1

NHES:2015

Full-scale Data Collection

Request for OMB Review

OMB# 1850-0768 v.10

Part A

July 8, 2014
2

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

JUSTIFICATION ...................................................................................................................... 1

A.1 Circumstances Necessitating Collection of Information........................................... 7

A.2 Purposes and Uses of the Data .................................................................................. 7

A.3 Use of Improved Information Technology................................................................ 7

A.4 Efforts to Identify Duplication .................................................................................. 8

A.5 Collection of Data from Small Businesses................................................................ 9

A.6 Consequences of Less Frequent Data Collection ...................................................... 9

A.7 Special Circumstances of Data Collection ................................................................ 9

A.8 Consultations Outside the Agency ............................................................................ 9

A.9 Payments to Respondents.......................................................................................... 14

A.10 Assurance of Confidentiality..................................................................................... 14

A.11 Sensitive Questions ................................................................................................... 14

A.12 Estimated Response Burden...................................................................................... 16

A.13 Cost to Respondents.................................................................................................. 16

A.14 Cost to the Federal Government................................................................................ 16

A.15 Reasons for Program Changes................................................................................... 16

A.16 Publication Plans and Project Schedule..................................................................... 16

A.17 Approval to Not Display the Expiration Date for OMB Approval ........................... 17

A.18 Exceptions to the Certification Statement ................................................................. 17

List of Tables

Table

1 Estimated response burden for NHES:2015.............................................................. 16

List of Exhibits

Exhibit

1 Surveys conducted under the National Household Education Surveys Program, by 

years administered: 1991 through 2012..................................................................... 6

2 NHES:2015 schedule of major activities................................................................... 17
3

JUSTIFICATION

Request for Clearance

In 2008, the National Household Education Surveys program (NHES) began a redesign effort to convert from a 

system of landline random digit dial (RDD) surveys to a self-administered mail survey using an address-based 

sample (ABS). This redesign was prompted by declines in response rates to the telephone survey and concerns 

about population coverage using the landline telephone frame (due to increasing conversion to cellular-only 

coverage). The goals of the redesign effort were to develop and assess approaches to collecting important 

information on education topics from households while improving response rates and coverage from the previous 

design. A feasibility test of the new design was conducted in 2009 followed by a field test in 2011. The field test 

results helped to inform the final design of a full-scale NHES collection in 2012 (OMB# 1850-0768 v.9).

During the same period of time, NCES began supporting developmental work on new questionnaire items for 

federal household surveys on work-related education, training, and credentials for adults and out-of-school youth. 

The Interagency Working Group on Expanded Measures of Enrollment and Attainment (GEMEnA) is a

collaboration among federal statistical agencies established by the OMB Office of Statistical and Science Policy, 

the Council of Economic Advisors, and the Under Secretary of Education to improve federal household statistics on 

the attainment of non-degree credentials such as industry-recognized certifications, occupational licenses, and 

educational certificates. In 2012, GEMEnA’s commission expanded to include the development of new and revised 

measures of enrollment or participation in education and training for work. One of GEMEnA’s roles is to guide 

NCES’s development of a new household survey on these topics to support research and policy analysis. NCES 

conducted two pilot studies (OMB# 1850-0803), first a two-stage telephone survey (42% response rate) and then a 

single-stage self-administered mail survey (69% response rate).

NHES Feasibility Study (NHES-FS) Summary 

One of NCES’s goals from the beginning of the GEMEnA project was to see whether it would be feasible to 

eventually incorporate a revised survey on adult credentials back into the NHES. In 2014 a Feasibility Study testing 

the integration of an adult topical survey into NHES mail operations and processing was conducted. The Feasibility 

Study (NHES-FS) included several experiments to inform the final design of the 2015 full-scale NHES which will 

include the Credentials for Work Survey (CWS) and the two child-focused surveys fielded in the NHES:2012, the 

Parent and Family Involvement in Education (PFI), and Early Childhood Program Participation (ECPP) surveys.

The 2015 NHES will also pilot the adult Training for Work Survey (TWS), planned for a future NHES 

administration. Using one household survey platform for both child and adult surveys provides greater efficiency in 

the data collection and reduces overall national burden by maximizing the use of a single household sample draw.

Before adding an adult education survey back into the NHES it was important to test the feasibility of using a mail 

survey to screen households for both adults and children, and to test different approaches to collecting topical data 

from households (e.g., sampling either an adult or a child from the same household for topical follow up compared 

to sampling both and adult and a child for follow up).

In addition to testing different approaches to collecting topical data from households, the NHES-FS included 

several other experiments to test approaches aimed toward decreasing unit and item nonresponse. These 

experiments are described below.

1. Experiment 1 tested unit and item response rate differences between a screener that asked for age measured in 

years versus a screener that asked for age measured as year and month of birth. Both screeners are included in 

Appendix B. Based on the NHES:FS results, NCES plans to collect age measured as year and month of birth.

