Socioeconomic impact of adverse 

childhood experiences in young 

adulthood

Shawn Ratcliff, U.S. Census Bureau 

Keith Finlay, U.S. Census Bureau

Jordan Papp, University of Michigan

Megan Kearns, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention

Cora Peterson, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention

2023 Federal Committee on Statistical Methodology

Hyattsville, MD

October 25, 2023

The findings and conclusions in this report are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the official positions of the Centers for 

Disease Control and Prevention or the Census Bureau. All results were approved for release by the Census Bureau Disclosure Review Board 

(Data Management System number P-7500378 and DRB approval number CBDRB-FY23-0527). 1
What is an adverse childhood experience?

Adverse childhood experiences (ACEs) represent a variety of negative 

events a person is exposed to in childhood (0-17) including:

○ Experiencing abuse/neglect

○ Exposure to familial or community violence

○ Death of an immediate family member

○ Parental substance (ab)use issues 

○ Physical and/or mental disabilities/limitations

○ Parental separation/divorce

○ Parental incarceration

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention estimate that 64% of individuals 

experience at least 1 ACE before turning 18 (Swedo et al. 2023)

2
How and why do ACEs matter?

ACEs have a negative impact on many healthrelated outcomes (Gilbert et al. 2015; Felitti 2009)

○ Some evidence for socio-economic 

outcomes but much more limited (Font and Maguire-Jack 2016; 

Metzler et al. 2017)

Why do ACEs have such a negative impact?

○ Stress disrupts cognitive ability (Yates et al. 2003)

○ Loss of a parent reduces 

resources/supervision (Cookston 1999)

○ Severe maltreatment may have long-term 

mental health consequences (Leeb, Lewis, and Zolotor 2011)

Note: Figure retrieved from CDC Vital Signs Website (https://www.cdc.gov/vitalsigns/aces/index.html)

3
Measuring ACEs: Recall Bias and Accuracy

Research on ACEs frequently relies on survey 

measures

○ Further from an event, more likely to recall it 

inaccurately (Sheikh 2018; Van de Mheen et al. 1997)

Self-reports are subject to recall bias in two 

ways: 

○ Individuals forgetting the event(s) occurred 

(Clark et al. 2010)

○ Current contexts may influence perception 

(Widom et al. 2004; Hardt and Rutter 2004)

ACE Occurrence

Recall

Birth

Death 4
Measuring ACEs: Recall Bias and Accuracy

ACE Occurrence

Recall

Birth

Death 5

Research on ACEs frequently relies on survey 

measures

○ Further from an event, more likely to recall it 

inaccurately (Sheikh 2018; Van de Mheen et al. 1997)

Self-reports are subject to recall bias in two 

ways: 

○ Individuals forgetting the event(s) occurred 

(Clark et al. 2010)

○ Current contexts may influence perception 

(Widom et al. 2004; Hardt and Rutter 2004)
Measuring ACEs: Recall Bias and Accuracy

Research on ACEs frequently relies on survey 

measures

○ Further from an event, more likely to recall it 

inaccurately (Sheikh 2018; Van de Mheen et al. 1997)

Self-reports are subject to recall bias in two 

ways: 

○ Individuals forgetting the event(s) occurred 

(Clark et al. 2010)

○ Current contexts may influence perception 

(Widom et al. 2004; Hardt and Rutter 2004)

ACE Occurrence

Recall

Birth

Death 6
Novelty: ACEs measured in population data

ACEs typically measured as cumulative scale (No ACEs, 1 ACE, 2 ACEs, etc.) 

