See notes at end of table. 
K-108 

Table K-24. Summary of item nonresponse bias analysis for all students and by institutional sector: 2004—Conti

Variable Variable label 

All 

students 

Public 

less-than2-year Public 2-year 

Public 4-

year nondoctoral 

Public 4-

year 

doctoral 

Private notfor-profit 

less-than4-year 

Private notfor-profit 4-

year nondoctoral 

Privat

for

4

do

TAXHOPE Claim Federal Hope scholarship 

Mean estimated bias 0.12 0.09 0.12 0.13 0.08 0.17 0.06 

Median estimated bias 0.04 0.06 0.04 0.05 0.02 0.08 0.03 Percent significant bias 41.82 32.43 19.51 15.91 28.26 20.51 18.60 

TAXLEARN Claim lifetime learning tax credit 

Mean estimated bias 0.12 0.10 0.11 0.13 0.08 0.17 0.06 

Median estimated bias 0.05 0.05 0.03 0.04 0.02 0.08 0.03 Percent significant bias 49.09 27.03 19.51 20.45 30.43 17.95 13.95 

TAXTUIT Claim tuition tax deduction 

Mean estimated bias 0.12 0.09 0.11 0.13 0.08 0.17 0.06 

Median estimated bias 0.05 0.06 0.04 0.04 0.02 0.08 0.03 Percent significant bias 49.09 32.43 26.83 22.73 26.09 17.95 11.63 

TRANSCRD Transferred credits to NPSAS 

Mean estimated bias 0.20 0.66 0.23 0.17 0.20 0.35 0.14 

Median estimated bias 0.09 0.48 0.10 0.11 0.08 0.30 0.10 Percent significant bias 20.75 31.25 19.51 4.88 14.29 7.69 15.00 

TRANSFR Transferred from NPSAS 

Mean estimated bias 0.15 0.27 0.19 0.10 0.22 0.21 0.15 

Median estimated bias 0.06 0.12 0.07 0.06 0.06 0.15 0.11 Percent significant bias 28.30 # 19.51 4.88 4.55 2.56 24.39 

TRANSPLN Plan to transfer from NPSAS 

Mean estimated bias 0.17 0.15 0.14 0.13 0.10 0.20 0.09 

Median estimated bias 0.09 0.09 0.06 0.06 0.04 0.11 0.05 Percent significant bias 60.38 24.32 14.63 37.21 54.55 17.95 28.57 

TRANSTO Transferred to NPSAS 

Mean estimated bias 0.12 0.24 0.14 0.10 0.14 0.21 0.09 

Median estimated bias 0.04 0.16 0.05 0.06 0.03 0.16 0.06 Percent significant bias 35.85 8.82 21.95 9.76 6.82 5.13 7.32 

UNTAXBF Received untaxed benefits in 2003 

Mean estimated bias 0.22 0.06 0.12 0.12 0.09 0.10 0.05 

Median estimated bias 0.13 0.06 0.04 0.05 0.04 0.08 0.02 Percent significant bias 30.91 24.32 19.51 27.27 19.57 5.13 4.65 

UNTAXBFA Received child support 

Mean estimated bias 0.28 0.24 0.25 0.28 0.20 0.24 0.17 

Median estimated bias 0.18 0.19 0.15 0.21 0.14 0.18 0.14 Percent significant bias 47.27 21.62 31.71 30.95 26.09 2.63 4.65 

See notes at end of table. 
K-109 

Table K-24. Summary of item nonresponse bias analysis for all students and by institutional sector: 2004—Conti

Variable Variable label 

All 

students 

Public 

less-than2-year Public 2-year 

Public 4-

year nondoctoral 

Public 4-

year 

doctoral 

Private notfor-profit 

less-than4-year 

Private notfor-profit 4-

year nondoctoral 

Privat

for

4

do

UNTAXBFB Received disability payments 

Mean estimated bias 0.28 0.18 0.31 0.40 0.25 0.25 0.23 

Median estimated bias 0.18 0.14 0.19 0.25 0.17 0.17 0.19 Percent significant bias 47.27 16.22 41.46 40.91 34.78 7.69 13.95 

UNTAXBFC Received food stamps 

Mean estimated bias 0.28 0.18 0.31 0.40 0.25 0.25 0.23 

Median estimated bias 0.18 0.14 0.19 0.25 0.17 0.17 0.19 Percent significant bias 47.27 16.22 41.46 40.91 34.78 7.69 13.95 

UNTAXBFD Received social security benefits 

Mean estimated bias 0.22 0.19 0.31 0.40 0.25 0.25 0.23 

Median estimated bias 0.13 0.14 0.20 0.25 0.17 0.17 0.18 Percent significant bias 30.91 16.22 41.46 40.91 36.96 7.69 13.95 

UNTAXBFE Received TANF 

Mean estimated bias 0.28 0.24 0.25 0.28 0.20 0.24 0.17 

Median estimated bias 0.18 0.19 0.15 0.21 0.14 0.18 0.14 Percent significant bias 47.27 21.62 31.71 30.95 26.09 2.63 4.65 

UNTAXBFF Received worker’s compensation 

Mean estimated bias 0.12 0.18 0.31 0.40 0.25 0.25 0.23 

Median estimated bias 0.06 0.14 0.19 0.25 0.17 0.17 0.19 Percent significant bias 43.64 16.22 41.46 40.91 34.78 7.69 13.95 

USBORN Respondent born in the U.S. 

Mean estimated bias 0.12 0.10 0.12 0.13 0.08 0.13 0.06 

Median estimated bias 0.05 0.06 0.04 0.04 0.02 0.09 0.03 Percent significant bias 45.45 27.03 17.07 22.73 28.26 5.13 9.30 

VOCAPPLY Ever applied for Voc Rehab services 

Mean estimated bias 0.23 0.28 0.24 0.34 0.17 0.31 0.19 

Median estimated bias 0.08 0.21 0.10 0.12 0.07 0.23 0.08 Percent significant bias 25.45 11.11 12.20 15.91 20.45 2.70 6.98 

VOCRECV Ever received Voc Rehab services 

Mean estimated bias 0.24 0.24 0.26 0.34 0.17 0.25 0.17 

Median estimated bias 0.08 0.18 0.11 0.13 0.08 0.18 0.07 Percent significant bias 29.09 27.78 14.63 20.45 29.55 8.11 4.65 

VOTEEVER Ever vote 

Mean estimated bias 0.12 0.10 0.12 0.12 0.08 0.14 0.06 

Median estimated bias 0.05 0.05 0.04 0.04 0.02 0.10 0.03 Percent significant bias 47.27 27.03 19.51 22.73 28.26 7.69 9.30 

See notes at end of table. 
K-110 

Table K-24. Summary of item nonresponse bias analysis for all students and by institutional sector: 2004—Conti

Variable Variable label 

All 

students 

Public 

less-than2-year Public 2-year 

Public 4-

year nondoctoral 

Public 4-

year 

doctoral 

Private notfor-profit 

less-than4-year 

Private notfor-profit 4-

year nondoctoral 

Privat

for

4

do

VOTEREG Registered to vote 

Mean estimated bias 0.12 0.10 0.12 0.12 0.08 0.18 0.06 

Median estimated bias 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.02 0.10 0.03 Percent significant bias 47.27 27.03 17.07 18.18 26.09 12.82 9.30 

YEARGRAD Year began graduate school 

Mean estimated bias 0.07 † † 0.10 0.04 † 0.07 

Median estimated bias 0.02 † † 0.05 0.01 † 0.03 

Percent significant bias 6.98 † † # 11.43 † 11.43 

† Not applicable. NOTE: Nonresponse bias analysis was conducted only for items with a weighted response rate less than 85 percent. Nonresponse bias analysis was based on the student-leve

respondents and nonrespondents (described in section 6.3). SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 2004 National Postsecondary Student Aid Study (NPSAS:04). 
Appendix K. Nonresponse Bias Analysis 

K-111 

Table K-25. Evaluation of item nonresponse bias after imputation for continuous variables: 2004 

Variable Variable label 

Before 

imputation 

mean 

After 

imputation 

mean 

Estimated 

bias 

Relative 

bias 

BAYEAR Year received bachelor's degree 1,995.56 1,995.55 0.01 # 

COMHOUR Number of hours volunteered per month 15.27 15.36 -0.10 -0.01 

CRBALDUE Balance due on all credit cards 2,036.12 2,043.79 -7.67 # 

DEPCOST Monthly daycare costs 414.40 421.10 -6.70 -0.02 

DEPINC Dependent parent income derived 60,353.38 66,537.78 -6,184.401

 -0.09 

DEPOLD Dependent children—age of oldest 2.28 2.69 -0.421

 -0.16 

DEPYNG Dependent children—age of youngest 1.60 1.97 -0.361

 -0.18 

DSTUINC Dependent student earnings derived 4,351.04 5,474.09 -1,123.051

 -0.21 

EMPLYAM2 Employer (parents) tuition aid 29.11 29.44 -0.32 -0.01 

GPA Grad point average 296.43 296.85 -0.421

 # 

HOMEDIST Distance from NPSAS school to home 159.96 161.77 -1.81 -0.01 

HSGRADYY High school graduation year 1,995.43 1,963.77 31.671

 0.02 

INDEPINC Independent student & spouse income derived 25,522.71 32,689.87 -7,167.161

 -0.22 

JOBEARN Total amount earned during the school year 15,145.66 15,137.24 8.42 # 

JOBHOUR Hours worked weekly during the school year 29.97 30.11 -0.141

 # 

JOBNUM Number of jobs during NPSAS year 0.95 0.95 # # 

JOBSAVE Amount saved from summer earnings 1,101.21 1,102.04 -0.83 # 

NUMCRED Number of credit cards in own name 1.15 1.16 -0.01 -0.01 

PARALLOW Monthly allowance amount from parents 107.27 145.68 -38.411

 -0.26 

SJHOURS Work study: hours worked per week 12.39 12.52 -0.13 -0.01 

SPSINC Spouse of student earnings derived 21,221.92 29,144.00 -7,922.081

 -0.27 1

 Bias is significant at the 0.05 level. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 2004 National Postsecondary 

Student Aid Study (NPSAS:04). 

 
Appendix K. Nonresponse Bias Analysis 

K-112 

Table K-26. Evaluation of item nonresponse bias after imputation for categorical variables: 2004 

Variable Variable label Category

Before 

imputation 

mean

After 

imputation 

mean 

Estimated 

bias 

Relative 

bias

ATTENDA Reason for attending NPSAS: complete 

associate’s degree 

0 61.73 62.37 -0.64 -0.01

 1 38.27 37.63 0.64 0.02

ATTENDB Reason for attending NPSAS: complete certificate 0 81.45 81.14 0.31 #

 1 18.55 18.86 -0.31 -0.02

ATTENDC Reason for attending NPSAS: learn job skills 0 58.04 57.37 0.681

 0.01

 1 41.96 42.63 -0.681

 -0.02

ATTENDD Reason for attending NPSAS: personal interest or 

enrichment 

0 53.46 53.39 0.07 #

 1 46.54 46.61 -0.07 #

ATTENDE Reason for attending NPSAS: transfer to 2-year 

school 

0 94.54 94.62 -0.08 #

 1 5.46 5.38 0.08 0.01

ATTENDF Reason for attending NPSAS: transfer to 4-year 

school 

0 66.28 67.10 -0.821

 -0.01

 1 33.72 32.90 0.821

 0.02

ATTENDG Reason for attending NPSAS: transfer to another 

school 

0 91.10 91.17 -0.08 #

 1 8.90 8.83 0.08 0.01

CLASSA Type of class: business 0 89.26 89.28 -0.03 #

 1 10.74 10.72 0.03 #

CLASSB Type of class: health 0 88.58 88.69 -0.11 #

 1 11.42 11.31 0.11 0.01

CLASSC Type of class: education 0 85.43 84.68 0.75 0.01

 1 14.57 15.32 -0.75 -0.05

CLASSD Type of class: engineering and engineering 

technology 

0 97.36 97.31 0.05 #

 1 2.64 2.69 -0.05 -0.02

CLASSE Type of class: computer and information sciences 0 86.96 86.97 -0.01 #

 1 13.04 13.03 0.01 #

CLASSF Type of class: social sciences 0 88.69 88.53 0.16 #

 1 11.31 11.47 -0.16 -0.01

CLASSG Type of class: natural sciences and mathematics 0 82.33 81.33 1.00 0.01

 1 17.67 18.67 -1.00 -0.05

CLASSH Type of class: arts and humanities 0 84.82 84.27 0.54 0.01

 1 15.18 15.73 -0.54 -0.03

CLASSI Type of class: communications 0 94.54 94.23 0.31 #

 1 5.46 5.77 -0.31 -0.05

CLASSJ Type of class: vocational program 0 93.90 94.23 -0.33 #

 1 6.10 5.77 0.33 0.06

CLASSK Type of class: university transfer 0 94.32 94.27 0.05 #

 1 5.68 5.73 -0.05 -0.01

CLASSL Type of class: general education 0 76.09 76.56 -0.47 -0.01

 1 23.91 23.44 0.47 0.02

See notes at end of table. 
Appendix K. Nonresponse Bias Analysis 

K-113 

Table K-26. Evaluation of item nonresponse bias after imputation for categorical variables: 

2004—Continued 

Variable Variable label Category

Before 

imputation 

mean

After 

imputation 

mean 

Estimated 

bias 

Relative 

bias

CLASSX Type of class: other 0 79.48 79.98 -0.50 -0.01

 1 20.52 20.02 0.50 0.02

COMONE One time event 0 82.11 82.25 -0.14 #

 1 17.89 17.75 0.14 0.01

COMREQ Volunteer work required for graduation/class 0 86.50 86.54 -0.04 #

 1 13.50 13.46 0.04 #

COMSERV Community service/volunteer in last year 0 57.78 57.88 -0.10 #

 1 42.22 42.12 0.10 #

COMSERVA Volunteer: fundraising (political and non-political) 0 79.85 79.86 # #

 1 20.15 20.14 # #

COMSERVB Volunteer: homeless shelter/soup kitchen 0 86.26 86.58 -0.32 #

 1 13.74 13.42 0.32 0.02

COMSERVC Volunteer: health services 0 82.76 82.43 0.33 #

 1 17.24 17.57 -0.33 -0.02

COMSERVD Volunteer: neighborhood improvement 0 80.37 80.51 -0.14 #

 1 19.63 19.49 0.14 0.01

COMSERVE Volunteer: service to the church 0 68.77 68.44 0.33 #

 1 31.23 31.56 -0.33 -0.01

COMSERVF Volunteer: tutoring/education-related 0 74.06 74.40 -0.33 #

 1 25.94 25.60 0.33 0.01

COMSERVG Volunteer: other work with kids 0 71.70 72.08 -0.38 -0.01

 1 28.30 27.92 0.38 0.01

COMSERVX Volunteer: other 0 70.93 71.19 -0.26 #

 1 29.07 28.81 0.26 0.01

CONSIDRA Consider campus safety 0 68.90 69.39 -0.481

 -0.01

 1 31.10 30.61 0.481

 0.02

CONSIDRB Consider graduation rate 0 72.01 72.21 -0.20 #

 1 27.99 27.79 0.20 0.01

CONSIDRC Consider job rate 0 35.29 35.89 -0.60 -0.02

 1 64.71 64.11 0.60 0.01

DEGEARN Earned prior degree/certificates 0 65.78 65.32 0.46 0.01

 1 34.22 34.68 -0.46 -0.01

DEGEARNA Already earned bachelor’s degree 0 48.64 50.15 -1.511

 -0.03

 1 51.36 49.85 1.511

 0.03

DEGEARNB Already earned associate’s degree 0 70.03 68.76 1.271

 0.02

 1 29.97 31.24 -1.271

 -0.04

DEGEARNC Already earned undergraduate certificate/diploma 0 76.22 75.44 0.781

 0.01

 1 23.78 24.56 -0.781

 -0.03

DEGEARND Already earned post-BA certificate 0 98.41 98.47 -0.06 #

 1 1.59 1.53 0.06 0.04

DEGEARNE Already earned master’s degree 0 87.50 87.99 -0.49 -0.01

 1 12.50 12.01 0.49 0.04

See notes at end of table. 
Appendix K. Nonresponse Bias Analysis 

K-114 

Table K-26. Evaluation of item nonresponse bias after imputation for categorical variables: 

2004—Continued 

Variable Variable label Category

Before 

imputation 

mean

After 

imputation 

mean 

Estimated 

bias 

Relative 

bias

DEGEARNF Already earned post-MA certificate 0 99.34 99.34 # #

 1 0.66 0.66 # #

DEGEARNG Already earned first professional degree 0 97.28 97.16 0.12 #

 1 2.72 2.84 -0.12 -0.04

DEGEARNH Already earned doctoral degree 0 99.11 99.14 -0.03 #

 1 0.89 0.86 0.03 0.04

DELIVE Distance education: live 0 83.64 83.44 0.20 #

 1 16.36 16.56 -0.20 -0.01

DEPCARE Have dependent children in daycare 0 63.86 63.80 0.07 #

 1 36.14 36.20 -0.07 #

DEPCHILD Dependents - has dependent children 0 75.95 74.12 1.821

 0.02

 1 24.05 25.88 -1.821

 -0.07

DEPCLAIM Claimed as a dependent 0 24.07 23.58 0.491

 0.02

 1 64.37 65.02 -0.651

 -0.01

 2 0.41 0.42 -0.01 -0.02

 3 11.15 10.98 0.17 0.02

DEPNUMCH Dependents - number of dependent children 0 78.41 74.12 4.291

 0.06

 1 8.31 10.34 -2.031

 -0.20

 2 7.99 9.50 -1.511

 -0.16

 3 3.58 4.17 -0.591

 -0.14

 4 1.23 1.37 -0.151

 -0.11

 5 0.36 0.37 -0.01 -0.04

 6 0.09 0.09 # -0.04

 7 0.03 0.03 # 0.08

 8 0.01 0.01 # 0.09

 9 # # # 0.23

 10 # # # 0.23

DEPOTHER Dependents - has dependent other than children 0 95.10 94.90 0.201

 #

 1 4.90 5.10 -0.201

 -0.04

DERECR Distance education: pre-recorded 0 80.23 79.74 0.49 0.01

 1 19.77 20.26 -0.49 -0.02

DEWWW Distance education: Internet 0 11.78 11.61 0.17 0.01

 1 88.22 88.39 -0.17 #

DISABLE Disability Flag 0 89.73 89.28 0.451

 0.01

 1 10.27 10.72 -0.451

 -0.04

DISMOBIL Condition that limits physical activities 0 95.63 95.71 -0.08 #

 1 4.37 4.29 0.08 0.02

DISOTHER Other condition lasting six months or more 0 94.01 93.94 0.07 #

 1 5.99 6.06 -0.07 -0.01

DISOTHRA Difficulty: dressing, bathing, etc 0 92.45 92.68 -0.23 #

 1 7.55 7.32 0.23 0.03

DISOTHRB Difficulty: getting to school to attend class 0 68.99 68.82 0.17 #

 1 31.01 31.18 -0.17 -0.01

See notes at end of table. 
Appendix K. Nonresponse Bias Analysis 

K-115 

Table K-26. Evaluation of item nonresponse bias after imputation for categorical variables: 