2. Experiment 2 tests different response option orders for the question about household members’ school 

enrollment status. In one version of the screener, the response option “homeschool instead of school for some 

classes or subjects” is the first response option, after “public or private school, or preschool”. In the other 

version, “homeschool instead of school for some classes or subjects” is the first option and “public or private 

school, or preschool” is the second response option. Analysis of the NHES:2012 data suggested there may 

have been under-reporting of homeschooling on the screener. This experiment is designed to test whether 
4

response distributions are sensitive to response option order. Based on the NHES:FS results, NCES plans to 

position the homeschool response option first. 

3. Experiment 3 tested response rate differences between households that did not receive a cash incentive with 

their initial screener questionnaire mailing and households that received the NHES standard $5 incentive. 

Preliminary results from the NHES-FS indicate that the $5 incentive is associated with higher response rates 

than no incentive. Based on this NCES plans to include a $5 incentive in the initial screener mailing in the 

NHES:2015.

4. Experiment 4 tested the effectiveness of mailing a large credit-card sized magnet with the screener to serve as 

a reminder to complete the survey. This experiment was designed to test whether the magnet was associated 

with higher response rates in the second stage of the survey. Preliminary results indicate that the magnet did 

not improve topical response rates so NCES does not plan to include a magnet incentive in NHES:2015.

5. Experiment 5 tested unit response rates when a household was mailed both an adult topical questionnaire and 

a child topical questionnaire (the After-School Programs and Activities, or ASPA, survey) versus a single 

CWS or ASPA questionnaire. Due to the operational complexity of fielding two topical surveys per 

household and the relatively small increase in efficiency for dual households, households will only receive 

one questionnaire (adult or child) in the NHES:2015.

6. Experiment 6 included a split-ballot test of the ASPA topical instrument to test the efficiency of different 

question wordings and formats (grid versus non-grid) for selected items. The analysis is ongoing to determine 

the results of the ASPA split ballot test. NCES is not requesting clearance for the ASPA for the NHES:2015.

7. Experiment 7 included a split-ballot test of a full Adult Training and Education Survey (ATES) instrument 

including sections on work-related training and non-credit college classes versus a shorter CWS instrument 

including only key items from those sections. In NHES:2015, NCES plans to field the CWS and pilot test the 

TWS for NHES:2017.

Overview of NHES:2015 Target population 

Adults ages 16 to 65 who are not enrolled in grade 12 or below will be eligible for the CWS and TWS topical 

surveys and children from birth through 12th grade who are ages 20 or younger will be eligible for the child-focused

topical surveys. The NHES:2015 will screen 200,000 households, which splits into a 185,000 household sample 

that will be sent paper screeners and a 15,000 household sample that will be selected to participate in a selfresponse Internet screener experiment. The Internet screener experiment will allow NCES to examine response 

rates and coverage when initiating the NHES survey using a web mode. We will also experimentally test 

nonresponse follow-up by mail at either the 3rd mailing and 4th mailing or the 4th mailing only. The Internet screener 

will be developed and hosted by the Census Bureau. For both groups, an expected screener response rate of 70 

percent and an address ineligibility1rate of 11 percent are assumed, bringing the total number of expected screeners 

to 124,600. From these completed screeners, it is expected that approximately 56 percent or 69,341 households will 

contain an eligible adult but no eligible children; approximately 27 percent or 34,167 households will contain an 

eligible adult and an eligible child; and approximately 0.4 percent or 534 households will contain an eligible child 

but no eligible adults (for example, children who live with grandparents above age 65)2.

NHES Background

NHES is NCES’s principal mechanism for addressing education topics appropriate for households rather than

establishments. Such topics cover a wide range of issues, including early childhood care and education, children’s 

readiness for school, parent perceptions of school safety and discipline, before- and after-school activities of 

school-age children, participation in adult education and training, parent involvement in education, school choice, 

homeschooling, and civic involvement. The NHES consists of a series of rotating surveys using a two-stage design

 

1

Ineligible addresses are those that are undeliverable. Once a screener mailing for an address is returned as a postmaster return (PMR), the 

address will be coded ineligible.

2

Percentages based on population proportions from the Annual Social and Economic Supplement (ASEC) of the Current Population Survey 

(CPS).
5

in which a household screener collects household membership and key characteristics for sampling and then 

appropriate topical survey(s) are mailed to sample members.

Data from the NHES are used to provide national cross-sectional estimates on populations of special interest to 

education researchers and policymakers. For surveys about children, the population of interest is defined by age or 

grade in school, or both, depending on the particular survey topic and research questions. For surveys of adults, the 

population of interest is those aged 16 to 65 who are not enrolled in grade 12 or below, excluding those on active 

duty military service and those who are institutionalized. The NHES targets these populations using specific 

screening and sampling procedures. 

The NHES design also yields estimates for subgroups of interest for each child and adult survey, as defined by age 

(or grade for children), education level for adults, Hispanic origin, and racial background for all populations of 

interest3. In addition to providing cross-sectional estimates, the NHES is designed to produce estimates from 

repeated cross sections to measure changes in key statistics.