○ Scales limit ability to make specific intervention recommendations (Reidy et al. 2021)

Administrative data limits recall & sensitivity bias (Patten et al. 2015; Colman et al. 2016)

○ Studies generally rely on self-reported, retrospective measures (Breton et al. 2022; Danese 2020)

○ Administrative data has been done but very limited in scope (Currie and Tekin 2012)

Larger sample size increases national representability and examination of rare 

outcomes (e.g., teen birth)

○ Measures are temporally ordered 

○ Capture ACEs during childhood (0-17) and outcomes in young adulthood (18-22)

7
Data linkages

The U.S. Census Bureau has assigned 

protected identification keys (PIKs) to many 

files available within their data infrastructure 

(Wagner and Lane 2014)

● PIKs allow linkage of individuals across time and space

The Census Household Composition Key 

(CHCK) allows us to identify legal/biological 

parents identified on SS-5 applications (Genadek, Sanders, 

and Stevension 2022)

● Parent had to be on SS-5 application and resided with 

the child

8
Data linkages

The U.S. Census Bureau has assigned 

protected identification keys (PIKs) to many 

files available within their data infrastructure 

(Wagner and Lane 2014)

● PIKs allow linkage of individuals across time and space

The Census Household Composition Key 

(CHCK) allows us to identify legal/biological 

parents identified on SS-5 applications (Genadek, Sanders, 

and Stevension 2022)

● Parent had to be on SS-5 application and resided with 

the child

9
Sample Construction

Cens us Hous ehold 

Compos ition Key (CHCK)

Relations hip Cros s walk

NUMIDENT - Place of 

Birth (NC, ND, MI, MD)

CJ ARS (Parent Info)

CJ ARS 

(Child Info)

HUD (Housing 

Assistance)

CHCK 

(Teen Birth)

W2 Filings 

(Employed)

Medicaid 

Receipt

ACS

Other Parental 

Meas ures

n=930,000

n=930,000

n=930,000

n=930,000

n=570,000

n=23,000

Administrative File

Medicaid File

Survey

LEGEND

All results were approved for release by the Census Bureau Disclosure Review Board (Data Management System number P-7500378 and DRB approval number CBDRB-FY23-0527).

10
Sample Construction

Cens us Hous ehold 

Compos ition Key (CHCK)

Relations hip Cros s walk

NUMIDENT - Place of 

Birth (NC, ND, MI, MD)

CJ ARS (Parent Info)

CJ ARS 

(Child Info)

HUD (Housing 

Assistance)

CHCK (Teen 

Birth)

W2 Filings 

(Employed)

Medicaid 

Receipt

ACS

Other Parental 

Meas ures

Parental Dis ability 

(2000 SEDF)

CJ ARS 

(Child Info)

HUD (Housing 

Assistance)

CHCK 

(Teen Birth)

W2 Filings 

(Employed)

Medicaid 

Receipt

ACS

n=930,000

n=930,000

n=930,000

n=930,000

n=107,000

n=107,000

n=107,000

n=107,000

n=570,000 n=63,500

n=23,000 n=3,400

Administrative File

Medicaid File

Survey

LEGEND

All results were approved for release by the Census Bureau Disclosure Review Board (Data Management System number P-7500378 and DRB approval number CBDRB-FY23-0527).

11
Sample Representation

Our sample captures ~75% of all births

○ Compared to NUMIDENT birth records

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

0

100,000

200,000

300,000

400,000

500,000

600,000

700,000

MD MI NC ND

% Births Captured

# of Births

Total Births (NUMIDENT) Our Sample % Captured

All results were approved for release by the Census Bureau Disclosure Review Board (Data Management System number P-7500378 and DRB approval number CBDRB-FY23-0527).

12
Sample Representation

Our sample captures ~75% of all births

○ Compared to NUMIDENT birth records

Our sample reflects the demographic 

make-up of the 18-22 population

○ 2021 ACS=Full Population

○ Our Sample=Four States

0.00 0.10 0.20 0.30 0.40 0.50 0.60 0.70 0.80

White

Black

AIAN

Asian/NHPI

Other

Multiracial

Hispanic

Male

Female

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

Race/Ethnicity Sex Year of Birth

Our Sample 2021 ACS

All results were approved for release by the Census Bureau Disclosure Review Board (Data Management System number P-7500378 and DRB approval number CBDRB-FY23-0527).