2004—Continued 

Variable Variable label Category

Before 

imputation 

mean

After 

imputation 

mean 

Estimated 

bias 

Relative 

bias

DISOTHRC Difficulty: learning, remembering 0 17.61 17.19 0.42 0.02

 1 82.39 82.81 -0.42 -0.01

DISOTHRD Difficulty: working at a job 0 61.45 61.34 0.11 #

 1 38.55 38.66 -0.11 #

DISSENSR Have a long-lasting sensory condition 0 98.19 98.17 0.02 #

 1 1.81 1.83 -0.02 -0.01

DISTALL Distance education: entire program 0 66.44 65.97 0.47 0.01

 1 33.56 34.03 -0.47 -0.01

DISTEDUC Distance education: took courses 0 84.33 84.18 0.16 #

 1 15.67 15.82 -0.16 -0.01

DISTLOC Distance education: location of course(s) 1 80.22 79.02 1.191

 0.02

 2 10.16 10.64 -0.48 -0.04

 3 9.62 10.34 -0.72 -0.07

DISTNUM Distance education: number of courses 1 45.16 44.69 0.47 0.01

 2 22.80 22.83 -0.03 #

 3 11.20 11.27 -0.07 -0.01

 4 7.07 7.08 -0.01 #

 5 3.99 3.98 0.01 #

 6 3.50 3.71 -0.21 -0.06

 7 1.81 1.75 0.06 0.03

 8 1.33 1.45 -0.13 -0.09

 9 0.61 0.65 -0.05 -0.07

 10 1.15 1.15 # #

 11 0.26 0.25 0.01 0.03

 12 0.70 0.68 0.02 0.02

 13 0.21 0.26 -0.05 -0.20

 14 0.10 0.11 -0.01 -0.10

 15 0.13 0.12 0.01 0.07

DISTSATF Distance education: satisfaction 1 28.02 27.95 0.07 #

 2 40.25 39.98 0.28 0.01

 3 31.73 32.08 -0.35 -0.01

DISTYPES Main limiting condition 1 5.19 4.91 0.28 0.06

 2 3.70 3.93 -0.23 -0.06

 3 0.46 0.48 -0.02 -0.04

 4 24.73 25.40 -0.67 -0.03

 5 7.78 7.51 0.28 0.04

 6 11.02 10.50 0.52 0.05

 7 17.37 17.75 -0.38 -0.02

 8 8.84 8.80 0.04 #

 9 13.14 13.09 0.05 #

 10 0.53 0.51 0.03 0.05

 11 1.33 1.19 0.14 0.12

 12 5.90 5.93 -0.03 #

EVER2PUB Ever attended community college 0 58.64 58.31 0.32 0.01

 1 41.36 41.69 -0.32 -0.01

See notes at end of table. 
Appendix K. Nonresponse Bias Analysis 

K-116 

Table K-26. Evaluation of item nonresponse bias after imputation for categorical variables: 

2004—Continued 

Variable Variable label Category

Before 

imputation 

mean

After 

imputation 

mean 

Estimated 

bias 

Relative 

bias

EVER4YR Ever attended 4-year school 0 70.99 70.02 0.971 0.01

 1 29.01 29.98 -0.971 -0.03

FORESCH Ever attended elementary or secondary school 

outside of the U.S. 

0 91.08 90.95 0.13 #

 1 8.92 9.05 -0.13 -0.01

GAINSUR Health insurance with assistantship 0 57.38 57.87 -0.49 -0.01

 1 42.62 42.13 0.49 0.01

GRADPYR Year began graduate degree 1985 0.02 8.41 -8.391

 -1.00

 1986 0.05 0.05 # 0.04

 1987 # # # 0.55

 1988 0.04 0.03 0.01 0.16

 1989 0.05 0.07 -0.03 -0.35

 1990 0.05 0.03 0.02 0.55

 1991 0.16 0.11 0.05 0.47

 1992 0.08 0.07 0.01 0.15

 1993 0.25 0.21 0.04 0.20

 1994 0.17 0.15 0.02 0.17

 1995 0.26 0.25 0.02 0.07

 1996 0.45 0.34 0.111

 0.32

 1997 1.03 0.93 0.10 0.11

 1998 1.78 1.46 0.321

 0.22

 1999 3.26 3.07 0.19 0.06

 2000 6.61 6.24 0.37 0.06

 2001 14.92 14.14 0.78 0.06

 2002 26.53 23.12 3.401

 0.15

 2003 37.71 34.84 2.861

 0.08

 2004 6.57 6.47 0.10 0.02

GRADTAA TA duties: student email 0 55.08 56.72 -1.64 -0.03

 1 44.92 43.28 1.64 0.04

GRADTAB TA duties: grading 0 32.62 33.76 -1.14 -0.03

 1 67.38 66.24 1.14 0.02

GRADTAC TA duties: teaching 0 47.73 45.72 2.00 0.04

 1 52.27 54.28 -2.00 -0.04

GRADTAD TA duties: office hours 0 27.28 28.46 -1.18 -0.04

 1 72.72 71.54 1.18 0.02

GRADTAE TA duties: discussion 0 63.91 64.47 -0.56 -0.01

 1 36.09 35.53 0.56 0.02

GRADTAF TA duties: lab 0 63.72 63.46 0.26 #

 1 36.28 36.54 -0.26 -0.01

GRASTUIT Tuition paid by assistantship 0 30.55 33.14 -2.59 -0.08

 1 69.45 66.86 2.59 0.04

GRENRST Graduate enrollment status (all years) 1 61.33 59.96 1.37 0.02

 2 33.57 35.09 -1.52 -0.04

 3 5.10 4.94 0.16 0.03

See notes at end of table. 
Appendix K. Nonresponse Bias Analysis 

K-117 

Table K-26. Evaluation of item nonresponse bias after imputation for categorical variables: 

2004—Continued 

Variable Variable label Category

Before 

imputation 

mean

After 

imputation 

mean 

Estimated 

bias 

Relative 

bias

HIGHLVEX Highest level of education ever expected 1 0.51 0.56 -0.05 -0.09

 2 1.45 1.96 -0.521 -0.26

 3 6.58 7.07 -0.501

 -0.07

 4 26.07 26.43 -0.36 -0.01

 5 1.12 1.09 0.03 0.03

 6 42.21 41.53 0.681

 0.02

 7 15.92 15.48 0.431

 0.03

 8 6.15 5.87 0.281

 0.05

HOMEPAR Parents own home 0 13.65 13.78 -0.13 -0.01

 1 86.35 86.22 0.13 #

HOMESTUD Own home 0 47.67 51.56 -3.891

 -0.08

 1 52.33 48.44 3.891

 0.08

HSDEG High school degree type 1 89.50 87.01 2.491

 0.03

 2 6.46 6.37 0.08 0.01

 3 0.41 0.40 0.01 0.03

 4 1.76 4.41 -2.651

 -0.60

 5 1.63 1.57 0.06 0.04

 6 0.24 0.23 0.01 0.04

HSTYPE Type of high school attended 1 89.13 89.31 -0.18 #

 2 10.32 10.32 # #

 3 0.55 0.37 0.181

 0.49

JOBAFFOR Afford school without working 0 61.55 61.76 -0.21 #

 1 38.45 38.24 0.21 0.01

JOBCLASS Job related to coursework 0 64.69 63.55 1.141

 0.02

 1 35.31 36.45 -1.141

 -0.03

JOBEFFA Job helped with career preparation 0 61.87 62.27 -0.40 -0.01

 1 38.13 37.73 0.40 0.01

JOBEFFB Job helped with coursework 0 84.35 84.95 -0.591

 -0.01

 1 15.65 15.05 0.591

 0.04

JOBEFFC Job restricted class choice 0 64.77 64.31 0.46 0.01

 1 35.23 35.69 -0.46 -0.01

JOBEFFD Job limited class schedule 0 50.36 49.51 0.841

 0.02

 1 49.64 50.49 -0.841

 -0.02

JOBEFFE Job limited facility access 0 67.51 67.03 0.48 0.01

 1 32.49 32.97 -0.48 -0.01

JOBEFFF Job limited number of classes 0 57.75 57.28 0.47 0.01

 1 42.25 42.72 -0.47 -0.01

JOBEFFGR Effect of job on grades 1 20.61 20.52 0.09 #

 2 40.30 40.59 -0.30 -0.01

 3 39.10 38.89 0.21 0.01

See notes at end of table. 
Appendix K. Nonresponse Bias Analysis 

K-118 

Table K-26. Evaluation of item nonresponse bias after imputation for categorical variables: 

2004—Continued 

Variable Variable label Category

Before 

imputation 

mean

After 

imputation 

mean 

Estimated 

bias 

Relative 

bias

JOBEMPL Type of employer 1 7.83 7.55 0.27 0.04

 2 60.09 60.19 -0.10 #

 3 12.92 13.07 -0.16 -0.01

 4 11.84 12.09 -0.25 -0.02

 5 1.77 1.74 0.04 0.02

 6 5.55 5.35 0.20 0.04

JOBEXPT Parents expect you to have a job 0 32.14 31.59 0.551

 0.02

 1 67.86 68.41 -0.551

 -0.01

JOBMAIN Main reason for working 1 23.60 23.70 -0.10 #

 2 62.95 63.43 -0.48 -0.01

 3 7.96 7.65 0.31 0.04

 4 5.49 5.22 0.27 0.05

JOBMAJOR Job related to major 0 54.21 54.71 -0.51 -0.01

 1 45.79 45.29 0.51 0.01

JOBONOFF Job on or off campus 1 7.21 7.03 0.18 0.03

 2 90.65 90.84 -0.19 #

 3 2.14 2.13 0.01 #

JOBPRIOR Had job prior to enrollment at NPSAS 0 38.22 38.00 0.22 0.01

 1 61.78 62.00 -0.22 #

JOBROLE Working student/employee taking classes 1 60.98 60.95 0.03 #

 2 39.02 39.05 -0.03 #

JOBSCHA Combine school and work: class outside work 0 18.84 18.58 0.26 0.01

 1 81.16 81.42 -0.26 #

JOBSCHB Combine school and work: distance ed 0 79.89 79.31 0.57 0.01

 1 20.11 20.69 -0.57 -0.03

JOBSCHC Combine school and work: modify schedule 0 63.65 63.99 -0.35 -0.01

 1 36.35 36.01 0.35 0.01

JOBSUMMR Work during summer 2003 0 22.21 22.21 # #

 1 77.79 77.79 # #

JOBWEEK Weeks worked while enrolled 1 63.03 63.40 -0.37 -0.01

 2 17.55 17.68 -0.13 -0.01

 3 8.32 8.09 0.23 0.03

 4 11.11 10.84 0.27 0.02

LOCALRES Housing 0 15.62 12.45 3.171

 0.25

 1 12.21 12.03 0.18 0.02

 2 45.88 48.10 -2.211

 -0.05

 3 19.51 20.42 -0.911

 -0.04

 4 6.78 7.01 -0.231

 -0.03

See notes at end of table. 
Appendix K. Nonresponse Bias Analysis 

K-119 

Table K-26. Evaluation of item nonresponse bias after imputation for categorical variables: 

2004—Continued 

Variable Variable label Category

Before 

imputation 

mean

After 

imputation 

mean 

Estimated 

bias 

Relative 

bias

MAJORS Field of study/major (detailed) 0 10.66 10.76 -0.10 -0.01

 1 0.48 0.48 # #

 2 0.30 0.30 # #

 3 0.64 0.64 0.01 0.01

 4 0.24 0.23 # 0.02

 5 2.21 2.19 0.01 0.01

 6 0.58 0.57 0.01 0.01

 7 4.96 5.06 -0.11 -0.02

 8 1.43 1.44 -0.01 -0.01

 9 10.10 9.90 0.201

 0.02

 10 3.52 3.48 0.04 0.01

 11 1.27 1.28 -0.01 -0.01

 12 0.55 0.53 0.02 0.04

 13 0.52 0.53 -0.01 -0.02

 14 1.45 1.39 0.061

 0.05

 15 1.39 1.38 0.01 #

 16 4.53 4.56 -0.04 -0.01

 17 0.12 0.11 0.01 0.06

 18 2.56 2.54 0.02 0.01

 19 0.58 0.58 # 0.01

 20 0.02 0.02 # -0.02

 21 0.35 0.36 -0.01 -0.03

 22 0.53 0.55 -0.02 -0.04

 23 0.39 0.38 0.01 0.02

 24 0.62 0.60 0.02 0.04

 25 0.80 0.78 0.02 0.02

 26 0.19 0.19 # 0.01

 27 3.13 3.13 # #

 28 0.41 0.40 0.01 0.03

 29 1.42 1.41 0.01 0.01

 30 0.45 0.48 -0.03 -0.06

 31 0.98 0.99 -0.01 -0.01

 32 0.05 0.05 # 0.07

 33 0.24 0.25 -0.01 -0.04

 34 3.34 3.37 -0.03 -0.01

 35 13.51 13.56 -0.05 #

 36 17.49 17.55 -0.06 #

 37 1.10 1.12 -0.01 -0.01

 38 0.29 0.30 -0.01 -0.03

 39 2.26 2.29 -0.03 -0.01

 40 0.46 0.45 0.01 0.02

 41 0.20 0.19 0.01 0.05

 42 0.20 0.21 # -0.01

 43 1.08 1.06 0.02 0.02

 44 1.00 1.00 # #

 45 0.59 0.59 # #

 46 0.81 0.78 0.031

 0.04

MILTYPE Military service type 0 94.56 94.77 -0.201

 #

 1 0.50 0.57 -0.081

 -0.14

 2 1.14 1.22 -0.081

 -0.06

 3 3.80 3.44 0.361

 0.10

See notes at end of table. 
Appendix K. Nonresponse Bias Analysis 

K-120 

Table K-26. Evaluation of item nonresponse bias after imputation for categorical variables: 

2004—Continued 

Variable Variable label Category

Before 

imputation 

mean

After 

imputation 

mean 

Estimated 

bias 

Relative 

bias

NPFIRST NPSAS was first school attended after high school 0 43.56 44.18 -0.621 -0.01

 1 56.44 55.82 0.621 0.01

OWNINVST Own investments, business or farm over $10,000 0 86.88 87.69 -0.811

 -0.01

 1 13.12 12.31 0.811

 0.07

PARBORN Student's parents were born in the United States 1 18.04 18.16 -0.11 -0.01

 2 5.74 5.79 -0.05 -0.01

 3 76.21 76.05 0.17 #

PARCOLL Parents taking college courses in 2003-2004 0 89.79 89.84 -0.05 #

 1 1.95 2.08 -0.13 -0.06

 2 8.26 8.08 0.18 0.02

PARESTA Parents own other real estate 0 70.56 70.69 -0.13 #

 1 29.44 29.31 0.13 #

PARHELPA Help from parents: housing 0 53.49 54.27 -0.781

 -0.01

 1 46.51 45.73 0.781

 0.02

PARHELPB Help from parents: other educational expenses 0 46.43 46.89 -0.46 -0.01

 1 53.57 53.11 0.46 0.01

PARHELPC Help from parents: other living expenses 0 45.21 45.45 -0.24 -0.01

 1 54.79 54.55 0.24 #

PARHELPD Help from parents: tuition and fees 0 40.99 41.88 -0.891

 -0.02

 1 59.01 58.12 0.891

 0.02

PARLIVE Lived with parents while not enrolled 0 36.25 39.08 -2.841

 -0.07

 1 63.75 60.92 2.841

 0.05

PARPAYCR Parents help pay credit bills 0 75.59 75.46 0.13 #

 1 24.41 24.54 -0.13 -0.01

PAYOFBAL Payoff or carry credit balance 1 58.15 58.55 -0.39 -0.01

 2 41.85 41.45 0.39 0.01

PAYTUIT Use credit to pay for tuition 0 80.49 81.02 -0.54 -0.01

 1 19.51 18.98 0.54 0.03

PDADED Father’s highest education level 0 7.76 7.58 0.191

 0.02

 1 11.40 11.37 0.03 #

 2 32.06 31.93 0.13 #

 3 3.91 3.95 -0.04 -0.01

 4 4.63 5.56 -0.931

 -0.17

 5 3.78 4.49 -0.711

 -0.16

 6 3.03 3.69 -0.661

 -0.18

 7 14.50 17.25 -2.751

 -0.16

 8 7.30 8.84 -1.541

 -0.17

 9 1.67 1.97 -0.301

 -0.15

 10 2.86 3.38 -0.521

 -0.15

 11 7.09 † † †

See notes at end of table. 
Appendix K. Nonresponse Bias Analysis 

K-121 

Table K-26. Evaluation of item nonresponse bias after imputation for categorical variables: 