The last NHES data collection prior to the redesign was conducted in 2007 and included the Parent and Family 

Involvement in Education Survey (PFI) and the School Readiness Survey (SR)4. The NHES:2012 was the first fullscale data collection using an addressed-based sample and a self-administered questionnaire--it included the PFI

survey and ECPP survey. The overall screener plus topical response rate was approximately 58 percent for both the 

PFI and the ECPP in 2012, compared to the 2007 overall response rate of 39-41% (depending on the survey). The 

results suggest that the new methodology has the ability to address the response rate and coverage issues identified 

in the 2007 data collection.

The 2015 NHES will reintroduce an adult survey component. The Credentials for Work Survey (CWS) will provide 

a means to investigate issues related to the prevalence and key characteristics of credentials for work that cannot be 

adequately studied through the Center’s institution-based data collection efforts. NCES is also requesting clearance 

for a small pilot study of a complementary Training for Work Survey (TWS) that focuses on participation in workrelated education and training. NCES expects to field the TWS as part of NHES:2017.

Survey data from the NHES have been used for a large number of descriptive and analytic reports and articles, 

including NCES publications, publications of other Federal agencies, policy analyses, theses and dissertations, 

conference papers, and journal articles. A list of NHES publications issued by NCES can be found on the NHES 

website, http://nces.ed.gov/nhes.

NHES:2015 Surveys 

As shown in exhibit 1, each administration of the NHES has included more than one topical survey. However, thus 

far under the new mail data collection methodology, households have only been screened for and topical surveys

have only focused on children. The NHES:2015 will include three topical surveys: the CWS, the PFI, and ECPP 

surveys; and a pilot test of the TWS.

5 To develop the CWS survey, NCES has been redeveloping and testing new 

survey content since 2009, including pilot testing, expert review, cognitive testing, and focus groups.

 

3 NCES collects information on the following racial/ethnic groups in the NHES topical surveys: American Indian or Alaska Native, Asian, 

Black or African American, Hispanic, Native Hawaiian or other Pacific Islander, and White. Reported estimates by race typically use the 

following categories: White, non-Hispanic; Black, non-Hispanic; Hispanic; Asian or other Pacific Islander, non-Hispanic; and other, nonHispanic. Areas with higher concentrations of Blacks and Hispanics are typically oversampled in order to ensure sufficient samples sizes to 

generate reliable estimates for these subgroups. In the Feasibility Study, these groups were not oversampled because no estimates will be 

published, instead comparisons will primarily be made across item distributions for the two split panel forms.

4 NHES:2007 also included an adult education module, but data collection was stopped due to low response rates.

5 For survey administration purposes only, NCES has titled both the CWS and the TWS as the Adult Training and Education Survey. NCES 

believes that this title has the most relevance to respondents and will promote higher response rates.
6

Exhibit 1. Surveys conducted under the National Household Education Surveys Program, by years 

administered: 1991 through 2012

Topical survey NHES survey administration

1991 1993 1995 1996 199912001 2003 2005 2007 2012

Early childhood education/

program participation √ √ √ √ √√

Adult education √ √ √ √ √ √

School readiness √ √ √

School safety and discipline √

Parent and family involvement 

in education √ √ √ √√

Civic involvement √ √

After-school programs and 

activities √

2

√ √

3

√

Household library use √

Homeschooling √ √ √ √

1

The NHES:1999 was a special end-of-decade administration that measured key indicators from the surveys fielded during the 1990s. 

2

The After-School Programs and Activities Survey of the NHES:1995 only asked about children in first through third grades.

3

The After-School Programs and Activities Survey of the NHES:2001 also included items on before-school programs.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, National Household Education Surveys Program 

(NHES), 1991–2012.

The PFI and ECPP surveys are repeat administrations of the topics administered in the mail survey mode in the 

NHES:2012. NCES decided to repeat these surveys in 2015 to establish the first trend data for the newly designed 

NHES. Tracking changes in the population over time is a key research goal of the NHES program.

 The Early Childhood Program Participation Survey (ECPP), previously conducted in 1991, 1995, 2001, 

2005, and 2012, surveys families of children ages 6 or younger who are not yet enrolled in kindergarten and 

provides estimates of children’s participation in care by relatives and non-relatives in private homes and in 

center-based daycare or preschool programs (including Head Start and Early Head Start). Additional topics 

addressed in ECPP interviews have included family learning activities; out-of-pocket expenses for nonparental 

care; continuity of care; factors related to parental selection of care; parents’ perceptions of care quality; child 

health and disability; and child, parent, and household characteristics.

 The Parent and Family Involvement in Education Survey (PFI), previously conducted in 1996, 2003, 

2007, and 2012, surveys families of children and youth enrolled in kindergarten through 12th grade or 

homeschooled for these grades, with an age limit of 20 years, and addresses specific ways that families are 

involved in their children’s school; school practices to involve and support families; involvement with 

children’s homework; and involvement in education activities outside of school. Parents of homeschoolers are 

asked about their reasons for choosing homeschooling and resources they used in homeschooling. Information 

about child, parent, and household characteristics is also collected. To minimize response burden and potential 

respondent confusion, both enrolled and homeschool versions of the PFI questionnaire were created for selfadministration. 