13
Focal Adverse Childhood Experiences (ACEs)

ACE Proportion Operationalization 

Parental Death If a parent died while still residing with the child 

Parental Separation (One) Parent left the home (not death or incarcerated) 

Parental Incarceration (At least one) Parent became incarcerated while residing with the 

child 

Parent Charged, IPV Parent was charged with a crime classified as intimate partner 

violence

Parent Charged, SA Parent was charged with a crime classified as child molestation

Parent Charged, CA Parent was charged with a crime classified as child abuse

Parent Charged, SU Parent was charged with a crime classified as drug or alcohol 

use/possession

Parental Disability (At least one) Parent reported they had a physical, cognitive, or 

behavioral disability [2000 SEDF]

Note: IPV=Intimate Partner Violence, SA=Sexual Abuse, CA=Child Abuse (Physical, Emotional), SU=Substance Use

All results were approved for release by the Census Bureau Disclosure Review Board (Data Management System number P-7500378 and DRB approval number CBDRB-FY23-0527).

0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3

14
Focal Outcomes (Young Adulthood)

Outcome Proportion Operationalization 

Criminal Justice Contact Charged with a felony crime

Housing Assistance Receipt Received federal housing assistance 

Teen Birth Had a child between 13 and 19

Employment W-2 filed by employer 

Medicaid Receipt Received (at least one day of) Medicaid 

Poverty Lived in a household that fell below the federal 

poverty line

School Enrollment Reported having their high school diploma

Not in Employment or 

Education (NEE) Was not employed nor enrolled in school

All results were approved for release by the Census Bureau Disclosure Review Board (Data Management System number P-7500378 and DRB approval number CBDRB-FY23-0527).

0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8

15
ACEs Increase CJ Contact in Young Adulthood

Nearly every ACE increases odds an 

individual is charged with a crime

Biggest effect observed for: 

○ Parental Separation 

○ Parent Incarceration 

○ Parent Charged, IPV

○ Parent Charged, SU

All results were approved for release by the Census Bureau Disclosure Review Board (Data Management System number P-7500378 and DRB approval number CBDRB-FY23-0527).

16
ACEs Impact Social Safety Program Usage

Biggest positive effects observed for: 

○ Parental Separation 

○ Parent Charged, IPV

○ Parent Charged, Substance Use 

Parental death has differential effects

This may be partially explained by age 

(18-22) and still residing with one’s 

parents

○ Same is true for poverty

All results were approved for release by the Census Bureau Disclosure Review Board (Data Management System number P-7500378 and DRB approval number CBDRB-FY23-0527).

17
Employed but Not in School

Exposure to ACEs has little to no effect on 

employment

ACEs reduce being enrolled in school 

during prime college years (18-22)

Early employment at the cost of longer- term career returns on education? 

○ This requires follow-up as this 

population comes to prime working 

age (25 and older)

All results were approved for release by the Census Bureau Disclosure Review Board (Data Management System number P-7500378 and DRB approval number CBDRB-FY23-0527).

18
Source of Data Matters

Our measures of ACEs are generally lower than 

survey self-reports

○ Parental separation and incarceration are the 

most similar

○ Differences likely a confluence of issues and 

limitations

Likely that the “true” number falls between 

○ Recall of ACEs may be shaped by current 

contexts and timing sense event

○ Felony charges reflect ACEs that were charged 

and prosecuatable

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

Physical Abuse Sexual Abuse IPV Substance use Parental

Separation

Parental

Incarceration

% 

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

0 1 2 or 3 4 or more

%

Number of ACEs Experienced

Our Estimates 2011-2020 BRFSS

All results were approved for release by the Census Bureau Disclosure Review Board (Data Management System number P-7500378 and DRB approval number CBDRB-FY23-0527).