2004—Continued 

Variable Variable label Category

Before 

imputation 

mean

After 

imputation 

mean 

Estimated 

bias 

Relative 

bias

PMOMED Mother’s highest education level 0 4.31 4.20 0.10 0.02

 1 10.44 10.38 0.05 0.01

 2 35.49 35.62 -0.13 #

 3 3.74 3.80 -0.06 -0.02

 4 5.71 6.84 -1.131

 -0.17

 5 6.63 7.98 -1.351

 -0.17

 6 3.34 3.98 -0.641

 -0.16

 7 14.15 17.00 -2.851

 -0.17

 8 7.07 8.32 -1.251

 -0.15

 9 0.72 0.80 -0.081

 -0.10

 10 0.91 1.07 -0.161 -0.15

 11 7.49 † † †

PRIMLANG English as primary language 0 12.96 12.82 0.13 0.01

 1 87.04 87.18 -0.13 #

RAINDTRB State/federally recognized tribe 0 70.49 64.84 5.651

 0.09

 1 29.51 35.16 -5.651

 -0.16

REMEDIA Took remedial course: English 0 69.91 69.88 0.02 #

 1 30.09 30.12 -0.02 #

REMEDIB Took remedial course: math 0 23.53 23.15 0.37 0.02

 1 76.47 76.85 -0.37 #

REMEDIC Took remedial course: reading 0 72.07 72.02 0.05 #

 1 27.93 27.98 -0.05 #

REMEDID Took remedial course: study skills 0 87.86 87.77 0.09 #

 1 12.14 12.23 -0.09 -0.01

REMEDIE Took remedial course: writing 0 64.49 65.25 -0.77 -0.01

 1 35.51 34.75 0.77 0.02

REMETOOK Took remedial courses this school year 0 49.78 51.93 -2.151

 -0.04

 1 50.22 48.07 2.151

 0.04

REMEVER Ever taken remedial courses 0 65.90 65.69 0.22 #

 1 34.10 34.31 -0.22 -0.01

SERNEEDA Adaptive equipment and technology 0 96.38 96.55 -0.17 #

 1 3.62 3.45 0.17 0.05

SERNEEDB Alternative exam formats or additional time 0 89.97 90.05 -0.08 #

 1 10.03 9.95 0.08 0.01

SERNEEDC Course substitution or waiver 0 95.48 95.42 0.06 #

 1 4.52 4.58 -0.06 -0.01

SERNEEDD Readers, note takers, or scribes 0 95.13 95.17 -0.04 #

 1 4.87 4.83 0.04 0.01

SERNEEDE Registration assistance or priority class registration 0 95.60 95.53 0.07 #

 1 4.40 4.47 -0.07 -0.02

SERNEEDF Sign language or oral interpreters 0 98.57 98.42 0.15 #

 1 1.43 1.58 -0.15 -0.09

SERNEEDG Tutors to assist with homework 0 90.56 90.98 -0.42 #

 1 9.44 9.02 0.42 0.05

See notes at end of table. 
Appendix K. Nonresponse Bias Analysis 

K-122 

Table K-26. Evaluation of item nonresponse bias after imputation for categorical variables: 

2004—Continued 

Variable Variable label Category

Before 

imputation 

mean

After 

imputation 

mean 

Estimated 

bias 

Relative 

bias

SERNEEDX Needs: other 0 93.84 93.60 0.24 #

 1 6.16 6.40 -0.24 -0.04

SERRECVA Service: adaptive equipment and technology 0 96.17 96.24 -0.06 #

 1 3.83 3.76 0.06 0.02

SERRECVB Service: alternative exam formats/additional time 0 87.57 88.06 -0.50 -0.01

 1 12.43 11.94 0.50 0.04

SERRECVC Service: course substitution or waiver 0 98.39 98.55 -0.15 #

 1 1.61 1.45 0.15 0.10

SERRECVD Service: readers, note takers, or scribes 0 95.29 95.52 -0.22 #

 1 4.71 4.48 0.22 0.05

SERRECVE Service: registration priority or assistance 0 92.99 93.07 -0.09 #

 1 7.01 6.93 0.09 0.01

SERRECVF Service: sign language or oral interpreters 0 99.44 99.45 -0.02 #

 1 0.56 0.55 0.02 0.03

SERRECVG Service: tutors to assist with homework 0 90.79 90.50 0.28 #

 1 9.21 9.50 -0.28 -0.03

SERRECVX Service: other 0 93.62 93.80 -0.18 #

 1 6.38 6.20 0.18 0.03

SIBCOLB4 Siblings in college before respondent 0 53.58 54.03 -0.45 -0.01

 1 46.42 45.97 0.45 0.01

SINCOL Number in college (independent students) 0 45.04 43.31 1.731

 0.04

 1 47.60 48.87 -1.271

 -0.03

 2 6.44 6.83 -0.391

 -0.06

 3 0.81 0.87 -0.071

 -0.08

 4 0.10 0.11 -0.01 -0.09

 5 0.01 0.01 # -0.02

 6 # # # 0.18

SJCOMSER Work-study: community service 0 91.53 91.43 0.10 #

 1 8.47 8.57 -0.10 -0.01

SJMAJOR Work study: related to major 0 57.78 58.57 -0.79 -0.01

 1 42.22 41.43 0.79 0.02

SJONOFF Work study: on/off campus 1 79.08 80.29 -1.211

 -0.02

 2 17.15 16.20 0.95 0.06

 3 3.77 3.51 0.25 0.07

SJSCHOOL Work study: for school 1 83.78 85.16 -1.381 -0.02

 2 16.22 14.84 1.381

 0.09

SJTUTOR Work study: tutoring 0 78.59 78.16 0.43 0.01

 1 21.41 21.84 -0.43 -0.02

SPINCOL Spouse in college 0 80.75 81.70 -0.951

 -0.01

 1 9.55 8.85 0.701

 0.08

 2 9.70 9.45 0.25 0.03

See notes at end of table. 
Appendix K. Nonresponse Bias Analysis 

K-123 

Table K-26. Evaluation of item nonresponse bias after imputation for categorical variables: 

2004—Continued 

Variable Variable label Category

Before 

imputation 

mean

After 

imputation 

mean 

Estimated 

bias 

Relative 

bias

SSISSDI Receive SSI/SSDI 0 92.60 92.59 0.01 #

 1 2.56 2.83 -0.27 -0.09

 3 3.87 3.60 0.26 0.07

 4 0.97 0.98 -0.01 -0.01

STUDMULT Number of institutions attended 1 92.80 92.99 -0.191

 #

 2 6.85 6.67 0.181 0.03

 3 0.32 0.31 0.01 0.05

 4 0.03 0.03 # -0.08

 5 # # # -0.22

TAXHOPE Claim Federal Hope scholarship 0 61.72 62.05 -0.33 -0.01

 1 6.28 6.46 -0.19 -0.03

 2 32.01 31.49 0.521

 0.02

TAXLEARN Claim lifetime learning tax credit 0 58.92 59.34 -0.43 -0.01

 1 7.94 8.09 -0.15 -0.02

 2 33.14 32.56 0.581

 0.02

TAXTUIT Claim tuition tax deduction 0 48.86 49.13 -0.27 -0.01

 1 17.95 18.18 -0.24 -0.01

 2 33.19 32.69 0.501

 0.02

TRANSCRD Transferred credits to NPSAS 1 54.20 54.38 -0.18 #

 2 38.64 38.08 0.56 0.01

 3 7.16 7.54 -0.38 -0.05

TRANSFR Transferred from NPSAS 0 70.21 70.91 -0.71 -0.01

 1 29.79 29.09 0.71 0.02

TRANSPLN Plan to transfer from NPSAS 0 65.99 65.69 0.30 #

 1 34.01 34.31 -0.30 -0.01

TRANSTO Transferred to NPSAS 0 66.48 66.41 0.07 #

 1 33.52 33.59 -0.07 #

UGDEGAA Associate’s degree types 1 67.31 67.20 0.11 #

 2 32.69 32.80 -0.11 #

UNTAXBF Received untaxed benefits in 2003 0 86.65 86.43 0.22 #

 1 13.35 13.57 -0.22 -0.02

UNTAXBFA Received child support 0 40.57 41.47 -0.90 -0.02

 1 59.43 58.53 0.90 0.02

UNTAXBFB Received disability payments 0 80.29 66.26 14.031

 0.21

 1 19.71 33.74 -14.031

 -0.42

UNTAXBFC Received food stamps 0 84.11 84.06 0.05 #

 1 15.89 15.94 -0.05 #

UNTAXBFD Received social security benefits 0 81.78 81.79 -0.01 #

 1 18.22 18.21 0.01 #

UNTAXBFE Received TANF 0 88.07 87.95 0.13 #

 1 11.93 12.05 -0.13 -0.01

UNTAXBFF Received worker’s compensation 0 92.70 88.93 3.771

 0.04

 1 7.30 11.07 -3.771

 -0.34

See notes at end of table. 
Appendix K. Nonresponse Bias Analysis 

K-124 

Table K-26. Evaluation of item nonresponse bias after imputation for categorical variables: 

2004—Continued 

Variable Variable label Category

Before 

imputation 

mean

After 

imputation 

mean 

Estimated 

bias 

Relative 

bias

USBORN Respondent born in the U.S. 0 6.52 6.66 -0.15 -0.02

 1 93.48 93.34 0.15 #

VOCAPPLY Ever applied for Voc Rehab services 0 94.75 94.49 0.26 #

 1 5.25 5.51 -0.26 -0.05

VOCRECV Ever received Voc Rehab services 0 83.32 83.23 0.09 #

 1 16.68 16.77 -0.09 -0.01

VOTEEVER Ever vote 0 37.23 36.45 0.781

 0.02

 1 62.77 63.55 -0.781

 -0.01

VOTEREG Registered to vote 0 17.53 17.36 0.16 0.01

 1 82.47 82.64 -0.16 #

YEARGRAD Year began graduate school 1985 0.02 0.01 # 0.37

 1986 0.05 0.05 -0.01 -0.12

 1987 # # # 0.37

 1988 0.04 0.03 # 0.06

 1989 0.05 0.04 0.01 0.28

 1990 0.05 0.04 0.01 0.26

 1991 0.16 0.14 0.02 0.13

 1992 0.08 0.07 0.01 0.07

 1993 0.25 0.22 0.02 0.10

 1994 0.19 0.17 0.02 0.11

 1995 0.25 0.21 0.05 0.23

 1996 0.45 0.37 0.08 0.22

 1997 1.00 0.91 0.09 0.10

 1998 1.73 1.76 -0.03 -0.02

 1999 3.22 4.06 -0.84 -0.21

 2000 6.42 6.35 0.07 0.01

 2001 14.52 14.51 0.02 #

 2002 26.71 25.93 0.78 0.03

 2003 38.14 38.10 0.04 #

 2004 6.68 7.02 -0.34 -0.05

† Not applicable. 

1

 Bias is significant at the 0.05/(c-1) level, where c is the number of categories within the primary variable. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 2004 National Postsecondary Student Aid Study 

(NPSAS:04). 
L-1 

Appendix L 

Details of the Bootstrap Variance Estimation 

Appendix L. Details of the Bootstrap Variance Estimation 

L-3 

L.1 Background 

The first stage sample of institutions was selected using a probability proportional to size 

(pps) sequential sampling scheme (Chromy 1981), and certain large institutions were selected 

with certainty (see section 2.1). In this application, sample selection of institutions was “without 

replacement” and selection of bootstrap samples for variance estimation used the same sampling 

methodology used for selecting the initial sample. Sampling of students is assumed to be with a 

low sampling fraction so that “with replacement” variance models provide a good approximation 

to the second stage (student) variance contribution. This is also consistent with treating the 

student population as infinite for the purposes of applying statistical tests based on normal 

distribution theory, which requires reference to a hypothetical infinite population. 

The second stage design involved stratification of students within institutions and 

application of different sampling rates within the student strata (see section 2.1). For variance 

estimation purposes, replicates of the second stage sample were formed as discrete subsamples of 

the student sample ordered by stratum. Each student sample replicate could be considered as the 

sample resulting from applying the second stage design with a smaller overall student sample 

size. In most institutions, only two student sample replicates were formed; in some of the larger 

institutions, as many as eight student replicate samples were formed. All of the institutions with 

three or more student replicates were certainty institutions. 

For discussion purposes, the sampling units are referred to as institutions at the first stage 

of sampling and as student replicates at the second stage of sampling. Because the student 

replicates are treated as being drawn with replacement, the effects of student stratification and 

weighting are incorporated in the weighted replicate subtotals and represented in the expectation 

of the variance estimates. 

Software which accounts for the finite population correction (FPC) in two stage samples 

had been developed and written by Steve Kaufman at National Center for Education Statistics 

(NCES) and was adapted to the National Postsecondary Student Aid Study (NPSAS) application 

(Kaufman 2004). The discussion below addresses four steps of the software program and the 

general process followed to select bootstrap samples and compute replicate weights as applied to 

the NPSAS data: 

1. Computation of the variance of an estimate for a variable whose value is known for 

all first stage frame elements. 

2. Determination of the first stage bootstrap sample size based on comparisons to the 

variance calculated in step 1. 

3. Determination of the second stage sample size for each bootstrap replicate selection. 

4. Selection of the bootstrap samples and calculation of the associated replicate weights. 

L.1.1 Step 1: Computation of the Variance of an Estimate for a Known Variable 

The institution sampling frame created from Integrated Postsecondary Education Data 

System (IPEDS) (see section 2.1) included variables known for each institution. The total student 

enrollment from the frame was selected for the purposes of computing a variance for a simple 

linear estimate of a population total at the design stratum level. 
Appendix L. Details of the Bootstrap Variance Estimation 

L-4 

Within each design stratum two or more institutions had been selected. The originally 

applied measures of size scaled to the sample size for the design stratum were also available on 

the complete frame. If more than three institutions had been selected from a design stratum, the 

frame was modified by forming substrata called analysis strata. Each analysis stratum was 

associated with, in most cases, two selected institutions; when a design stratum had an odd 

sample size, it was necessary to form one analysis stratum with three selected institutions (see 

section 6.4.1). 

The Kaufman procedure formed exactly equal-sized strata with an accumulated size 

measure of 2 (or 3) by partitioning the measure of size for any institution whose accumulated 

measure of size exceeded 2 (or 3). This introduced some additional first stage units into the 

frame. In addition, within each analysis stratum, a similar partitioning was performed to form 2 

(or 3) subgroups of equal size. It was then feasible to approximate the FPC factor within analysis 

stratum by applying the formula developed for Rao-Hartley-Cochran sample designs.1

 The 

frame-based variance of the total estimate was then computed within each analysis stratum by 

multiplying the “with replacement” variance estimate by the Rao-Harley-Cochran FPC factor. 

This design stratum level variance was then used in a subsequent step to select an appropriate 

design stratum bootstrap sample size that empirically reproduces this standard variance (within a 

reasonable approximation). 

L.1.2 Step 2: Determination of First Stage Bootstrap Sample Sizes 

For this step of the process, a pseudo sampling frame was formed from the observed 

sample by replicating each institutional respondent based on its assigned first stage sampling 

weight. Since the NPSAS application used only respondent institutions, the weight used for this 

purpose was adjusted for institution nonresponse. Each respondent institution and its measure of 

size was replicated on the pseudo frame based on a multiple of its “rounded up” first stage 

weight so that the sum of its repeated measures of size totaled exactly 1; the measure of size for 

the final replication was adjusted downward when the first stage weight was not an integer so 

that the sum of the measures of size for each institution was exactly 1. 

This pseudo frame was then used to generate first stage samples using the same pps 

sequential sampling procedure used for selecting the NPSAS sample from the complete frame. A 

range of sample sizes was specified in advance for each design stratum and 100 first stage 

bootstrap samples were selected for each sample size and used to compute a bootstrap variance 

estimate for the linear statistic selected for comparison with the standard variance computed in 

step 1. If the specified range included feasible values, then this process was able to bracket 

standard variances with empirical bootstrap variances based on two different sample sizes. Once 

the standard variance was bracketed, simple linear interpolation was used to compute the 

proportional position of the standard variance between the bracketed values. This proportion was 

then compared to a randomly drawn uniform random number to select one of the integer valued 

bootstrap sample sizes. The bracketing sample sizes were not always consecutive. The following 

notation is useful for discussing the general results of applying the algorithm. Let n1h = the 

number of institutions selected in design stratum h (first stage sample), * m1h .= the first stage 

bootstrap sample size for design stratum h, and * m1hi .= the number of times institution i in design 

 

1

 See Kaufman (1999) for a discussion of the rationale for this approach. 
Appendix L. Details of the Bootstrap Variance Estimation 

L-5 

stratum h is actually selected in a particular bootstrap sample. Then the first stage (institution 

level) bootstrap sample weight is then computed as an adjustment to the initial weight as 

*

1 *

1

* 1

hi

h

h

hi hi m

m

n

w = w . 

Note that for certainty strata, the first stage sample was preserved and both the initial 

institution weight and the adjusted institution weight were exactly 1. 

L.1.3 Step 3: Determination of the Second Stage Bootstrap Sample Sizes 

Since second stage units were defined as replicate subsamples from the sample of 

students selected within each institution and ‘with replacement’ sampling was assumed as a 

reasonable approximation to the low sampling rate, the second stage bootstrap sample sizes were 

just one less than the initial sample multiplied by the first stage bootstrap weight. If we let n2hi = 

the number of student replicates initially selected at institution i in design stratum h, then secondstage bootstrap sample was computed as 

( 1). 2 *

1 * m2hi = w hi n hi −

The resulting number was randomly rounded to an integer value.2

L.1.4 Step 4: Selection of Bootstrap Samples and Computation of Replicate 

Weights 

The first stage replicate samples were selected using pps sequential sampling using the 

first stage bootstrap sample sizes. For institutions selected one or more times at the first stage of 

bootstrap sample selection for a particular replicate, student replicates were selected with equal 

probability and ‘with replacement’ using the second stage bootstrap sample size for that 

institution. Note that in certainty institutions, the second-stage bootstrap sample size was always 

just one less than the original sample. Much larger second stage samples were selected in 

institutions with smaller first stage sampling rates. 