 The Credentials for Work (CWS) provides a means to investigate issues related to the prevalence and key 

characteristics of non-degree credentials that cannot be adequately studied through the Center’s institutionbased data collection efforts. It targets non-institutionalized adults in the United States ages 16 to 65, who are

not enrolled at grade 12 or below. The CWS will collect information on educational attainment, prevalence 

and characteristics of certifications and licenses and their holders, prevalence and characteristics of 

educational certificates and certificate holders, and key measures of work-related training collected on the 

TWS. It will also collect detailed employment and background information.

 The Training for Work Survey (TWS) will collect information on initial on-the-job training programs (such 

as apprenticeships and internships), college coursetaking, work-related training and key measures of nondegree credentials collected on the CWS. It also includes detailed employment and background items.

The instruments are provided in Appendices B (screener) and C (topical questionnaires).
7

A.1 Circumstances Necessitating Collection of Information

The Education Sciences Reform Act of 2002 (ESRA 2002: 20 U.S. Code § 9543) defines the legislative mission of 

NCES to collect, report, analyze, and disseminate statistical data related to education in the United States and in 

other nations.

The NHES is specifically designed to support this mission by providing a means to investigate education issues that 

cannot be adequately studied through the Center’s institution-based data collection efforts. For example, school-age 

children participate in many types of informal or formal care settings. There is no available sample frame that 

includes all of these types of care arrangements. Likewise, although attaining a postsecondary credential has 

become increasingly important for securing opportunities to get high-return jobs in the United States in the 21st 

century, NCES has traditionally only collected data on postsecondary certificates and degrees awarded through 

credit-bearing instruction in institutions of higher education that participate in Title IV federal student aid 

programs. These comprise only a portion of subbaccalaureate education and training American adults seek and 

complete to learn the skills they need to find and keep good-paying jobs. 

It is efficient and economical to interview parents about their children’s participation in child care programs and 

family participation in school and other education activities through a household-based approach rather than 

incurring the cost and nonresponse involved in enlisting schools, obtaining lists of parents, and sampling parents 

from those lists. Similarly, it is also most efficient to interview adults through a household-based approach rather 

than trying to obtain lists from a myriad of private credential awarding bodies. Also, the household approach allows 

for inclusion of adults who do not participate in training or have a credential, providing a point of comparison.

Repeating the NHES:2012 child surveys will provide the first trend data available under the new NHES design. 

Tracking trends in education topics over time on a regular, repeating basis is a key research goal of the NHES 

program. Adding the adult education component will provide the first publicly available adult education data from 

the NHES in over a decade, and provide detailed data about previously unmeasured non-degree credentials.

A.2 Purposes and Uses of the Data

The NHES:2015 data collection will provide policymakers and researchers with data on early childhood education, 

parent and family involvement in education, homeschooling, and adult credentials for work that are not available 

elsewhere. The data contribute directly to NCES education indicators, reports, and statistical abstracts. Researchers 

nationwide rely on NHES data for important policy analyses.

A.3 Use of Improved Information Technology

The data for the NHES:2015 will be collected for NCES by the United States Bureau of the Census using four

complementary survey systems - (1) Amgraf One Form Plus, (2) Docuprint, and (3) integrated Computer Assisted 

Data Entry (iCADE), chosen for their efficiency and accuracy in the data collection process and (4) Enterprise 

Internet Solutions (EIS). 

 Forms Design. Questionnaires will be created using Amgraf One Form Plus. Completed hardcopy forms can 

be processed by iCADE to capture responses through optical mark recognition (OMR) and keying from image 

(KFI). Questionnaires will be printed, trimmed, and stitched through an in-house print on-demand process 

using a Docuprint system which allows personalization, and the ability to tailor items to each specific 

respondent. The data from the questionnaires will be captured by the iCADE technology/software, which

automatically extracts all check box entries (OMR) and captures and displays an image of all other entries to 

an operator for KFI. 

 Image Preprocessing. iCADE applies image preprocessing to the forms in their image format in order to 

correct any skewing at the time of scanning, and the iCADE software performs registration to align the 

individual questionnaire page template with the appropriate scanned image. The scanner despeckles the image 

to remove unwanted pixels. 
8

 Data Capture. iCADE reads the form image files, checks the presence of data, processes all check box fields 

through OMR, and presents an image of the handwritten fields to an operator for KFI. 

 Verification. Extracted KFI data are subject to 100% field validation according to project specifications. If a 

data value violates validation rules, the value is flagged for review by verifiers who interactively review the 

images and the corresponding extracted data, and resolve validation errors. 

 Archiving. Images will be scanned and archived to magnetic storage located on a secured server in case they 

are needed later. This eliminates the need to save paper copies of the completed questionnaires. 

 Data from a web instrument. The Enterprise Internet Solutions (EIS) area of the Application Services 

Divisions (ASD) will host a web based Screener instrument. Data will be transmitted and processed daily. The 

web application will be hosted on the fully certified and accredited Centurion system (infrastructure, security, 

and framework).