L.2 Overall Weight Adjustment 

The overall weight adjustments for the k-th student in student replicate hij received a 

bootstrap replicate weight based on a particular bootstrap sample outcome by adjusting the 

individual’s initial weight as 

*

2 *

* 2

1 *

1

* 1

hij

whi

hi

hi

h

h

hijk hijk m

m

n

m

m

n

w = w . 

Note that this adjustment incorporates adjustments at both stages of bootstrap sampling. 

 

2

 The formula generally produces a non-integer result. The number is increased to the next highest integer with 

probability proportional to the fractional component of the number (e.g., for 1.73, the number would be increased to 2 

with probability 0.73). Otherwise the number is decreased to the next smallest integer (e.g., for 1.73, the number 

would be decreased to 1 with probability 0.27). 
Appendix L. Details of the Bootstrap Variance Estimation 

L-6 

L.3 Number of Bootstrap Replicates 

The bootstrap sampling process was repeated 100 times, but only the first 64 samples 

were used to compute replicate weights. This decision was based on studying the stability of the 

bootstrap variance estimate as the number of replicates was increased. Only small changes in the 

values of the bootstrap variance estimates were observed after the number of replicates exceeded 

about 55. 

L.4 Appendix L References 

Chromy, J.R. (1981). Variance Estimators for a Sequential Sample Selection Procedure. In. D. 

Krewski, R. Platek, and J.N.K. Rao (Eds.), Current Top IMS in Survey Sampling (pp. 329-

347). New York: Academic Press. 

Kaufman, S. (1999). Using the Bootstrap to Estimate the Variance from a Single Systematic PPS 

Sample. Proceedings of the Survey Research Methods Section, American Statistical 

Association.

Kaufman, S. (2004). Using the Bootstrap in a Two-Stage Design when Some Second-Stage 

Strata have only One Unit Allocated. Proceedings of the American Statistical Association, 

Section on Survey Research Methods. 
M-1 

Appendix M 

Weighted Analysis Considerations 

Appendix M. Weighted Analysis Considerations 

M-3 

The National Postsecondary Student Aid Study 2004 (NPSAS:04) sampling design was a 

stratified two-stage design. A stratified sample of postsecondary institutions was selected with 

probabilities proportional to a composite measure of size at the first stage, and a stratified 

systematic sample of students was selected from sample institutions at the second stage. At the 

first stage, about 25 percent of the eligible institutions were selected, but the institution sampling 

rates varied considerably by institutional sampling strata.1 Institutions were oversampled in the 

12 states with representative samples of undergraduate students in three sectors. At the second 

stage, first-time beginners (FTBs) and undergraduate students in the 12 states were sampled at 

higher rates than other students. Because of this complex sampling design, statistical analyses 

should be conducted using software that properly accounts for the complex survey design. 

Most commonly used statistical computing packages (e.g., SAS and SPSS) assume that 

data are obtained from a simple random sample; that is, they assume that the observations are 

independent and identically distributed. When the data have been collected using a complex 

sampling design, the simple random sampling assumption usually leads to an underestimate of 

the sampling variance, which would lead to artificially small confidence intervals and liberal 

hypothesis test results (i.e., rejecting the null hypothesis when it is in fact true more often than 

indicated by the nominal Type I error level) (Carlson, Johnson, and Cohen 1993). 

Statistical strategies that have been developed to address this issue include: first-order 

Taylor series expansion of the variance equation; bootstrap replication; balanced repeated 

replication; and the Jackknife approach (see, e.g., Wolter 1985). Special-purpose software 

packages that have been developed for analysis of complex sample survey data include 

SUDAAN, WesVar, and Stata. Evaluations of the relative performances of these packages are 

reported by Cohen (1997). 

• SUDAAN is a commercial product developed by RTI; information regarding the 

features of this package and its lease terms is available from the website 

http://www.rti.org/sudaan. 

• WesVar is a product of Westat, Inc.; information regarding the features of this 

package and its lease terms is available from the website 

http://www.westat.com/wesvar. 

• Information regarding the features of Stata and its lease terms is available from the 

website http://www.stata.com. 

• The National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) has also developed a software 

tool called the Data Analysis System (DAS) for analysis of complex survey data. 

Information about using the DAS is available from the website http://nces.ed.gov/das. 

When computing standard errors using Taylor Series approximation, analysts should use 

the variables ANALSTR and ANALPSU in specifying analysis strata and analysis PSUs 

(primary sampling units). This method of variance estimation may overestimate the variance 

because it does not always account for the finite population correction (FPC) at the institution 

stage of sampling. Additionally, the analyst should specify the study weights (STUDYWT). 

 

1

 From about 6 percent for two national sample strata to 100 percent for two national sample strata and several state 

sample strata. See chapter 2 for more details. 
Appendix M. Weighted Analysis Considerations 

M-4 

Below is an example of generic SUDAAN code to produce estimates and standard errors 

using Taylor Series approximation and not accounting for the FPC. The symbols /* and */ in the 

code indicate the beginning and end of a comment. Note that the dataset must be sorted by 

analysis strata and analysis PSUs. 

PROC DESCRIPT DATA=/* INSERT FILENAME */ DESIGN=WOR; 

NEST ANALSTR ANALPSU; 

WEIGHT STUDYWT; 

VAR /* INSERT VARIABLES */; 

SUBPOPN /* INSERT DOMAIN OF INTEREST */; 

PRINT NSUM MEAN SEMEAN / STYLE=NCHS; 

RUN; 

When computing standard errors using Taylor Series approximation, the analyst could 

alternatively use the variables FANALSTR, FANALPSU, FANALSSU, and PSUCOUNT in 

specifying analysis strata, analysis PSUs, analysis SSUs (secondary sampling units), and 

estimated number of PSUs in the stratum. This method of variance estimation accounts for the 

FPC at the institution stage of sampling. 

Below is an example of generic SUDAAN code to produce estimates and standard errors 

using Taylor Series approximation accounting for the fpc. The symbols /* and */ in the code 

indicate the beginning and end of a comment. Note that the dataset must be sorted by analysis 

strata, analysis PSUs, and analysis SSUs. 

PROC DESCRIPT DATA=/* INSERT FILENAME */ DESIGN=WOR; 

NEST FANALSTR FANALPSU FANALSSU; 

TOTCNT PSUCOUNT _MINUS1__ __ZERO_; 

WEIGHT STUDYWT; 

VAR /* INSERT VARIABLES */; 

SUBPOPN /* INSERT DOMAIN OF INTEREST */; 

PRINT NSUM MEAN SEMEAN / STYLE=NCHS; 

RUN; 

When computing standard errors using bootstrap replication, the analyst should specify 

the bootstrap weights BOOTWT01 – BOOTWT64 in addition to specifying STUDYWT. 
Appendix M. Weighted Analysis Considerations 

M-5 

Below is an example of generic SUDAAN code to produce estimates and standard errors 

using bootstrap replication. The symbols /* and */ in the code indicate the beginning and end of a 

comment. Note that the dataset does not need to be sorted. 

PROC DESCRIPT DATA=/* INSERT FILENAME */ DESIGN=BRR; 

REPWGT BOOTWT01-BOOTWT64; 

WEIGHT STUDYWT; 

VAR /* INSERT VARIABLES */; 

SUBPOPN /* INSERT DOMAIN OF INTEREST */; 

PRINT NSUM MEAN SEMEAN / STYLE=NCHS; 

RUN; 

If one must perform a quick analysis of NPSAS:04 data without using one of the software 

packages for analysis of complex survey data, the design effects tables in appendix N can be 

used to make approximate adjustments to the standard errors of survey statistics computed using 

the standard software packages that assume simple random sampling designs. For example, table 

N-2 shows design effects (DEFFs) and square roots of design effects (DEFTs) for male 

undergraduate students. If one had computed a statistic (e.g., mean Pell grant amount) for this 

domain of students, then the summary statistics from table N-2 suggest that the standard error 

computed from the statistical software package should be multiplied by a survey DEFT of about 

1.87 (the median for this domain). However, the range of DEFTs shown in table N-2 for this 

domain is from 1.30 to 2.78. Therefore, one cannot be confident regarding the actual designbased standard error without performing the analysis using one of the software packages 

specifically designed for analysis of data from complex sample surveys. 

Appendix M References 

Carlson, B.L., Johnson, A.E., and Cohen, S.B. (1993). An Evaluation of the Use of Personal 

Computers for Variance Estimation with Complex Survey Data. Journal of Official Statistics, 

9(4): 795-814. 

Cohen, S.B. (1997). An Evaluation of Alternative PC-Based Software Packages Developed for 

the Analysis of Complex Survey Data. The American Statistician, 57(13): 285-292. 

Wolter, K. (1985). Introduction to Variance Estimation, Springer-Verlag: New York, NY. 
Appendix M. Weighted Analysis Considerations 

M-6 
N-1 

Appendix N 

Design Effects 

Appendix N. Design Effects 

N-3 

Table N-1. Design effects for all undergraduate students: 2004 

Variable Defined as 

Percent 

estimate 

Design 

standard 

error 

Simple random 

sample 

standard error DEFT DEFF 

Received any aid TOTAID>0 63.24 0.36 0.17 2.13 4.55 

Received any federal aid ANYFED=1 46.38 0.27 0.18 1.50 2.26 

Received any state grant aid ANYSTGRT=1 14.67 0.39 0.13 3.08 9.51 

Received any institution grant aid ANYINSTG=1 17.56 0.42 0.13 3.10 9.59 

Received any work-study aid ANYWKST=1 7.54 0.22 0.09 2.36 5.57 

Received a Pell grant ANYPELL=1 26.76 0.17 0.16 1.06 1.12 

Received a Stafford loan ANYSTAF=1 33.18 0.23 0.17 1.38 1.89 

Subsidized STAFSUB>0 27.69 0.22 0.16 1.39 1.93 

Unsubsidized STAFUNSB>0 20.65 0.18 0.14 1.22 1.50 

Married SMARITAL=2 21.29 0.40 0.14 2.77 7.67 

U.S. citizen CITIZEN2=1 92.86 0.24 0.09 2.63 6.93 

Enrolled exclusively full-time ATTNPTRN=1 48.91 0.61 0.18 3.43 11.75 

Enrolled part-time or part-year ATTNSTAT IN 

(3, 4, 5, 6) 

58.94 0.49 0.17 2.82 7.95 

Received any employer aid ANYEMP=1 7.01 0.17 0.09 1.85 3.41 

Worked while in school JOBENR IN (2,3) 74.19 0.28 0.15 1.81 3.29 

Worked full-time while in school JOBENR = 3 32.74 0.35 0.17 2.12 4.50 

Worked part-time while in school JOBENR = 2 41.44 0.36 0.17 2.04 4.17 

Principal job in 2003–04 related to 

major 

JOBMAJOR=1 23.54 0.33 0.15 2.19 4.82 

Registered to vote VOTEREG=1 79.51 0.30 0.14 2.12 4.48 

Has a disability DISABLE=1 11.32 0.19 0.11 1.72 2.96 

Attended more than one institution 

in 2003–04 

STUDMULT>1 7.50 0.16 0.09 1.70 2.91 

Has dependents other than a 

spouse 

DEPANY=1 27.12 0.42 0.16 2.66 7.09 

U.S. Armed Forces veteran VETERAN=1 3.39 0.16 0.06 2.42 5.88 

Ever attended a community college EVER2PUB=1 68.13 0.26 0.16 1.60 2.57 

Summary statistics 

Minimum † † † † 1.06 1.12 

25th percentile † † † † 1.65 2.74 

Median † † † † 2.12 4.49 

75th percentile † † † † 2.65 7.01 

Maximum † † † † 3.43 11.75 

† Not applicable. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 2004 National Postsecondary 

Student Aid Study (NPSAS:04). 
Appendix N. Design Effects 

N-4 

Table N-2. Design effects for male undergraduate students: 2004 

Variable Defined as 

Percent 

estimate 

Design 

standard 

error 

Simple random 

sample 

standard error DEFT DEFF 

Received any aid TOTAID>0 60.61 0.54 0.27 2.01 4.03 

Received any federal aid ANYFED=1 41.99 0.46 0.27 1.68 2.83 

Received any state grant aid ANYSTGRT=1 12.94 0.36 0.19 1.95 3.79 

Received any institution grant aid ANYINSTG=1 17.15 0.55 0.21 2.61 6.81 

Received any work-study aid ANYWKST=1 7.40 0.24 0.15 1.67 2.79 

Received a Pell grant ANYPELL=1 22.02 0.38 0.23 1.66 2.76 

Received a Stafford loan ANYSTAF=1 31.48 0.45 0.26 1.73 3.00 

Subsidized STAFSUB>0 25.95 0.42 0.24 1.73 3.01 

Unsubsidized STAFUNSB>0 19.24 0.32 0.22 1.45 2.09 

Married SMARITAL=2 19.08 0.61 0.22 2.78 7.73 

U.S. citizen CITIZEN2=1 92.69 0.33 0.14 2.27 5.17 

Enrolled exclusively full-time ATTNPTRN=1 51.83 0.72 0.28 2.59 6.71 

Enrolled part-time or part-year ATTNSTAT IN 

(3, 4, 5, 6) 

57.26 0.60 0.27 2.19 4.78 

Received any employer aid ANYEMP=1 6.94 0.29 0.14 2.02 4.09 

Worked while in school JOBENR IN (2,3) 73.79 0.40 0.24 1.63 2.65 

Worked full-time while in school JOBENR = 3 32.78 0.51 0.26 1.96 3.83 

Worked part-time while in school JOBENR = 2 41.01 0.46 0.27 1.70 2.87 

Principal job in 2003–04 related to 

major 

JOBMAJOR=1 22.19 0.42 0.23 1.81 3.27 

Registered to vote VOTEREG=1 79.37 0.44 0.22 1.94 3.76 

Has a disability DISABLE=1 11.23 0.29 0.18 1.68 2.83 

Attended more than one institution 

in 2003–04 

STUDMULT>1 6.89 0.18 0.14 1.30 1.70 

Has dependents other than a 

spouse 

DEPANY=1 19.15 0.47 0.22 2.14 4.58 

U.S. Armed Forces veteran VETERAN=1 6.25 0.29 0.13 2.14 4.58 

Ever attended a community college EVER2PUB=1 66.35 0.45 0.26 1.71 2.93 

Summary statistics 

Minimum † † † † 1.30 1.70 

25th percentile † † † † 1.68 2.83 

Median † † † † 1.87 3.51 

75th percentile † † † † 2.14 4.58 

Maximum † † † † 2.78 7.73 

† Not applicable. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 2004 National Postsecondary 

Student Aid Study (NPSAS:04). 
Appendix N. Design Effects 

N-5 

Table N-3. Design effects for female undergraduate students: 2004 

Variable Defined as 

Percent 

estimate 

Design 

standard 

error 

Simple random 

sample 

standard error DEFT DEFF 

Received any aid TOTAID>0 65.18 0.41 0.22 1.87 3.51 

Received any federal aid ANYFED=1 49.60 0.37 0.23 1.62 2.63 

Received any state grant aid ANYSTGRT=1 15.93 0.45 0.17 2.66 7.05 

Received any institution grant aid ANYINSTG=1 17.85 0.42 0.18 2.37 5.60 

Received any work-study aid ANYWKST=1 7.64 0.25 0.12 2.06 4.26 

Received a Pell grant ANYPELL=1 30.24 0.28 0.21 1.31 1.72 

Received a Stafford loan ANYSTAF=1 34.44 0.34 0.22 1.58 2.49 

Subsidized STAFSUB>0 28.97 0.34 0.21 1.62 2.63 

Unsubsidized STAFUNSB>0 21.68 0.31 0.19 1.61 2.60 

Married SMARITAL=2 22.91 0.40 0.19 2.09 4.39 

U.S. citizen CITIZEN2=1 92.99 0.24 0.12 2.04 4.14 

Enrolled exclusively full-time ATTNPTRN=1 46.77 0.61 0.23 2.67 7.11 

Enrolled part-time or part-year ATTNSTAT IN 

(3, 4, 5, 6) 

60.17 0.52 0.23 2.32 5.36 

Received any employer aid ANYEMP=1 7.06 0.16 0.12 1.40 1.96 

Worked while in school JOBENR IN (2,3) 74.48 0.31 0.20 1.55 2.40 

Worked full-time while in school JOBENR = 3 32.72 0.40 0.22 1.87 3.49 

Worked part-time while in school JOBENR = 2 41.76 0.43 0.23 1.88 3.52 

Principal job in 2003–04 related to 

major 

JOBMAJOR=1 24.53 0.36 0.20 1.82 3.30 

Registered to vote VOTEREG=1 79.62 0.31 0.19 1.68 2.83 

Has a disability DISABLE=1 11.38 0.22 0.15 1.50 2.26 

Attended more than one institution 

in 2003–04 

STUDMULT>1 7.96 0.21 0.12 1.68 2.82 

Has dependents other than a 

spouse 

DEPANY=1 32.97 0.50 0.22 2.33 5.43 

U.S. Armed Forces veteran VETERAN=1 1.29 0.10 0.05 1.84 3.38 

Ever attended a community college EVER2PUB=1 69.44 0.35 0.21 1.65 2.71 

Summary statistics 

Minimum † † † † 1.31 1.72 

25th percentile † † † † 1.62 2.61 

Median † † † † 1.83 3.34 

75th percentile † † † † 2.08 4.32 

Maximum † † † † 2.67 7.11 

† Not applicable. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 2004 National Postsecondary 