A.4 Efforts to Identify Duplication

CWS/TWS

Senior policy officials in the Departments of Education, Commerce, and Labor, foundations including the Gates 

Foundation and Lumina, and research organizations such as the Georgetown Center for Education and the 

Workforce have recognized that there is a lack of valid statistical information on prevalence of industry-recognized 

certifications and education certificates, and called for the development of new data sources. A series of meetings 

during the fall of 2009 launched a broad effort to begin to define and enumerate these credentials. NCES conducted 

a review of research literature and data collections since the work of a previous Interagency Committee in 2000, 

from which NCES developed a bank of existing survey items on certifications (completed 11/2009) and education 

certificates (completed 1/2010). This research found no surveys that adequately capture comprehensive data on 

adult training, education, and non-degree credentials.

PFI and ECPP

Population: Most other surveys do not address the topics covered in NHES for the populations of interest. For 

example, the Head Start Family and Child Experiences Survey (FACES) focuses on children in Head Start, whereas 

all children who have not yet started kindergarten are of interest in the ECPP Survey. Likewise, the National 

Survey of Early Care and Education (NSECE) focuses primarily on low income children and their program 

participation. The National Survey of Parents of Public School Students and Survey of Family and School 

Partnerships in Public Schools focus on parents of children in public schools; those whose children attend private 

schools or are homeschooled are not represented. Some studies, such as the Early Childhood Longitudinal Study, 

Birth Cohort (ECLS-B); the Early Childhood Longitudinal Study, Kindergarten Class of 1998-1999 (ECLS-K); and 

the Early Childhood Longitudinal Study-Kindergarten Class of 2010-11 (ECLS-K:2011) focus on single-year 

cohorts that are followed over time and therefore do not provide nationally representative data on different age 

groups. The NHES surveys are designed to complement these longitudinal collections with more frequent and more 

inclusive cross-sectional data.

Survey Content: Extant studies are limited in the content that they include relative to the goals of the NHES 

surveys. Studies such as the National Survey of America’s Families and the National Study of the Changing 

Workforce collect some information on child care or program participation, but their primary emphasis is on other 

topics, and the depth of information on early care and education experiences is limited. The Head Start FACES 

project collects information on Head Start program participation and some family measures, but does not account 

for all nonparental care and programs. The Current Population Survey October Education Supplement is limited to 

a relatively small number of items on education participation and does not address the roles that parents play in 

their children’s school, schoolwork, and home activities. Also, no nationally representative study other than the 

NHES collects detailed data on homeschooling. 

Current Estimates and Measuring Change Over Time. Many of the extant surveys follow one cohort or periodic 

cohorts (e.g., the Early Childhood Longitudinal Studies, Head Start FACES, NSECE) or are no longer conducted 
9

(e.g., the National Survey of America’s Families, Family Involvement in Education: A National Portrait). As a 

result, they cannot meet the NHES goal of providing up-to-date cross-sectional estimates and measures of change 

over time for all children who have not started kindergarten or for children in kindergarten through 12th grade, as is 

provided by the NHES.

Due to these limitations in extant studies and the importance of data collected by the NHES, NCES plans to 

continue to conduct the ECPP and PFI surveys under the NHES program. Appendix D contains a review prepared 

for NCES of other surveys that cover topics similar to those in the NHES child surveys. The review shows that 

there is little overlap between the NHES and these other surveys. There are no other federal surveys that collect 

information on the attainment of non-degree credentials; filling this gap is GEMEnA’s charge.

A.5 Collection of Data from Small Businesses

Not applicable.

A.6 Consequences of Less Frequent Data Collection

This request is for clearance of the NHES:2015. Topics covered in child questionnaires for this NHES collection 

have been addressed in previous NHES administrations; repeating the surveys biennially allows for analysis of 

trends over time. Less frequent collection would result in incomplete tracking of these trends. The last full NHES 

study was conducted in 2012. Because of budget constraints, NCES did not conduct the NHES in 2014 but plans to 

resume a biennial data collection schedule beginning in 2015. 

A.7 Special Circumstances of Data Collection

None of the special circumstances listed in the instructions for completing the supporting statement apply to the 

NHES:2015.

A.8 Consultations Outside the Agency

A Technical Review Panel (TRP) comprising leading experts in survey methodology was established to provide 

input to the redesign of the NHES system. Most members of the panel met in February 2010 to discuss the 

proposed design for the field test, and their comments and suggestions led to changes reflected in this submission.

Technical Review Panel Participants and Their Affiliation at the Time of TRP Recruitment

Nancy Bates

U.S. Census Bureau 

649 A. St. N.E.

Washington, DC 20002

E-mail: nancy.a.bates@census.gov

Paul Beatty 

National Center for Health Statistics

Division of Health Care Statistics

3311 Toledo Road, 

Hyattsville, MD 20782

E-mail: pbeatty@cdc.gov

Johnny Blair

Survey Sampling and Methodology

Abt Associates Inc.