Student Aid Study (NPSAS:04). 
Appendix N. Design Effects 

N-6 

Table N-4. Design effects for students at less-than-2-year institutions: 2004 

Variable Defined as 

Percent 

estimate

Design 

standard 

error

Simple random 

sample 

standard error DEFT DEFF

Received any aid TOTAID>0 77.83 0.79 0.42 1.87 3.49

Received any federal aid ANYFED=1 66.77 0.50 0.48 1.04 1.09

Received any state grant aid ANYSTGRT=1 3.25 0.35 0.18 1.96 3.85

Received any institution grant aid ANYINSTG=1 5.30 0.73 0.23 3.22 10.37

Received any work-study aid ANYWKST=1 2.15 0.19 0.15 1.27 1.61

Received a Pell grant ANYPELL=1 47.70 0.46 0.51 0.91 0.83

Received a Stafford loan ANYSTAF=1 47.42 0.46 0.51 0.91 0.84

Subsidized STAFSUB>0 45.20 0.41 0.51 0.82 0.67

Unsubsidized STAFUNSB>0 38.31 0.50 0.49 1.02 1.04

Married SMARITAL=2 24.90 0.67 0.44 1.52 2.30

U.S. citizen CITIZEN2=1 88.38 0.54 0.33 1.66 2.75

Enrolled exclusively full-time ATTNPTRN=1 73.49 1.05 0.45 2.33 5.45

Enrolled part-time or part-year ATTNSTAT IN (3, 

4, 5, 6) 

73.08 0.66 0.45 1.46 2.12

Received any employer aid ANYEMP=1 6.57 0.45 0.25 1.77 3.13

Worked while in school JOBENR IN (2,3) 66.43 0.68 0.48 1.43 2.03

Worked full-time while in school JOBENR = 3 35.57 0.66 0.49 1.35 1.83

Worked part-time while in school JOBENR = 2 30.86 0.61 0.47 1.30 1.69

Principal job in 2003–04 related to 

major 

JOBMAJOR=1 20.77 0.52 0.41 1.27 1.61

Registered to vote VOTEREG=1 75.33 0.61 0.44 1.39 1.93

Has a disability DISABLE=1 12.77 0.51 0.34 1.51 2.28

Attended more than one institution 

in 2003–04 

STUDMULT>1 3.97 0.22 0.20 1.11 1.23

Has dependents other than a 

spouse 

DEPANY=1 44.98 0.71 0.51 1.41 1.98

U.S. Armed Forces veteran VETERAN=1 3.07 0.30 0.18 1.69 2.85

Ever attended a community college EVER2PUB=1 40.91 0.51 0.50 1.02 1.03

Summary statistics 

Minimum † † † † 0.82 0.67

25th percentile † † † † 1.08 1.16

Median † † † † 1.40 1.95

75th percentile † † † † 1.67 2.80

Maximum † † † † 3.22 10.37

† Not applicable. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 2004 National Postsecondary 

Student Aid Study (NPSAS:04). 
Appendix N. Design Effects 

N-7 

Table N-5. Design effects for students at public 2-year institutions: 2004 

Variable Defined as 

Percent 

estimate

Design 

standard 

error

Simple random 

sample 

standard error DEFT DEFF

Received any aid TOTAID>0 48.09 0.79 0.31 2.58 6.66

Received any federal aid ANYFED=1 30.83 0.53 0.28 1.88 3.52

Received any state grant aid ANYSTGRT=1 10.91 0.58 0.19 2.99 8.97

Received any institution grant aid ANYINSTG=1 7.24 0.49 0.16 3.09 9.56

Received any work-study aid ANYWKST=1 3.65 0.22 0.12 1.89 3.59

Received a Pell grant ANYPELL=1 22.92 0.35 0.26 1.36 1.84

Received a Stafford loan ANYSTAF=1 13.40 0.39 0.21 1.88 3.52

Subsidized STAFSUB>0 11.06 0.35 0.19 1.83 3.35

Unsubsidized STAFUNSB>0 7.73 0.24 0.16 1.44 2.06

Married SMARITAL=2 26.79 0.65 0.27 2.39 5.71

U.S. citizen CITIZEN2=1 91.72 0.47 0.17 2.74 7.53

Enrolled exclusively full-time ATTNPTRN=1 31.21 0.94 0.29 3.28 10.75

Enrolled part-time or part-year ATTNSTAT IN 

(3, 4, 5, 6) 

76.10 0.70 0.26 2.65 7.03

Received any employer aid ANYEMP=1 7.50 0.24 0.16 1.48 2.18

Worked while in school JOBENR IN (2,3) 78.64 0.36 0.25 1.43 2.06

Worked full-time while in school JOBENR = 3 40.13 0.60 0.30 1.98 3.90

Worked part-time while in school JOBENR = 2 38.51 0.60 0.30 2.01 4.05

Principal job in 2003–04 related to 

major 

JOBMAJOR=1 22.37 0.43 0.26 1.69 2.85

Registered to vote VOTEREG=1 78.63 0.54 0.25 2.14 4.59

Has a disability DISABLE=1 12.20 0.31 0.20 1.52 2.31

Attended more than one institution 

in 2003–04 

STUDMULT>1 9.45 0.30 0.18 1.64 2.68

Has dependents other than a 

spouse 

DEPANY=1 34.59 0.61 0.29 2.09 4.37

U.S. Armed Forces veteran VETERAN=1 3.93 0.24 0.12 1.98 3.93

Ever attended a community college EVER2PUB=1 100.00 0.00 0.00 † †

Summary statistics 

Minimum † † † † 1.36 1.84

25th percentile † † † † 1.64 2.68

Median † † † † 1.98 3.90

75th percentile † † † † 2.58 6.66

Maximum † † † † 3.28 10.75

† Not applicable. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 2004 National Postsecondary 

Student Aid Study (NPSAS:04). 
Appendix N. Design Effects 

N-8 

Table N-6. Design effects for undergraduate students at 4-year non-doctorate-granting/firstprofessional institutions: 2004 

Variable Defined as 

Percent 

estimate

Design 

standard 

error

Simple random 

sample 

standard error DEFT DEFF

Received any aid TOTAID>0 75.31 1.08 0.34 3.14 9.87

Received any federal aid ANYFED=1 58.11 0.94 0.39 2.38 5.65

Received any state grant aid ANYSTGRT=1 21.13 1.05 0.33 3.22 10.38

Received any institution grant aid ANYINSTG=1 29.20 1.63 0.36 4.50 20.23

Received any work-study aid ANYWKST=1 13.58 0.92 0.27 3.39 11.47

Received a Pell grant ANYPELL=1 29.43 0.98 0.36 2.71 7.33

Received a Stafford loan ANYSTAF=1 47.15 1.15 0.40 2.89 8.33

Subsidized STAFSUB>0 38.88 0.97 0.39 2.50 6.25

Unsubsidized STAFUNSB>0 27.00 0.84 0.35 2.36 5.58

Married SMARITAL=2 19.77 1.09 0.32 3.42 11.71

U.S. citizen CITIZEN2=1 94.37 0.43 0.18 2.31 5.35

Enrolled exclusively full-time ATTNPTRN=1 59.06 1.67 0.39 4.25 18.05

Enrolled part-time or part-year ATTNSTAT IN 

(3, 4, 5, 6) 

45.52 1.54 0.40 3.89 15.10

Received any employer aid ANYEMP=1 7.81 0.46 0.21 2.14 4.57

Worked while in school JOBENR IN (2,3) 72.28 0.77 0.36 2.15 4.61

Worked full-time while in school JOBENR = 3 29.63 1.30 0.36 3.57 12.73

Worked part-time while in school JOBENR = 2 42.65 0.87 0.39 2.22 4.91

Principal job in 2003–04 related to 

major 

JOBMAJOR=1 25.84 0.91 0.35 2.61 6.84

Registered to vote VOTEREG=1 81.36 0.62 0.31 2.00 4.01

Has a disability DISABLE=1 11.15 0.42 0.25 1.67 2.80

Attended more than one institution 

in 2003–04 

STUDMULT>1 6.38 0.31 0.19 1.59 2.52

Has dependents other than a 

spouse 

DEPANY=1 23.01 1.11 0.34 3.30 10.86

U.S. Armed Forces veteran VETERAN=1 3.48 0.40 0.15 2.75 7.54

Ever attended a community college EVER2PUB=1 43.99 1.03 0.40 2.59 6.72

Summary statistics 

Minimum † † † † 1.59 2.52

25th percentile † † † † 2.27 5.13

Median † † † † 2.66 7.08

75th percentile † † † † 3.34 11.16

Maximum † † † † 4.50 20.23

† Not applicable. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 2004 National Postsecondary 

Student Aid Study (NPSAS:04). 
Appendix N. Design Effects 

N-9 

Table N-7. Design effects for undergraduate students at 4-year doctorate-granting/firstprofessional institutions: 2004 

Variable Defined as 

Percent 

estimate

Design 

standard 

error

Simple random 

sample 

standard error DEFT DEFF

Received any aid TOTAID>0 71.45 0.56 0.32 1.78 3.15

Received any federal aid ANYFED=1 52.80 0.64 0.35 1.82 3.32

Received any state grant aid ANYSTGRT=1 18.10 0.40 0.27 1.50 2.24

Received any institution grant aid ANYINSTG=1 29.47 0.72 0.32 2.26 5.13

Received any work-study aid ANYWKST=1 11.19 0.41 0.22 1.85 3.42

Received a Pell grant ANYPELL=1 23.37 0.65 0.30 2.19 4.80

Received a Stafford loan ANYSTAF=1 44.32 0.68 0.35 1.94 3.75

Subsidized STAFSUB>0 34.96 0.63 0.33 1.88 3.54

Unsubsidized STAFUNSB>0 24.83 0.52 0.30 1.71 2.92

Married SMARITAL=2 11.20 0.47 0.22 2.12 4.48

U.S. citizen CITIZEN2=1 94.10 0.25 0.17 1.52 2.32

Enrolled exclusively full-time ATTNPTRN=1 64.29 0.94 0.34 2.79 7.76

Enrolled part-time or part-year ATTNSTAT IN 

(3, 4, 5, 6) 

37.82 0.69 0.34 2.01 4.05

Received any employer aid ANYEMP=1 4.60 0.21 0.15 1.42 2.01

Worked while in school JOBENR IN (2,3) 67.75 0.61 0.33 1.85 3.41

Worked full-time while in school JOBENR = 3 17.86 0.45 0.27 1.67 2.79

Worked part-time while in school JOBENR = 2 49.88 0.48 0.35 1.36 1.85

Principal job in 2003–04 related to 

major 

JOBMAJOR=1 21.53 0.46 0.29 1.60 2.56

Registered to vote VOTEREG=1 79.75 0.35 0.28 1.25 1.55

Has a disability DISABLE=1 9.32 0.24 0.20 1.16 1.34

Attended more than one institution 

in 2003–04 

STUDMULT>1 6.23 0.23 0.17 1.35 1.82

Has dependents other than a 

spouse 

DEPANY=1 11.05 0.52 0.22 2.37 5.63

U.S. Armed Forces veteran VETERAN=1 1.53 0.12 0.09 1.38 1.89

Ever attended a community college EVER2PUB=1 40.67 0.73 0.34 2.11 4.46

Summary statistics 

Minimum † † † † 1.16 1.34

25th percentile † † † † 1.46 2.13

Median † † † † 1.80 3.23

75th percentile † † † † 2.06 4.25

Maximum † † † † 2.79 7.76

† Not applicable. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 2004 National Postsecondary 

Student Aid Study (NPSAS:04). 
Appendix N. Design Effects 

N-10 

Table N-8. Design effects for undergraduate students at public 4-year non-doctorate-granting/firstprofessional institutions: 2004 

Variable Defined as 

Percent 

estimate

Design 

standard 

error

Simple random 

sample 

standard error DEFT DEFF

Received any aid TOTAID>0 67.60 1.72 0.53 3.22 10.39

Received any federal aid ANYFED=1 52.86 1.60 0.57 2.81 7.91

Received any state grant aid ANYSTGRT=1 19.12 1.37 0.45 3.06 9.36

Received any institution grant aid ANYINSTG=1 15.41 1.29 0.41 3.12 9.76

Received any work-study aid ANYWKST=1 8.53 0.82 0.32 2.56 6.54

Received a Pell grant ANYPELL=1 28.78 1.35 0.52 2.60 6.78

Received a Stafford loan ANYSTAF=1 40.48 1.45 0.56 2.59 6.70

Subsidized STAFSUB>0 32.10 1.26 0.53 2.37 5.61

Unsubsidized STAFUNSB>0 23.08 1.06 0.48 2.21 4.87

Married SMARITAL=2 18.47 1.48 0.44 3.34 11.17

U.S. citizen CITIZEN2=1 93.88 0.59 0.27 2.16 4.67

Enrolled exclusively full-time ATTNPTRN=1 54.56 2.14 0.57 3.77 14.22

Enrolled part-time or part-year ATTNSTAT IN (3, 

4, 5, 6) 

45.09 2.07 0.57 3.63 13.21

Received any employer aid ANYEMP=1 5.56 0.45 0.26 1.74 3.02

Worked while in school JOBENR IN (2,3) 74.54 1.02 0.50 2.06 4.24

Worked full-time while in school JOBENR = 3 27.96 1.55 0.51 3.02 9.10

Worked part-time while in school JOBENR = 2 46.58 1.00 0.57 1.76 3.09

Principal job in 2003–04 related to 

major 

JOBMAJOR=1 24.21 1.27 0.49 2.59 6.70

Registered to vote VOTEREG=1 80.68 0.85 0.45 1.88 3.52

Has a disability DISABLE=1 11.02 0.47 0.36 1.32 1.74

Attended more than one institution 

in 2003–04 

STUDMULT>1 6.26 0.39 0.28 1.42 2.02

Has dependents other than a 

spouse 

DEPANY=1 20.06 1.21 0.46 2.65 7.03

U.S. Armed Forces veteran VETERAN=1 2.58 0.39 0.18 2.13 4.56

Ever attended a community college EVER2PUB=1 45.23 1.74 0.57 3.06 9.37

Summary statistics 

Minimum † † † † 1.32 1.74

25th percentile † † † † 2.10 4.40

Median † † † † 2.59 6.70

75th percentile † † † † 3.06 9.37

Maximum † † † † 3.77 14.22

† Not applicable. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 2004 National Postsecondary 

Student Aid Study (NPSAS:04). 
Appendix N. Design Effects 

N-11 

Table N-9. Design effects for undergraduate students at public 4-year doctorate-granting/firstprofessional institutions: 2004 

Variable Defined as 

Percent 

estimate

Design 

standard 

error

Simple random 

sample 

standard error DEFT DEFF

Received any aid TOTAID>0 69.14 0.62 0.38 1.61 2.59

Received any federal aid ANYFED=1 51.29 0.65 0.42 1.57 2.47

Received any state grant aid ANYSTGRT=1 17.85 0.30 0.32 0.95 0.91

Received any institution grant aid ANYINSTG=1 23.27 0.55 0.35 1.57 2.46

Received any work-study aid ANYWKST=1 8.26 0.27 0.23 1.18 1.39

Received a Pell grant ANYPELL=1 23.90 0.64 0.36 1.81 3.26

Received a Stafford loan ANYSTAF=1 43.01 0.58 0.41 1.41 1.98

Subsidized STAFSUB>0 33.28 0.59 0.39 1.50 2.24

Unsubsidized STAFUNSB>0 25.45 0.49 0.36 1.35 1.84

Married SMARITAL=2 11.57 0.47 0.27 1.78 3.15

U.S. citizen CITIZEN2=1 94.27 0.29 0.19 1.48 2.18

Enrolled exclusively full-time ATTNPTRN=1 62.70 1.09 0.40 2.70 7.31

Enrolled part-time or part-year ATTNSTAT IN 

(3, 4, 5, 6) 

38.61 0.79 0.41 1.94 3.78

Received any employer aid ANYEMP=1 4.17 0.19 0.17 1.17 1.36

Worked while in school JOBENR IN (2,3) 69.88 0.72 0.38 1.88 3.52

Worked full-time while in school JOBENR = 3 18.47 0.45 0.32 1.38 1.90

Worked part-time while in school JOBENR = 2 51.40 0.55 0.42 1.33 1.76

Principal job in 2003–04 related to 

major 

JOBMAJOR=1 21.29 0.38 0.34 1.12 1.26

Registered to vote VOTEREG=1 80.23 0.40 0.33 1.20 1.45

Has a disability DISABLE=1 9.38 0.29 0.24 1.18 1.40

Attended more than one institution 

in 2003–04 

STUDMULT>1 6.55 0.25 0.21 1.21 1.46

Has dependents other than a 

spouse 

DEPANY=1 11.41 0.55 0.26 2.07 4.29

U.S. Armed Forces veteran VETERAN=1 1.63 0.13 0.11 1.20 1.43

Ever attended a community college EVER2PUB=1 42.53 0.77 0.41 1.86 3.46

Summary statistics 

Minimum † † † † 0.95 0.91

25th percentile † † † † 1.20 1.44

Median † † † † 1.44 2.08

75th percentile † † † † 1.79 3.21

Maximum † † † † 2.70 7.31

† Not applicable. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 2004 National Postsecondary 

Student Aid Study (NPSAS:04). 
Appendix N. Design Effects 

N-12 

Table N-10. Design effects for undergraduate students at private not-for-profit 4-year nondoctorate-granting/first-professional: 2004 