4550 Montgomery Avenue

Bethesda, MD 20814-3343

E-mail: Johnny_Blair@AbtAssoc.com

Stephen Blumberg

National Center for Health Statistics

3311 Toledo Road

Hyattsville, MD 20782

E-mail: stephen.blumberg@cdc.hhs.gov

Mick Couper

Survey Research Center

University of Michigan

ISR, 426 Thompson Street

Ann Arbor, MI 48104

E-mail: mcouper@umich.edu

Don Dillman

Social and Economic Sciences Research Center, Professor

Washington State University 

133 Wilson Hall 

Pullman, WA 99164-4014

E-mail: dillman@wsu.edu
11

Robert Groves

Survey Research Center, Institute for Social Research

University of Michigan

426 Thompson Street

Ann Arbor, MI 48106-1248

E-mail: bgroves@isr.umich.edu

Scott Keeter

Pew Research Center 

1615 L. St. NW. Suite 700

Washington, DC 20036

E-mail: skeeter@pewresearch.org

Kristen Olsen

Survey Research and Methodology

University of Nebraska-Lincoln

201 N. 13th St.

Lincoln, NE 68588-0241

E-mail: kolson5@unl.edu

Roger Tourangeau

Joint Program in Survey Methodology

University of Maryland 

1218 LeFrak Hall, University of Maryland

College Park, MD 20742

E-mail: RTourango@survey.umd.edu

Gordon Willis

Division of Cancer Control / Population Sciences

National Cancer Institute

6130 Executive Blvd, MSC 7344, EPN 4005

Bethesda, MD 20892-7344

E-mail: willisg@mail.nih.gov

The content of the NHES:2015 topical surveys repeats the content developed for the NHES:2012 administration 

and prior NHES administrations. As a result, the PFI and ECPP surveys reflect the cumulative input of many 

experts in the field and past NHES Technical Review Panels. In order to ensure that the ECPP and PFI Surveys 

address important issues in the topical areas of interest and incorporate important emerging issues, the design phase 

of the 2012 study included consultations with experts in the substantive areas addressed in the surveys. These 

experts included persons in government agencies, academe, and research organizations. 

Substantive Experts: ECPP and Their Affiliation at the Time of TRP Recruitment

Jerry West - Mathematica

Mathematica Policy Research, Inc.

600 Maryland Ave., SW, Suite 550

Washington, DC 20024-2512

E-mail: jwest@mathematica-mpr.com

Ann Collins – Abt Assoc. Cambridge, MA

Abt Associates Inc.

55 Wheeler Street

Cambridge, MA 02138-1168 

E-mail: Ann_Collins@abtassociates.com

Ron Haskins – Brookings Institution and Casey 

Foundation

The Brookings Institution

1775 Massachusetts Ave., NW

Washington, DC 20036

E-mail: rhaskins@brookings.edu

Ivelisse Martinez-Beck – HHS Division of Child and 

Family Development

Administration for Children and Families

370 L’Enfant Promenade, S.W.

7th Floor West, Room 7A011

Washington, D.C. 20447

E-mail: ivelisse.martinezbeck@acf.hhs.gov

Lynda Laughlin – Census

U.S. Census Bureau

4600 Silver Hill Road

Suitland, MD 20746

E-mail: lynda.l.laughlin@census.gov

Substantive Experts: PFI and Their Affiliation at the Time of TRP Recruitment

Richard Brandon – Univ. of Washington

Human Services Policy Center, Evans School of Public 

Affairs

University of Washington

1107 NE 45th St.

Seattle, WA 98105

E-mail: brandon@u.washington.edu

Annette Lareau – Univ. of Pennsylvania

Department of Sociology 

University of Pennsylvania 

McNeil Hall 

Philadelphia, PA 19104

E-mail: alareau@sas.upenn.edu
12

Joyce Epstein – The Johns Hopkins University

Center for Social Organization of Schools

3003 N. Charles St., Suite 200

Baltimore, MD 21218

E-mail: jepstein@csos.jhu.edu

Lawrence Aber - NYU

Steinhardt School of Culture, Education, and Human 

Development

New York University

82 Washington Square East

New York, NY 10003

E-mail: lawrence.aber@nyu.edu

As noted above, the CWS and TWS are products of ongoing work guided by GEMEnA, which has met monthly 

since October 2009 and consists of senior staff from the Bureau of the Census, the Bureau of Labor Statistics, the 

Council of Economic Advisors, the National Center for Education Statistics, the National Center for Science and 

Engineering Statistics, the Office of Statistical and Science Policy (OMB), and the Office of the Under Secretary of 

Education. In addition, GEMEnA established an Expert Panel of substantive experts in the fields of workforce 

education, economic development, and non-degree credentials that met in November of 2012 and March of 2014 to 

provide input to content for CWS and TWS.