Variable Defined as 

Percent 

estimate

Design 

standard 

error

Simple random 

sample 

standard error DEFT DEFF

Received any aid TOTAID>0 85.17 0.92 0.40 2.33 5.45

Received any federal aid ANYFED=1 64.82 1.15 0.53 2.16 4.66

Received any state grant aid ANYSTGRT=1 23.70 1.60 0.47 3.37 11.36

Received any institution grant aid ANYINSTG=1 46.84 3.02 0.56 5.44 29.56

Received any work-study aid ANYWKST=1 20.03 1.63 0.45 3.66 13.37

Received a Pell grant ANYPELL=1 30.26 1.80 0.51 3.52 12.39

Received a Stafford loan ANYSTAF=1 55.67 1.74 0.55 3.14 9.87

Subsidized STAFSUB>0 47.54 1.48 0.56 2.66 7.07

Unsubsidized STAFUNSB>0 32.01 1.39 0.52 2.67 7.15

Married SMARITAL=2 21.45 1.56 0.46 3.41 11.61

U.S. citizen CITIZEN2=1 95.00 0.62 0.24 2.56 6.55

Enrolled exclusively full-time ATTNPTRN=1 64.81 2.38 0.53 4.48 20.04

Enrolled part-time or part-year ATTNSTAT IN (3, 

4, 5, 6) 

46.07 1.79 0.56 3.22 10.35

Received any employer aid ANYEMP=1 10.69 0.91 0.34 2.64 6.95

Worked while in school JOBENR IN (2,3) 69.40 1.11 0.51 2.16 4.68

Worked full-time while in school JOBENR = 3 31.77 2.18 0.52 4.20 17.62

Worked part-time while in school JOBENR = 2 37.63 1.64 0.54 3.04 9.25

Principal job in 2003–04 related to 

major 

JOBMAJOR=1 27.94 1.14 0.50 2.28 5.21

Registered to vote VOTEREG=1 82.24 0.89 0.43 2.09 4.35

Has a disability DISABLE=1 11.31 0.64 0.35 1.81 3.29

Attended more than one institution in 

2003–04 

STUDMULT>1 6.52 0.54 0.28 1.98 3.93

Has dependents other than a 

spouse 

DEPANY=1 26.79 2.05 0.49 4.16 17.27

U.S. Armed Forces veteran VETERAN=1 4.64 0.79 0.23 3.36 11.32

Ever attended a community college EVER2PUB=1 42.40 1.28 0.55 2.32 5.39

Summary statistics 

Minimum † † † † 1.81 3.29

25th percentile † † † † 2.30 5.30

Median † † † † 2.86 8.20

75th percentile † † † † 3.46 12.00

Maximum † † † † 5.44 29.56

† Not applicable. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 2004 National Postsecondary 

Student Aid Study (NPSAS:04). 
Appendix N. Design Effects 

N-13 

Table N-11. Design effects for undergraduate students at private not-for-profit 4-year doctorategranting/first-professional institutions: 2004 

Variable Defined as 

Percent 

estimate

Design 

standard 

error

Simple random 

sample 

standard error DEFT DEFF

Received any aid TOTAID>0 80.29 1.15 0.52 2.22 4.91

Received any federal aid ANYFED=1 58.58 1.71 0.64 2.67 7.14

Received any state grant aid ANYSTGRT=1 19.04 1.49 0.51 2.92 8.50

Received any institution grant aid ANYINSTG=1 53.24 2.67 0.65 4.11 16.86

Received any work-study aid ANYWKST=1 22.47 1.43 0.54 2.63 6.91

Received a Pell grant ANYPELL=1 21.33 2.60 0.53 4.86 23.67

Received a Stafford loan ANYSTAF=1 49.34 1.96 0.65 3.01 9.04

Subsidized STAFSUB>0 41.42 1.67 0.64 2.60 6.75

Unsubsidized STAFUNSB>0 22.46 1.46 0.54 2.68 7.17

Married SMARITAL=2 9.79 1.34 0.39 3.47 12.01

U.S. citizen CITIZEN2=1 93.47 0.59 0.32 1.83 3.34

Enrolled exclusively full-time ATTNPTRN=1 70.37 1.96 0.59 3.30 10.86

Enrolled part-time or part-year ATTNSTAT IN (3, 

4, 5, 6) 

34.78 1.61 0.62 2.60 6.76

Received any employer aid ANYEMP=1 6.26 0.71 0.32 2.24 5.01

Worked while in school JOBENR IN (2,3) 59.56 1.10 0.64 1.72 2.95

Worked full-time while in school JOBENR = 3 15.51 1.28 0.47 2.71 7.32

Worked part-time while in school JOBENR = 2 44.05 1.21 0.65 1.87 3.50

Principal job in 2003–04 related to 

major 

JOBMAJOR=1 22.48 1.44 0.54 2.65 7.00

Registered to vote VOTEREG=1 77.92 0.75 0.54 1.38 1.90

Has a disability DISABLE=1 9.05 0.64 0.37 1.70 2.89

Attended more than one institution 

in 2003–04 

STUDMULT>1 5.01 0.44 0.28 1.57 2.45

Has dependents other than a 

spouse 

DEPANY=1 9.65 1.45 0.38 3.78 14.28

U.S. Armed Forces veteran VETERAN=1 1.12 0.35 0.14 2.54 6.43

Ever attended a community college EVER2PUB=1 33.53 1.71 0.62 2.77 7.69

Summary statistics 

Minimum † † † † 1.38 1.90

25th percentile † † † † 2.04 4.21

Median † † † † 2.64 6.95

75th percentile † † † † 2.96 8.77

Maximum † † † † 4.86 23.67

† Not applicable. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 2004 National Postsecondary 

Student Aid Study (NPSAS:04). 
Appendix N. Design Effects 

N-14 

Table N-12. Design effects for undergraduate students at private for-profit institutions: 2004 

Variable Defined as 

Percent 

estimate

Design 

standard 

error

Simple random 

sample 

standard error DEFT DEFF

Received any aid TOTAID>0 89.14 0.39 0.27 1.44 2.09

Received any federal aid ANYFED=1 81.20 0.69 0.34 2.02 4.09

Received any state grant aid ANYSTGRT=1 8.14 1.00 0.24 4.18 17.46

Received any institution grant aid ANYINSTG=1 6.80 0.86 0.22 3.88 15.04

Received any work-study aid ANYWKST=1 2.30 0.29 0.13 2.21 4.90

Received a Pell grant ANYPELL=1 50.99 0.77 0.44 1.76 3.11

Received a Stafford loan ANYSTAF=1 71.53 0.75 0.40 1.89 3.59

Subsidized STAFSUB>0 67.89 0.92 0.41 2.24 5.03

Unsubsidized STAFUNSB>0 62.08 0.80 0.43 1.88 3.53

Married SMARITAL=2 26.08 1.23 0.39 3.19 10.18

U.S. citizen CITIZEN2=1 91.81 0.57 0.24 2.35 5.55

Enrolled exclusively full-time ATTNPTRN=1 69.76 1.86 0.40 4.62 21.37

Enrolled part-time or part-year ATTNSTAT IN 

(3, 4, 5, 6) 

65.74 1.32 0.42 3.17 10.02

Received any employer aid ANYEMP=1 9.64 0.94 0.26 3.62 13.11

Worked while in school JOBENR IN (2,3) 75.84 0.76 0.38 2.04 4.15

Worked full-time while in school JOBENR = 3 47.39 1.32 0.44 3.01 9.06

Worked part-time while in school JOBENR = 2 28.45 0.99 0.40 2.49 6.21

Principal job in 2003–04 related to 

major 

JOBMAJOR=1 30.32 1.51 0.40 3.74 13.99

Registered to vote VOTEREG=1 79.39 0.80 0.35 2.25 5.07

Has a disability DISABLE=1 13.09 0.70 0.30 2.36 5.56

Attended more than one institution 

in 2003–04 

STUDMULT>1 3.99 0.54 0.17 3.15 9.90

Has dependents other than a 

spouse 

DEPANY=1 46.19 1.51 0.44 3.46 11.94

U.S. Armed Forces veteran VETERAN=1 6.05 0.61 0.21 2.92 8.53

Ever attended a community college EVER2PUB=1 44.83 0.97 0.44 2.22 4.94

Summary statistics 

Minimum † † † † 1.44 2.09

25th percentile † † † † 2.12 4.52

Median † † † † 2.42 5.88

75th percentile † † † † 3.32 11.06

Maximum † † † † 4.62 21.37

† Not applicable. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 2004 National Postsecondary 

Student Aid Study (NPSAS:04). 
Appendix N. Design Effects 

N-15 

Table N-13. Design effects for dependent undergraduate students: 2004 

Variable Defined as 

Percent 

estimate

Design 

standard 

error

Simple random 

sample standard 

error DEFT DEFF

Received any aid TOTAID>0 63.79 0.53 0.23 2.30 5.28

Received any federal aid ANYFED=1 47.82 0.44 0.24 1.81 3.28

Received any state grant aid ANYSTGRT=1 17.91 0.39 0.19 2.11 4.44

Received any institution grant aid ANYINSTG=1 25.47 0.52 0.21 2.49 6.20

Received any work-study aid ANYWKST=1 11.15 0.32 0.15 2.12 4.49

Received a Pell grant ANYPELL=1 21.85 0.23 0.20 1.15 1.31

Received a Stafford loan ANYSTAF=1 35.74 0.46 0.23 1.97 3.89

Subsidized STAFSUB>0 26.96 0.42 0.21 1.96 3.83

Unsubsidized STAFUNSB>0 17.11 0.31 0.18 1.68 2.84

Married SMARITAL=2 † † † † †

U.S. citizen CITIZEN2=1 93.85 0.22 0.12 1.94 3.75

Enrolled exclusively full-time ATTNPTRN=1 64.23 0.64 0.23 2.76 7.64

Enrolled part-time or part-year ATTNSTAT IN (3, 

4, 5, 6) 

40.73 0.57 0.24 2.41 5.82

Received any employer aid ANYEMP=1 1.83 0.10 0.06 1.49 2.22

Worked while in school JOBENR IN (2,3) 70.06 0.45 0.22 2.04 4.15

Worked full-time while in school JOBENR = 3 15.81 0.27 0.18 1.54 2.37

Worked part-time while in school JOBENR = 2 54.25 0.43 0.24 1.79 3.22

Principal job in 2003–04 related to 

major 

JOBMAJOR=1 16.33 0.29 0.18 1.65 2.71

Registered to vote VOTEREG=1 74.26 0.36 0.21 1.70 2.89

Has a disability DISABLE=1 8.98 0.22 0.14 1.56 2.45

Attended more than one institution 

in 2003–04 

STUDMULT>1 7.83 0.18 0.13 1.42 2.02

Has dependents other than a 

spouse 

DEPANY=1 † † † † †

U.S. Armed Forces veteran VETERAN=1 † † † † †

Ever attended a community college EVER2PUB=1 55.56 0.50 0.24 2.08 4.33

Summary statistics 

Minimum † † † † 1.15 1.31

25th percentile † † † † 1.65 2.71

Median † † † † 1.94 3.75

75th percentile † † † † 2.11 4.44

Maximum † † † † 2.76 7.64

† Not applicable. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 2004 National Postsecondary 

Student Aid Study (NPSAS:04). 
Appendix N. Design Effects 

N-16 

Table N-14. Design effects for independent undergraduate students: 2004 

Variable Defined as 

Percent 

estimate

Design 

standard 

error

Simple random 

sample standard 

error DEFT DEFF

Received any aid TOTAID>0 62.70 0.49 0.25 1.93 3.72

Received any federal aid ANYFED=1 44.95 0.46 0.26 1.79 3.19

Received any state grant aid ANYSTGRT=1 11.46 0.53 0.17 3.19 10.19

Received any institution grant aid ANYINSTG=1 9.72 0.39 0.15 2.52 6.33

Received any work-study aid ANYWKST=1 3.97 0.15 0.10 1.43 2.06

Received a Pell grant ANYPELL=1 31.61 0.32 0.24 1.32 1.74

Received a Stafford loan ANYSTAF=1 30.65 0.44 0.24 1.85 3.42

Subsidized STAFSUB>0 28.41 0.43 0.23 1.81 3.28

Unsubsidized STAFUNSB>0 24.15 0.32 0.22 1.45 2.10

Married SMARITAL=2 42.34 0.64 0.26 2.50 6.23

U.S. citizen CITIZEN2=1 91.89 0.35 0.14 2.45 5.99

Enrolled exclusively full-time ATTNPTRN=1 33.77 0.72 0.25 2.91 8.47

Enrolled part-time or part-year ATTNSTAT IN (3, 

4, 5, 6) 

76.95 0.46 0.22 2.11 4.44

Received any employer aid ANYEMP=1 12.13 0.28 0.17 1.65 2.73

Worked while in school JOBENR IN (2,3) 78.28 0.28 0.21 1.32 1.73

Worked full-time while in school JOBENR = 3 49.50 0.50 0.26 1.94 3.76

Worked part-time while in school JOBENR = 2 28.77 0.43 0.24 1.83 3.34

Principal job in 2003–04 related to 

major 

JOBMAJOR=1 30.68 0.56 0.24 2.33 5.44

Registered to vote VOTEREG=1 84.71 0.38 0.19 2.05 4.22

Has a disability DISABLE=1 13.63 0.28 0.18 1.54 2.38

Attended more than one institution 

in 2003–04 

STUDMULT>1 7.18 0.19 0.13 1.43 2.04

Has dependents other than a 

spouse 

DEPANY=1 53.95 0.45 0.26 1.74 3.02

U.S. Armed Forces veteran VETERAN=1 6.74 0.29 0.13 2.24 5.01

Ever attended a community college EVER2PUB=1 80.57 0.47 0.21 2.30 5.29

Summary statistics 

Minimum † † † † 1.32 1.73

25th percentile † † † † 1.60 2.55

Median † † † † 1.89 3.57

75th percentile † † † † 2.32 5.37

Maximum † † † † 3.19 10.19

† Not applicable. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 2004 National Postsecondary 

Student Aid Study (NPSAS:04). 
Appendix N. Design Effects 

N-17 

Table N-15. Design effects for White non-Hispanic undergraduate students: 2004 

Variable Defined as 

Percent 

estimate

Design 

standard 

error

Simple random 

sample standard 

error DEFT DEFF

Received any aid TOTAID>0 61.49 0.56 0.22 2.55 6.53

Received any federal aid ANYFED=1 42.86 0.52 0.22 2.32 5.37

Received any state grant aid ANYSTGRT=1 13.82 0.42 0.16 2.69 7.22

Received any institution grant aid ANYINSTG=1 18.39 0.48 0.18 2.72 7.37

Received any work-study aid ANYWKST=1 7.32 0.27 0.12 2.27 5.15

Received a Pell grant ANYPELL=1 20.50 0.40 0.18 2.16 4.66

Received a Stafford loan ANYSTAF=1 33.47 0.48 0.21 2.23 4.99

Subsidized STAFSUB>0 26.74 0.40 0.20 1.99 3.95

Unsubsidized STAFUNSB>0 20.70 0.39 0.18 2.13 4.55

Married SMARITAL=2 22.25 0.48 0.19 2.54 6.47

U.S. citizen CITIZEN2=1 97.29 0.14 0.07 1.90 3.62

Enrolled exclusively full-time ATTNPTRN=1 50.50 0.67 0.23 2.94 8.64

Enrolled part-time or part-year ATTNSTAT IN 

(3, 4, 5, 6) 

56.39 0.60 0.23 2.67 7.14

Received any employer aid ANYEMP=1 7.52 0.20 0.12 1.66 2.76

Worked while in school JOBENR IN (2,3) 74.99 0.35 0.20 1.79 3.21

Worked full-time while in school JOBENR = 3 31.35 0.38 0.21 1.81 3.27

Worked part-time while in school JOBENR = 2 43.65 0.41 0.23 1.81 3.28

Principal job in 2003–04 related to 

major 

JOBMAJOR=1 23.71 0.38 0.19 1.99 3.95

Registered to vote VOTEREG=1 83.29 0.29 0.17 1.70 2.89

Has a disability DISABLE=1 11.68 0.21 0.15 1.45 2.12

Attended more than one institution 

in 2003–04 

STUDMULT>1 7.31 0.17 0.12 1.40 1.97

Has dependents other than a 

spouse 

DEPANY=1 23.55 0.45 0.19 2.35 5.52

U.S. Armed Forces veteran VETERAN=1 3.38 0.18 0.08 2.24 5.02

Ever attended a community college EVER2PUB=1 66.36 0.56 0.21 2.63 6.92

Summary statistics 

Minimum † † † † 1.40 1.97

25th percentile † † † † 1.81 3.27

Median † † † † 2.20 4.82

75th percentile † † † † 2.55 6.50

Maximum † † † † 2.94 8.64

† Not applicable. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 2004 National Postsecondary 

Student Aid Study (NPSAS:04). 
Appendix N. Design Effects 

N-18 

Table N-16. Design effects for Black non-Hispanic undergraduate students: 2004 

Variable Defined as 

Percent 

estimate

Design 

standard 

error

Simple random 

sample 

standard error DEFT DEFF

Received any aid TOTAID>0 75.79 0.88 0.38 2.32 5.40

Received any federal aid ANYFED=1 62.13 1.15 0.43 2.68 7.16

Received any state grant aid ANYSTGRT=1 18.22 0.89 0.34 2.60 6.77

Received any institution grant aid ANYINSTG=1 14.95 0.84 0.32 2.65 7.05

Received any work-study aid ANYWKST=1 8.52 0.45 0.25 1.83 3.35

Received a Pell grant ANYPELL=1 46.80 0.99 0.44 2.24 5.00

Received a Stafford loan ANYSTAF=1 41.57 1.65 0.44 3.77 14.25

Subsidized STAFSUB>0 37.81 1.51 0.43 3.51 12.30

Unsubsidized STAFUNSB>0 27.89 1.03 0.40 2.58 6.64

Married SMARITAL=2 17.68 0.80 0.34 2.37 5.61

U.S. citizen CITIZEN2=1 91.10 0.73 0.25 2.89 8.35

Enrolled exclusively full-time ATTNPTRN=1 47.33 1.29 0.44 2.91 8.47

Enrolled part-time or part-year ATTNSTAT IN 

(3, 4, 5, 6) 