Survey and Methodology Experts: GEMEnA Member Agency Representatives

Census Bureau

Bob Kominski

Stephanie Ewert 

Bureau of Labor Statistics

Dori Allard

Harley Frazis 

National Center for Science and Engineering Statistics

Dan Foley

John Finamore

Council of Economic Advisors

Jordan Matsudaira

OMB Office of Statistical and Science Policy

Shelly Martinez

Department of Education – Office of the Under 

Secretary

Jon O’Bergh

National Center for Education Statistics

Sharon Boivin

Lisa Hudson 

Kashka Kubzdela

Sarah Crissey

Sarah Carroll

Andy Zukerberg

Substantive Experts: GEMEnA Expert Panel Members

Jim Van Erden

Senior Policy Advisor

National Association of State Workforce Agencies/

Information Technology Support Center

Washington, DC

Evelyn Ganzglass

Director of Workforce Development

CLASP

Washington, DC

Parminder Jassal

Executive Director

ACT Foundation

Austin, TX

Morris Kleiner

Professor and Director of Graduate Studies

Humphrey School of Public Affairs

University of Minnesota

Minneapolis, MN

James Parker

Senior Research and Policy Associate

Council for Advancement of Adult Literacy

New York City, NY

Kent Phillippe

Associate Vice President,

Research and Student Success

American Association of Community Colleges

Washington, DC

Kenneth Poole

CEO/President

Center for Regional Economic Competitiveness

Arlington, VA

Andrew Reamer

Research Professor

George Washington Institute of Public Policy

George Washington University

Washington, DC

Jesse Rothstein

Associate Professor of Public Policy and Economics

Richard & Rhoda Goldman School of Public Policy

University of California, Berkeley

Berkeley, CA

Jeff Strohl

Director of Research

Center on Education and the Workforce
14

Georgetown Public Policy Institute

Georgetown University

Washington, DC

Michelle Van Noy

Researcher

Heldrich Center for Workforce Development

Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey

New Brunswick, NJ

Holly Zanville

Senior Research Officer

Lumina Foundation

Indianapolis, IN

A.9 Payments to Respondents

The NHES:2003 included an extensive experiment in the use of small cash incentives to improve unit response. 

The experiment demonstrated that gains in respondent cooperation could be realized with relatively modest cash 

incentives (Brick et al. 2006). Such incentives were used in NHES:2005 and NHES:2007. The NHES:2011 Field 

Test included an incentive experiment at the screener level testing the effect of including a $2 cash incentive on 

response rates compared to a $5 cash incentive in the initial screener mailing. The $5 screener was associated with 

higher response rates than the $2 incentive, so the $5 incentive was used in the NHES:2012. Preliminary results 

from the NHES-FS indicate that the $5 incentive is associated with higher response rates than no incentive. We will 

continue with this approach in the NHES:2015 and use a $5 cash incentive in the first screener questionnaire 

mailing. 

The NHES:2012 included an incentive experiment at the topical level to further refine an optimal strategy for the 

use of incentives in the NHES. For those households in which a child was selected as the subject of an ECPP or PFI 

questionnaire, cases that responded to the first or second mailing of the screener received a $5 cash incentive with 

the initial topical survey mailing. Evidence from the 2011 Field Test indicated that topical response rates could

benefit significantly by providing later screener respondents with a larger topical incentive. To confirm this finding, 

we subsampled late screener respondents (those responding to the 3rd or 4th questionnaire mailing) to receive either 

a $5 or $15 cash incentive with their first topical survey mailing. The results from the NHES:2012 indicate that 

among later screener responders, the $15 incentive was associated with higher response rates compared to the $5 

incentive. Based on these findings, we will use the same strategy in the NHES:2015 and send a $5 cash incentive in 

the initial topical mailing to cases that responded to the first or second screener mailing and a $15 cash incentive in 

the initial topical mailing to any cases that responded later than three days after the third screener mailing.

A.10 Assurance of Confidentiality

Respondents will be informed of the voluntary nature of the survey and of the confidentiality provision in the initial 

cover letter and on the questionnaires, stating that their responses may be used for statistical purposes only and may 

not be disclosed, or used, in identifiable form for any other purpose except as required by law [Education Sciences 

Reform Act of 2002 (ESRA 2002), 20 U.S. Code § 9573].

Additionally, all staff members and subcontractors working on the NHES and having access to the data are required 

to sign the NCES Affidavit of Nondisclosure. Notarized affidavits are kept on file by the contractor and submitted 

to NCES quarterly. In addition, all contractor staff members who have access to confidential data and work on the 

project more than 30 days are required to have a federal background check.

A.11 Sensitive Questions

The NHES is a voluntary survey, and no persons are required to respond to it. In addition, respondents may decline 

to answer any question in the survey. Respondents are informed of the voluntary nature of the survey in the cover 

letter that accompanies the questionnaire, as well as on the actual questionnaire. At the same time, some items in 

the surveys may be considered sensitive by some respondents:

CWS and TWS: The CWS and TWS currently ask a question about income that may be considered sensitive:

 Personal earnings in the past year (categorical).
15

A measure of income is important because educational attainment is statistically associated with income, and the 

empirical properties of the survey measures may differ for people with different income levels. The American 

Community Survey (ACS) was the source for most of the CWS and TWS employment and background items. Item

response rates for income questions were reasonably high in the 2013 pilot test. The item response rate for personal 

earnings was 96.4. 

PFI and ECPP: Child development and education experts consider economic disadvantage and children’s 

disabilities to be important factors in children’s school experiences and their activities outside of school. As a 

result, the child surveys contain measures of these characteristics, including: 

 Household income;

 Receipt of public assistance in the form of Temporary Assistance to Needy Families (TANF), food stamps, 

and the Women, Infants, and Children program (WIC); and

 Children’s disability conditions.