65.27 1.51 0.42 3.58 12.79

Received any employer aid ANYEMP=1 6.92 0.46 0.23 2.04 4.15

Worked while in school JOBENR IN (2,3) 73.81 0.73 0.39 1.86 3.46

Worked full-time while in school JOBENR = 3 39.52 0.96 0.43 2.20 4.85

Worked part-time while in school JOBENR = 2 34.29 0.74 0.42 1.75 3.05

Principal job in 2003–04 related to 

major 

JOBMAJOR=1 26.56 0.69 0.39 1.75 3.08

Registered to vote VOTEREG=1 81.30 0.89 0.35 2.56 6.56

Has a disability DISABLE=1 10.71 0.47 0.27 1.72 2.96

Attended more than one institution 

in 2003–04 

STUDMULT>1 6.89 0.31 0.23 1.37 1.87

Has dependents other than a 

spouse 

DEPANY=1 42.96 1.12 0.44 2.54 6.45

U.S. Armed Forces veteran VETERAN=1 4.86 0.35 0.19 1.82 3.30

Ever attended a community college EVER2PUB=1 70.80 1.49 0.40 3.69 13.63

Summary statistics 

Minimum † † † † 1.37 1.87

25th percentile † † † † 1.85 3.41

Median † † † † 2.45 6.03

75th percentile † † † † 2.78 7.75

Maximum † † † † 3.77 14.25

† Not applicable. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 2004 National Postsecondary 

Student Aid Study (NPSAS:04). 
Appendix N. Design Effects 

N-19 

Table N-17. Design effects for Asian undergraduate students: 2004 

Variable Defined as 

Percent 

estimate

Design 

standard 

error

Simple random 

sample standard 

error DEFT DEFF

Received any aid TOTAID>0 51.56 1.55 0.82 1.90 3.62

Received any federal aid ANYFED=1 37.04 1.27 0.79 1.61 2.60

Received any state grant aid ANYSTGRT=1 15.12 0.85 0.59 1.45 2.09

Received any institution grant aid ANYINSTG=1 18.73 0.98 0.64 1.54 2.38

Received any work-study aid ANYWKST=1 9.53 0.59 0.48 1.23 1.52

Received a Pell grant ANYPELL=1 21.89 0.99 0.68 1.46 2.13

Received a Stafford loan ANYSTAF=1 21.67 0.85 0.67 1.27 1.60

Subsidized STAFSUB>0 18.78 0.78 0.64 1.23 1.51

Unsubsidized STAFUNSB>0 10.87 0.65 0.51 1.29 1.65

Married SMARITAL=2 20.41 1.12 0.66 1.69 2.87

U.S. citizen CITIZEN2=1 63.44 1.03 0.79 1.31 1.72

Enrolled exclusively full-time ATTNPTRN=1 48.44 1.64 0.82 2.00 4.01

Enrolled part-time or part-year ATTNSTAT IN 

(3, 4, 5, 6) 

55.06 1.44 0.81 1.77 3.15

Received any employer aid ANYEMP=1 4.66 0.48 0.34 1.39 1.94

Worked while in school JOBENR IN (2,3) 63.31 0.99 0.79 1.25 1.57

Worked full-time while in school JOBENR = 3 21.80 1.11 0.68 1.64 2.69

Worked part-time while in school JOBENR = 2 41.51 1.11 0.81 1.37 1.89

Principal job in 2003–04 related to 

major 

JOBMAJOR=1 17.79 1.01 0.63 1.62 2.63

Registered to vote VOTEREG=1 48.71 1.04 0.82 1.27 1.61

Has a disability DISABLE=1 7.09 0.65 0.42 1.54 2.38

Attended more than one institution 

in 2003–04 

STUDMULT>1 11.30 0.72 0.52 1.39 1.92

Has dependents other than a 

spouse 

DEPANY=1 17.94 0.87 0.63 1.39 1.92

U.S. Armed Forces veteran VETERAN=1 1.49 0.28 0.20 1.41 1.99

Ever attended a community college EVER2PUB=1 71.62 1.11 0.74 1.51 2.28

Summary statistics 

Minimum † † † † 1.23 1.51

25th percentile † † † † 1.30 1.69

Median † † † † 1.43 2.04

75th percentile † † † † 1.62 2.62

Maximum † † † † 2.00 4.01

† Not applicable. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 2004 National Postsecondary 

Student Aid Study (NPSAS:04). 
Appendix N. Design Effects 

N-20 

Table N-18. Design effects for Hispanic undergraduate students: 2004 

Variable Defined as 

Percent 

estimate

Design 

standard 

error

Simple random 

sample standard 

error DEFT DEFF

Received any aid TOTAID>0 63.20 0.82 0.46 1.79 3.22

Received any federal aid ANYFED=1 50.42 0.86 0.47 1.81 3.28

Received any state grant aid ANYSTGRT=1 14.83 0.65 0.34 1.94 3.78

Received any institution grant aid ANYINSTG=1 16.08 0.96 0.35 2.76 7.64

Received any work-study aid ANYWKST=1 6.84 0.52 0.24 2.18 4.76

Received a Pell grant ANYPELL=1 36.94 0.80 0.46 1.75 3.06

Received a Stafford loan ANYSTAF=1 27.88 0.93 0.42 2.19 4.78

Subsidized STAFSUB>0 25.02 0.87 0.41 2.12 4.49

Unsubsidized STAFUNSB>0 16.68 0.81 0.35 2.29 5.26

Married SMARITAL=2 20.96 0.71 0.39 1.83 3.37

U.S. citizen CITIZEN2=1 86.08 0.52 0.33 1.58 2.51

Enrolled exclusively full-time ATTNPTRN=1 43.72 1.15 0.47 2.45 5.99

Enrolled part-time or part-year ATTNSTAT IN 

(3, 4, 5, 6) 

65.49 0.93 0.45 2.07 4.29

Received any employer aid ANYEMP=1 5.83 0.33 0.22 1.46 2.15

Worked while in school JOBENR IN (2,3) 75.63 0.57 0.41 1.39 1.94

Worked full-time while in school JOBENR = 3 36.77 0.79 0.46 1.73 2.98

Worked part-time while in school JOBENR = 2 38.86 0.76 0.46 1.64 2.71

Principal job in 2003–04 related to 

major 

JOBMAJOR=1 22.05 0.69 0.39 1.75 3.06

Registered to vote VOTEREG=1 72.92 0.72 0.42 1.72 2.95

Has a disability DISABLE=1 10.90 0.49 0.30 1.66 2.75

Attended more than one institution 

in 2003–04 

STUDMULT>1 7.13 0.35 0.24 1.44 2.07

Has dependents other than a 

spouse 

DEPANY=1 31.28 0.87 0.44 1.98 3.92

U.S. Armed Forces veteran VETERAN=1 2.43 0.21 0.15 1.47 2.15

Ever attended a community college EVER2PUB=1 71.67 1.08 0.43 2.52 6.36

Summary statistics 

Minimum † † † † 1.39 1.94

25th percentile † † † † 1.65 2.73

Median † † † † 1.80 3.25

75th percentile † † † † 2.15 4.63

Maximum † † † † 2.76 7.64

† Not applicable. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 2004 National Postsecondary 

Student Aid Study (NPSAS:04). 
Appendix N. Design Effects 

N-21 

Table N-19. Design effects for other race undergraduate students: 2004 

Variable Defined as 

Percent 

estimate

Design 

standard 

error

Simple random 

sample 

standard error DEFT DEFF

Received any aid TOTAID>0 62.99 1.27 0.78 1.63 2.66

Received any federal aid ANYFED=1 46.47 1.34 0.81 1.66 2.77

Received any state grant aid ANYSTGRT=1 14.41 0.80 0.57 1.41 1.99

Received any institution grant aid ANYINSTG=1 16.77 0.81 0.60 1.34 1.79

Received any work-study aid ANYWKST=1 7.26 0.59 0.42 1.41 1.99

Received a Pell grant ANYPELL=1 28.99 1.03 0.73 1.40 1.96

Received a Stafford loan ANYSTAF=1 31.97 1.10 0.75 1.47 2.15

Subsidized STAFSUB>0 27.66 0.95 0.72 1.32 1.73

Unsubsidized STAFUNSB>0 20.34 1.02 0.65 1.56 2.45

Married SMARITAL=2 20.99 0.88 0.66 1.34 1.78

U.S. citizen CITIZEN2=1 90.81 0.73 0.47 1.55 2.41

Enrolled exclusively full-time ATTNPTRN=1 47.04 1.58 0.81 1.96 3.86

Enrolled part-time or part-year ATTNSTAT IN 

(3, 4, 5, 6) 

60.94 1.31 0.79 1.66 2.77

Received any employer aid ANYEMP=1 6.37 0.58 0.39 1.46 2.14

Worked while in school JOBENR IN (2,3) 73.07 1.17 0.72 1.63 2.66

Worked full-time while in school JOBENR = 3 32.96 1.36 0.76 1.79 3.22

Worked part-time while in school JOBENR = 2 40.11 1.33 0.79 1.68 2.82

Principal job in 2003–04 related to 

major 

JOBMAJOR=1 22.87 0.90 0.68 1.33 1.76

Registered to vote VOTEREG=1 76.72 1.21 0.68 1.77 3.12

Has a disability DISABLE=1 14.20 0.78 0.56 1.38 1.92

Attended more than one institution 

in 2003–04 

STUDMULT>1 8.55 0.46 0.45 1.02 1.05

Has dependents other than a 

spouse 

DEPANY=1 27.16 1.13 0.72 1.57 2.46

U.S. Armed Forces veteran VETERAN=1 3.92 0.46 0.31 1.46 2.13

Ever attended a community college EVER2PUB=1 70.38 1.34 0.74 1.82 3.32

Summary statistics 

Minimum † † † † 1.02 1.05

25th percentile † † † † 1.39 1.94

Median † † † † 1.51 2.28

75th percentile † † † † 1.66 2.77

Maximum † † † † 1.96 3.86

† Not applicable. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 2004 National Postsecondary 

Student Aid Study (NPSAS:04). 
Appendix N. Design Effects 

N-22 

Table N-20. Design effects for low-income undergraduate students: 2004 

Variable Defined as 

Percent 

estimate

Design 

standard 

error

Simple random 

sample 

standard error DEFT DEFF

Received any aid TOTAID>0 74.37 0.61 0.31 1.96 3.85

Received any federal aid ANYFED=1 64.02 0.66 0.34 1.95 3.82

Received any state grant aid ANYSTGRT=1 22.64 0.76 0.30 2.55 6.50

Received any institution grant aid ANYINSTG=1 21.03 0.61 0.29 2.12 4.48

Received any work-study aid ANYWKST=1 11.67 0.52 0.23 2.27 5.15

Received a Pell grant ANYPELL=1 58.71 0.59 0.35 1.71 2.91

Received a Stafford loan ANYSTAF=1 35.77 0.68 0.34 2.01 4.05

Subsidized STAFSUB>0 34.98 0.69 0.34 2.06 4.24

Unsubsidized STAFUNSB>0 17.50 0.48 0.27 1.79 3.21

Married SMARITAL=2 4.98 0.25 0.15 1.64 2.68

U.S. citizen CITIZEN2=1 88.79 0.45 0.22 2.00 4.01

Enrolled exclusively full-time ATTNPTRN=1 54.74 0.79 0.35 2.23 4.98

Enrolled part-time or part-year ATTNSTAT IN 

(3, 4, 5, 6) 

55.08 0.65 0.35 1.84 3.38

Received any employer aid ANYEMP=1 2.98 0.20 0.12 1.67 2.79

Worked while in school JOBENR IN (2,3) 67.53 0.62 0.33 1.88 3.53

Worked full-time while in school JOBENR = 3 23.35 0.55 0.30 1.83 3.34

Worked part-time while in school JOBENR = 2 44.18 0.66 0.35 1.88 3.54

Principal job in 2003–04 related to 

major 

JOBMAJOR=1 18.09 0.44 0.27 1.62 2.61

Registered to vote VOTEREG=1 73.69 0.60 0.31 1.91 3.67

Has a disability DISABLE=1 12.42 0.41 0.23 1.74 3.01

Attended more than one institution 

in 2003–04 

STUDMULT>1 7.44 0.30 0.19 1.61 2.58

Has dependents other than a 

spouse 

DEPANY=1 19.98 0.48 0.28 1.68 2.82

U.S. Armed Forces veteran VETERAN=1 1.95 0.19 0.10 1.98 3.91

Ever attended a community college EVER2PUB=1 66.78 0.48 0.33 1.43 2.04

Summary statistics 

Minimum † † † † 1.43 2.04

25th percentile † † † † 1.69 2.86

Median † † † † 1.88 3.53

75th percentile † † † † 2.01 4.03

Maximum † † † † 2.55 6.50

† Not applicable. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 2004 National Postsecondary 

Student Aid Study (NPSAS:04). 
Appendix N. Design Effects 

N-23 

Table N-21. Design effects for middle-income undergraduate students: 2004 

Variable Defined as 

Percent 

estimate

Design 

standard 

error

Simple random 

sample 

standard error DEFT DEFF

Received any aid TOTAID>0 66.42 0.45 0.24 1.92 3.70

Received any federal aid ANYFED=1 50.49 0.39 0.25 1.57 2.46

Received any state grant aid ANYSTGRT=1 16.39 0.44 0.19 2.38 5.65

Received any institution grant aid ANYINSTG=1 18.79 0.47 0.20 2.42 5.86

Received any work-study aid ANYWKST=1 7.97 0.24 0.14 1.80 3.26

Received a Pell grant ANYPELL=1 27.56 0.32 0.22 1.44 2.07

Received a Stafford loan ANYSTAF=1 37.41 0.37 0.24 1.53 2.34

Subsidized STAFSUB>0 33.17 0.34 0.24 1.43 2.06

Unsubsidized STAFUNSB>0 22.28 0.31 0.21 1.47 2.18

Married SMARITAL=2 14.29 0.43 0.18 2.47 6.11

U.S. citizen CITIZEN2=1 93.44 0.27 0.12 2.15 4.64

Enrolled exclusively full-time ATTNPTRN=1 50.27 0.67 0.25 2.67 7.11

Enrolled part-time or part-year ATTNSTAT IN 

(3, 4, 5, 6) 

57.78 0.63 0.25 2.55 6.49

Received any employer aid ANYEMP=1 5.86 0.15 0.12 1.29 1.67

Worked while in school JOBENR IN (2,3) 76.41 0.33 0.21 1.57 2.45

Worked full-time while in school JOBENR = 3 32.94 0.45 0.24 1.92 3.70

Worked part-time while in school JOBENR = 2 43.47 0.43 0.25 1.75 3.05

Principal job in 2003–04 related to 

major 

JOBMAJOR=1 23.43 0.39 0.21 1.84 3.38

Registered to vote VOTEREG=1 79.63 0.38 0.20 1.89 3.59

Has a disability DISABLE=1 11.26 0.29 0.16 1.86 3.47

Attended more than one institution 

in 2003–04 

STUDMULT>1 7.27 0.19 0.13 1.45 2.12

Has dependents other than a 

spouse 

DEPANY=1 25.62 0.50 0.22 2.29 5.24

U.S. Armed Forces veteran VETERAN=1 2.84 0.15 0.08 1.78 3.15

Ever attended a community college EVER2PUB=1 67.93 0.42 0.23 1.78 3.18

Summary statistics 

Minimum † † † † 1.29 1.67

25th percentile † † † † 1.55 2.40

Median † † † † 1.82 3.32

75th percentile † † † † 2.22 4.94

Maximum † † † † 2.67 7.11

† Not applicable. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 2004 National Postsecondary 

Student Aid Study (NPSAS:04). 
Appendix N. Design Effects 

N-24 

Table N-22. Design effects for high-income undergraduate students: 2004 

Variable Defined as 

Percent 

estimate

Design 

standard 

error

Simple random 

sample 

standard error DEFT DEFF

Received any aid TOTAID>0 50.10 0.61 0.35 1.71 2.93

Received any federal aid ANYFED=1 27.08 0.48 0.31 1.52 2.32

Received any state grant aid ANYSTGRT=1 6.17 0.29 0.17 1.68 2.82

Received any institution grant aid ANYINSTG=1 13.06 0.49 0.24 2.04 4.16

Received any work-study aid ANYWKST=1 3.92 0.21 0.14 1.52 2.31

Received a Pell grant ANYPELL=1 2.87 0.18 0.12 1.52 2.30

Received a Stafford loan ANYSTAF=1 24.33 0.44 0.30 1.46 2.13

Subsidized STAFSUB>0 13.41 0.39 0.24 1.60 2.57

Unsubsidized STAFUNSB>0 20.15 0.41 0.28 1.43 2.04

Married SMARITAL=2 44.43 0.77 0.35 2.19 4.78

U.S. citizen CITIZEN2=1 94.79 0.28 0.16 1.80 3.25

Enrolled exclusively full-time ATTNPTRN=1 42.55 0.77 0.35 2.21 4.90

Enrolled part-time or part-year ATTNSTAT IN 

(3, 4, 5, 6) 