Measures of household income and government assistance are important because access to early childhood

programs by children at-risk and the education involvement of families of children from different socioeconomic 

backgrounds is of interest to policymakers, child development specialists, and educators. These items are important 

in identifying children at-risk and have been administered successfully in previous NHES studies. Respondents are 

also asked the age at which they first became a parent to a child. This may be sensitive for parents in some 

situations.

The 2012 response rates for these items were very high. For total household income, the 2012 PFI survey had an 

item response rate of 95.4 percent. Item response rates for receipt of public assistance were also high: for 

Temporary Assistance to Needy Families, 97.9 percent; for the Women, Infants, and Children Program, 97.7 

percent; and for Food Stamps, 98.4 percent. In the 2012 mail survey, it is not possible to examine item missing data 

for child disability because of the multiple response, list format of the question. Missing data may indicate either 

unreported data or that the child does not have a disability. However, in prior NHES collections, response to this 

item was high; in the 2007 PFI, the item response rates were over 99 percent. In the 2012 PFI, the item response 

rate for age at which the child’s parent first became a parent to any child was 96.2 for the first parent reported and 

96.0 for the second parent reported. 

ECPP Survey: In addition to the items above, the ECPP survey also includes questions about assistance to pay for 

child care. This measure is important to understand families’ and children’s access to early childhood programs.

PFI Survey: The PFI survey includes items concerning children’s school performance and difficulties in school. 

Among these are:

 Children’s school performance and difficulties, including school grades, suspensions, and expulsions; and

 Identification of children’s schools.

Items concerning school performance and difficulty are important to the PFI survey as correlates of parent and 

family involvement in children’s education. These items were asked in the NHES:2012 PFI and item response rates 

for these items were high: 99.0 percent for children’s grades, 97.6 percent for out-of-school suspension, and 97.5 

percent for expulsion.

Another element of the surveys that may be sensitive to some parents is the identification of children’s schools. 

This feature allows analysts to link the NHES data to other NCES datasets containing additional information about 

schools, greatly enhancing the ability to examine the relationships between students’ and families’ experiences and 

the characteristics of schools. The item response rate for the identification of the child’s school was 97.0 percent in 

2012.
16

A.12 Estimated Response Burden

The response burden per instrument and the total response burden are shown in table 1. The administration times 

for the screener, adult questionnaires, and child questionnaires are based on practice administrations and past 

experience. The expected number of respondents and number of responses are based on the expected numbers of 

completed surveys of each type, discussed in section B.1.3. The hourly rate of $21.50 is based on the average for all 

civilian workers from the March 2013 National Compensation Survey 

(http://www.bls.gov/news.release/ecec.t02.htm). There are no other costs to respondents. There are also no 

recordkeeping requirements associated with NHES. For the NHES:2015, a total of 32,240 burden hours are 

anticipated, resulting in a burden cost to respondents of approximately $693,160.

Table 1. Estimated response burden for NHES:2015

Interview forms

Estimated 

time 

(minutes)

Number sampled

Anticipated 

Response 

Rate

Estimated 

Number of 

respondents

Estimated 

Number of 

responses

Total time 

(hours)

Screener 8 200,000* 70% 124,600 124,600 16,613

CWS questionnaire 10 61,882 70% 43,317 43,317 7,220

TWS questionnaire 10 16,000 70% 11,200 11,200 1,867

ECPP questionnaire 20 9,695 75% 7,271 7,271 2,424

PFI questionnaire 20 16,464 75% 12,348 12,348 4,116

Study Total 198,736 198,736 32,240

* Approximately 11% of addresses will be returned by USPS as invalid, reducing the final sample size to 178,000 addresses.

A.13 Cost to Respondents 

There are no costs beyond those presented in section A.11. 

A.14 Cost to the Federal Government

The total cost of NHES:2015 to the government is approximately $7.2 million over a period of 20 months. This 

includes all direct and indirect costs of the design, data collection, analysis, and reporting phases of the study, as 

well as the delivery of data sets to NCES.

A.15 Reasons for Program Changes

The increase in the respondent burden is due to the fact that the last OMB clearance was for NHES 2012 full-scale 

data collection, which included only two topical surveys (ECPP and PFI), while the NHES 2015 full-scale data 

collection in this submittal includes four topical surveys (CWS, TWS, ECPP, and PFI).

A.16 Publication Plans and Project Schedule

Exhibit 2 presents the schedule of project activities for NHES:2015. The NHES:2015 will produce datasets, 

statistics, and reports. The following are the planned outcomes of the NHES:2015:

 A fully documented public-use data set that will be available for download from the NCES website;

 A codebook with weighted and unweighted frequencies of all variables; and

 First Look Reports that highlight key findings from the study.
17

Exhibit 2. NHES:2015 schedule of major activities

Task Date of Scheduled Conduct/Completion

Survey Instruments Formatting and Printing November-December, 2014

Data Collection Begins (advance letter mailing) January 2, 2015

Data Collection Ends August 31, 2015

Public-use data files released August 31, 2016

Restricted-use data files released September 30, 2016

A.17 Approval to Not Display the Expiration Date for OMB Approval

The OMB authorization number and expiration date will be displayed on the questionnaires and web screener.

A.18 Exceptions to the Certification Statement

There are no exceptions to the certification statement.