63.59 0.68 0.34 2.00 4.02

Received any employer aid ANYEMP=1 11.76 0.43 0.23 1.90 3.61

Worked while in school JOBENR IN (2,3) 75.19 0.50 0.31 1.65 2.72

Worked full-time while in school JOBENR = 3 39.06 0.59 0.35 1.70 2.88

Worked part-time while in school JOBENR = 2 36.14 0.55 0.34 1.62 2.63

Principal job in 2003–04 related to 

major 

JOBMAJOR=1 27.58 0.57 0.32 1.81 3.27

Registered to vote VOTEREG=1 83.43 0.41 0.26 1.56 2.43

Has a disability DISABLE=1 10.64 0.32 0.22 1.49 2.21

Attended more than one institution 

in 2003–04 

STUDMULT>1 7.95 0.26 0.19 1.36 1.84

Has dependents other than a 

spouse 

DEPANY=1 34.64 0.70 0.34 2.07 4.27

U.S. Armed Forces veteran VETERAN=1 5.31 0.34 0.16 2.16 4.65

Ever attended a community college EVER2PUB=1 69.42 0.48 0.33 1.48 2.19

Summary statistics 

Minimum † † † † 1.36 1.84

25th percentile † † † † 1.52 2.30

Median † † † † 1.66 2.77

75th percentile † † † † 1.95 3.81

Maximum † † † † 2.21 4.90

† Not applicable. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 2004 National Postsecondary 

Student Aid Study (NPSAS:04). 
Appendix N. Design Effects 

N-25 

Table N-23. Design effects for all graduate students: 2004 

Variable Defined as 

Percent 

estimate

Design 

standard 

error

Simple random 

sample 

standard error DEFT DEFF

Received any aid TOTAID>0 70.27 1.09 0.47 2.34 5.49

Received any federal aid ANYFED=1 35.65 0.95 0.49 1.95 3.79

Received any state grant aid ANYSTGRT=1 1.86 0.34 0.14 2.48 6.15

Received any institution grant aid ANYINSTG=1 16.33 0.80 0.38 2.11 4.45

Received any work-study aid ANYWKST=1 1.52 0.20 0.12 1.60 2.55

Received any assistantship ANYGAST=1 15.93 0.72 0.37 1.92 3.70

Received a Stafford loan ANYSTAF=1 34.67 0.93 0.49 1.91 3.64

Subsidized STAFSUB>0 31.96 1.01 0.48 2.12 4.50

Unsubsidized STAFUNSB>0 28.61 0.91 0.46 1.98 3.93

Married SMARITAL=2 46.15 1.21 0.51 2.38 5.65

U.S. citizen CITIZEN2=1 88.01 0.66 0.33 1.99 3.96

Enrolled exclusively full-time ATTNPTRN=1 30.44 1.17 0.47 2.49 6.22

Enrolled part-time or part-year ATTNSTAT IN 

(3, 4, 5, 6) 

74.04 1.09 0.45 2.43 5.89

Received any employer aid ANYEMP=1 21.59 1.10 0.42 2.62 6.87

Worked while in school JOBENR IN (2,3) 75.57 0.96 0.44 2.18 4.76

Worked full-time while in school JOBENR = 3 53.55 1.31 0.51 2.57 6.61

Worked part-time while in school JOBENR = 2 22.02 0.91 0.42 2.15 4.64

Principal job in 2003–04 related to 

major 

JOBMAJOR=1 50.25 1.20 0.51 2.35 5.54

Registered to vote VOTEREG=1 84.92 0.87 0.37 2.37 5.63

Has a disability DISABLE=1 6.81 0.57 0.26 2.20 4.84

Attended more than one institution 

in 2003–04 

STUDMULT>1 3.80 0.47 0.20 2.39 5.72

Has dependents other than a 

spouse 

DEPANY=1 36.63 1.29 0.49 2.62 6.84

U.S. Armed Forces veteran VETERAN=1 3.99 0.54 0.20 2.71 7.32

Ever attended a community college EVER2PUB=1 46.20 0.88 0.51 1.72 2.97

Summary statistics 

Minimum † † † † 1.60 2.55

25th percentile † † † † 1.99 3.95

Median † † † † 2.27 5.16

75th percentile † † † † 2.45 6.02

Maximum † † † † 2.71 7.32

† Not applicable. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 2004 National Postsecondary 

Student Aid Study (NPSAS:04). 
Appendix N. Design Effects 

N-26 

Table N-24. Design effects for graduate students at public 4-year institutions: 2004 

Variable Defined as 

Percent 

estimate

Design 

standard 

error

Simple random 

sample 

standard error DEFT DEFF

Received any aid TOTAID>0 67.15 1.17 0.60 1.94 3.75

Received any federal aid ANYFED=1 29.50 0.80 0.58 1.37 1.87

Received any state grant aid ANYSTGRT=1 2.13 0.26 0.19 1.40 1.96

Received any institution grant aid ANYINSTG=1 18.31 0.77 0.50 1.55 2.41

Received any work-study aid ANYWKST=1 1.45 0.17 0.15 1.08 1.17

Received any assistantship ANYGAST=1 22.66 0.74 0.54 1.37 1.89

Received a Stafford loan ANYSTAF=1 28.32 0.77 0.58 1.34 1.79

Subsidized STAFSUB>0 25.87 0.81 0.56 1.44 2.08

Unsubsidized STAFUNSB>0 21.23 0.73 0.52 1.38 1.91

Married SMARITAL=2 44.76 0.97 0.64 1.52 2.32

U.S. citizen CITIZEN2=1 85.87 0.59 0.45 1.32 1.74

Enrolled exclusively full-time ATTNPTRN=1 27.11 1.09 0.57 1.90 3.63

Enrolled part-time or part-year ATTNSTAT IN 

(3, 4, 5, 6) 

75.45 1.01 0.55 1.82 3.32

Received any employer aid ANYEMP=1 18.53 0.83 0.50 1.67 2.80

Worked while in school JOBENR IN (2,3) 71.45 0.99 0.58 1.71 2.92

Worked full-time while in school JOBENR = 3 48.27 0.84 0.64 1.31 1.72

Worked part-time while in school JOBENR = 2 23.18 0.87 0.54 1.61 2.61

Principal job in 2003–04 related to 

major 

JOBMAJOR=1 47.47 1.18 0.64 1.84 3.37

Registered to vote VOTEREG=1 83.47 0.73 0.48 1.53 2.33

Has a disability DISABLE=1 7.05 0.49 0.33 1.49 2.22

Attended more than one institution 

in 2003–04 

STUDMULT>1 3.98 0.35 0.25 1.38 1.92

Has dependents other than a 

spouse 

DEPANY=1 34.11 0.99 0.61 1.63 2.65

U.S. Armed Forces veteran VETERAN=1 2.86 0.35 0.21 1.61 2.60

Ever attended a community college EVER2PUB=1 45.29 1.08 0.64 1.68 2.84

Summary statistics 

Minimum † † † † 1.08 1.17

25th percentile † † † † 1.38 1.90

Median † † † † 1.53 2.33

75th percentile † † † † 1.68 2.82

Maximum † † † † 1.94 3.75

† Not applicable. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 2004 National Postsecondary 

Student Aid Study (NPSAS:04). 
Appendix N. Design Effects 

N-27 

Table N-25. Design effects for graduate students at private not-for-profit 4-year institutions: 2004 

Variable Defined as 

Percent 

estimate

Design 

standard 

error

Simple random 

sample 

standard error DEFT DEFF

Received any aid TOTAID>0 72.05 2.05 0.77 2.68 7.16

Received any federal aid ANYFED=1 39.30 2.28 0.84 2.73 7.47

Received any state grant aid ANYSTGRT=1 1.66 0.71 0.22 3.26 10.66

Received any institution grant aid ANYINSTG=1 15.59 1.38 0.62 2.22 4.94

Received any work-study aid ANYWKST=1 1.80 0.41 0.23 1.82 3.32

Received any assistantship ANYGAST=1 8.77 0.84 0.48 1.74 3.03

Received a Stafford loan ANYSTAF=1 38.47 2.25 0.83 2.70 7.28

Subsidized STAFSUB>0 35.73 2.40 0.82 2.93 8.57

Unsubsidized STAFUNSB>0 33.31 1.98 0.81 2.46 6.06

Married SMARITAL=2 46.80 2.34 0.85 2.74 7.52

U.S. citizen CITIZEN2=1 90.47 0.96 0.50 1.91 3.66

Enrolled exclusively full-time ATTNPTRN=1 30.10 2.45 0.78 3.12 9.74

Enrolled part-time or part-year ATTNSTAT IN 

(3, 4, 5, 6) 

75.49 2.13 0.74 2.89 8.36

Received any employer aid ANYEMP=1 23.21 2.00 0.72 2.77 7.68

Worked while in school JOBENR IN (2,3) 79.18 1.58 0.69 2.27 5.15

Worked full-time while in school JOBENR = 3 57.40 2.78 0.85 3.28 10.77

Worked part-time while in school JOBENR = 2 21.78 1.85 0.71 2.62 6.85

Principal job in 2003–04 related to 

major 

JOBMAJOR=1 53.67 2.10 0.85 2.47 6.08

Registered to vote VOTEREG=1 87.28 1.25 0.57 2.19 4.78

Has a disability DISABLE=1 6.62 1.15 0.43 2.71 7.32

Attended more than one institution 

in 2003–04 

STUDMULT>1 3.55 0.75 0.32 2.35 5.54

Has dependents other than a 

spouse 

DEPANY=1 36.97 2.76 0.83 3.34 11.14

U.S. Armed Forces veteran VETERAN=1 4.34 0.97 0.35 2.78 7.74

Ever attended a community college EVER2PUB=1 46.71 1.69 0.85 1.98 3.93

Summary statistics 

Minimum † † † † 1.74 3.03

25th percentile † † † † 2.25 5.05

Median † † † † 2.69 7.22

75th percentile † † † † 2.84 8.05

Maximum † † † † 3.34 11.14

† Not applicable. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 2004 National Postsecondary 

Student Aid Study (NPSAS:04). 
Appendix N. Design Effects 

N-28 

Table N-26. Design effects for all first-professional students: 2004 

Variable Defined as 

Percent 

estimate

Design 

standard 

error

Simple random 

sample 

standard error DEFT DEFF

Received any aid TOTAID>0 88.76 1.17 0.88 1.33 1.76

Received any federal aid ANYFED=1 76.82 2.11 1.18 1.79 3.21

Received any state grant aid ANYSTGRT=1 6.17 1.83 0.67 2.73 7.44

Received any institution grant aid ANYINSTG=1 23.06 2.04 1.18 1.73 3.00

Received any work-study aid ANYWKST=1 5.82 1.66 0.65 2.54 6.43

Received any assistantship ANYGAST=1 6.93 0.74 0.71 1.04 1.09

Received a Stafford loan ANYSTAF=1 74.04 2.00 1.22 1.63 2.66

Subsidized STAFSUB>0 72.05 2.00 1.25 1.60 2.55

Unsubsidized STAFUNSB>0 67.45 2.02 1.31 1.54 2.37

Married SMARITAL=2 23.28 2.31 1.18 1.96 3.84

U.S. citizen CITIZEN2=1 92.97 1.35 0.71 1.89 3.56

Enrolled exclusively full-time ATTNPTRN=1 79.78 3.12 1.12 2.78 7.73

Enrolled part-time or part-year ATTNSTAT IN (3, 

4, 5, 6) 

19.81 3.13 1.11 2.82 7.93

Received any employer aid ANYEMP=1 5.79 0.85 0.65 1.31 1.71

Worked while in school JOBENR IN (2,3) 40.48 1.87 1.37 1.37 1.87

Worked full-time while in school JOBENR = 3 10.26 1.29 0.85 1.52 2.30

Worked part-time while in school JOBENR = 2 30.22 1.63 1.28 1.27 1.62

Principal job in 2003–04 related to 

major 

JOBMAJOR=1 27.59 1.44 1.25 1.15 1.33

Registered to vote VOTEREG=1 87.90 1.43 0.91 1.57 2.47

Has a disability DISABLE=1 5.73 0.74 0.65 1.13 1.28

Attended more than one institution 

in 2003–04 

STUDMULT>1 2.46 1.08 0.43 2.50 6.23

Has dependents other than a 

spouse 

DEPANY=1 13.19 1.99 0.94 2.11 4.43

U.S. Armed Forces veteran VETERAN=1 2.63 1.02 0.45 2.29 5.26

Ever attended a community college EVER2PUB=1 37.55 1.94 1.35 1.44 2.06

Summary statistics 

Minimum † † † † 1.04 1.09

25th percentile † † † † 1.35 1.82

Median † † † † 1.61 2.61

75th percentile † † † † 2.20 4.85

Maximum † † † † 2.82 7.93

† Not applicable. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 2004 National Postsecondary 

Student Aid Study (NPSAS:04). 
Appendix N. Design Effects 

N-29 

Table N-27. Design effects for first-professional students at public 4-year institutions: 2004 

Variable Defined as 

Percent 

estimate

Design 

standard 

error

Simple random 

sample 

standard error DEFT DEFF

Received any aid TOTAID>0 90.99 1.00 1.17 0.85 0.73

Received any federal aid ANYFED=1 80.38 1.48 1.62 0.92 0.84

Received any state grant aid ANYSTGRT=1 4.49 0.86 0.85 1.02 1.04

Received any institution grant aid ANYINSTG=1 25.90 1.61 1.79 0.90 0.81

Received any work-study aid ANYWKST=1 2.54 0.53 0.64 0.82 0.67

Received any assistantship ANYGAST=1 9.40 1.49 1.19 1.25 1.56

Received a Stafford loan ANYSTAF=1 77.03 1.60 1.72 0.93 0.87

Subsidized STAFSUB>0 75.06 1.66 1.77 0.94 0.89

Unsubsidized STAFUNSB>0 67.95 1.89 1.91 0.99 0.99

Married SMARITAL=2 21.88 1.99 1.69 1.18 1.39

U.S. citizen CITIZEN2=1 95.81 0.95 0.82 1.16 1.34

Enrolled exclusively full-time ATTNPTRN=1 86.62 1.42 1.39 1.02 1.05

Enrolled part-time or part-year ATTNSTAT IN 

(3, 4, 5, 6) 

9.58 1.13 1.20 0.94 0.88

Received any employer aid ANYEMP=1 4.40 0.75 0.84 0.90 0.80

Worked while in school JOBENR IN (2,3) 35.22 2.23 1.95 1.14 1.30

Worked full-time while in school JOBENR = 3 6.44 1.21 1.00 1.21 1.47

Worked part-time while in school JOBENR = 2 28.78 2.26 1.85 1.22 1.50

Principal job in 2003–04 related to 

major 

JOBMAJOR=1 25.13 1.91 1.77 1.08 1.17

Registered to vote VOTEREG=1 92.69 1.00 1.06 0.94 0.89

Has a disability DISABLE=1 5.30 1.10 0.91 1.20 1.44

Attended more than one institution 

in 2003–04 

STUDMULT>1 2.00 0.41 0.57 0.72 0.52

Has dependents other than a 

spouse 

DEPANY=1 9.03 1.15 1.17 0.98 0.96

U.S. Armed Forces veteran VETERAN=1 1.60 0.46 0.51 0.91 0.82

Ever attended a community college EVER2PUB=1 36.79 1.63 1.97 0.83 0.69

Summary statistics 

Minimum † † † † 0.72 0.52

25th percentile † † † † 0.90 0.82

Median † † † † 0.96 0.93

75th percentile † † † † 1.15 1.32

Maximum † † † † 1.25 1.56

† Not applicable. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 2004 National Postsecondary 

Student Aid Study (NPSAS:04). 
Appendix N. Design Effects 

N-30 

Table N-28. Design effects for first-professional students at private not-for-profit 4-year 

institutions: 2004 

Variable Defined as 

Percent 

estimate

Design 

standard 

error

Simple random 

sample 

standard error DEFT DEFF

Received any aid TOTAID>0 87.24 1.81 1.28 1.42 2.01

Received any federal aid ANYFED=1 74.39 3.40 1.67 2.04 4.14

Received any state grant aid ANYSTGRT=1 7.31 2.89 1.00 2.90 8.42

Received any institution grant aid ANYINSTG=1 21.11 3.10 1.56 1.99 3.94

Received any work-study aid ANYWKST=1 8.06 2.74 1.04 2.63 6.90

Received any assistantship ANYGAST=1 5.23 0.82 0.85 0.96 0.92

Received a Stafford loan ANYSTAF=1 71.99 3.21 1.72 1.87 3.48

Subsidized STAFSUB>0 69.99 3.11 1.75 1.77 3.14

Unsubsidized STAFUNSB>0 67.10 3.38 1.80 1.88 3.53

Married SMARITAL=2 24.24 3.38 1.64 2.06 4.25

U.S. citizen CITIZEN2=1 91.03 2.16 1.09 1.98 3.92

Enrolled exclusively full-time ATTNPTRN=1 75.09 4.94 1.65 2.99 8.93

Enrolled part-time or part-year ATTNSTAT IN 

(3, 4, 5, 6) 

26.80 4.83 1.69 2.85 8.13

Received any employer aid ANYEMP=1 6.74 1.38 0.96 1.44 2.08

Worked while in school JOBENR IN (2,3) 44.09 2.86 1.90 1.51 2.27

Worked full-time while in school JOBENR = 3 12.87 2.20 1.28 1.72 2.95

Worked part-time while in school JOBENR = 2 31.21 2.25 1.77 1.27 1.61

Principal job in 2003–04 related to 

major 

JOBMAJOR=1 29.26 2.08 1.74 1.20 1.43

Registered to vote VOTEREG=1 84.62 2.20 1.38 1.60 2.55

Has a disability DISABLE=1 6.03 0.95 0.91 1.04 1.08

Attended more than one institution 

in 2003–04 

STUDMULT>1 2.79 1.80 0.63 2.86 8.18

Has dependents other than a 

spouse 

DEPANY=1 16.03 3.04 1.40 2.17 4.70

U.S. Armed Forces veteran VETERAN=1 3.33 1.80 0.69 2.63 6.89

Ever attended a community college EVER2PUB=1 38.06 2.84 1.86 1.53 2.34

Summary statistics 

Minimum † † † † 0.96 0.92

25th percentile † † † † 1.48 2.18

Median † † † † 1.87 3.50

75th percentile † † † † 2.40 5.80

Maximum † † † † 2.99 8.93

† Not applicable. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 2004 National Postsecondary 

Student Aid Study (NPSAS:04).