19
The Impact and Mechanisms of ACEs

Experiencing ACEs at any point in childhood has 

impacts 

○ In nearly every case, ACEs decrease socio-economic 

outcomes 

○ Future work to disentangle if when the ACE occurs in 

childhood matters (Dube et al. 2001; Schalinksi et al. 2016)

Being charged with a (felony) crime has ramification on 

one’s finances and earning potential (e.g., court costs)

○ Creates barriers for the parent to provide to the child 

(Murray, Farrington, and Sekol 2012; Pager 2003)

■ Can also remove time with and supervision of the child 

that span days/weeks/months

20
The Impact and Mechanisms of ACEs

Experiencing ACEs at any point in childhood has 

impacts 

○ In nearly every case, ACEs decrease socio-economic 

outcomes 

○ Future work to disentangle if when the ACE occurs in 

childhood matters (Dube et al. 2001; Schalinksi et al. 2016)

Being charged with a (felony) crime has ramification on 

one’s finances and earning potential (e.g., court costs)

○ Creates barriers for the parent to provide to the child 

(Murray, Farrington, and Sekol 2012; Pager 2003)

■ Can also remove time with and supervision of the child 

that span days/weeks/months

21
Specific ACEs Have Larger Impacts Than Others

IPV and parental separation have a large impact on young adult socio- economic outcomes

○ IPV may increase instability within the household (e.g., new partners, family 

members) (Pavao et al. 2007; Adams et al. 2021)

○ Parental separation may also reduce supervision and financial resources (Robertson 2016; 

Antecol and Bedard 2007)

Substance use may also capture a mix of household dysfunction and 

financial limitations

○ The cost of substances may limit/reduce the financial resources allocated 

towards the child (Mullahy and Sindelar 1993; Farrell, Manning, and Finch 2003)

○ Substance (ab)use may co-occur with neglect and parental absence – even if 

informally (i.e., parent in home but not available)

22
Major Takeaways

Measuring ACEs with administrative data often reflects more serious cases

○ Cons: Only reflects serious cases which are much lower in their occurrence 

compared to survey estimates 

○ Pros: Removes any potential recall or sensitivity bias in responses and allows for 

larger, more diverse samples

ACEs exposure has little effect on employment but reduces school enrollment 

between 18-22

○ What does it mean to be working but not in school during prime college age? Likely 

limits overall earning potential over the life course 

ACEs have negative consequences in young adulthood outcomes 

○ Large effects observed for IPV and parental separation likely via household 

dysfunction

23
Questions?

24
Parental Separation Negatively Impacts YA Outcomes

A child experiencing a parent exiting the 

household negatively impacts socio- economic outcomes

A parent exiting the home frequently 

reduces supervision and access to 

additional resources

Although parental separation increases 

employment, may be because the 

individual must enter the work force 

earlier rather than pursuing higher 

education

All results were approved for release by the Census Bureau Disclosure Review Board (Data Management System number P-7500378 and DRB approval number CBDRB-FY23-0527).

26
Type of Crime Parent Arrested for Matters

Generally, a parent being found 

guilty of a crime has a negative 

impact on YA outcomes

While effect size varies due to rarity 

of some outcomes (e.g., teen birth), 

two ACEs have a consistently larger 

effects: 

○ Intimate Partner Violence 

○ Substance (Ab)Use

All results were approved for release by the Census Bureau Disclosure Review Board (Data Management System number P-7500378 and DRB approval number CBDRB-FY23-0527).

27
Additional Controls/Confounders

Control Operationalization Data Source(s)

Race White (ref.), Black, AIAN, Asian/NHPI, Other, Multiracial Census Best Race File

Ethnicity Hispanic, Not Hispanic/Latino (ref.) Census Best Race File

Sex Male (ref.), Female Numident

Year of Birth 1999 (ref.), 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003 Numident

State of Birth Maryland (ref.), Michigan, North Carolina, North Dakota Numident 

Household Type Dual Parent (ref.), Single Mom, Single Dad CHCK

Parental Income Highest income of a parent in 2000 CHCK, IRS 1040 Filings

Parental Poverty Whether (at least) one parent was in poverty in 2000 CHCK, 2000 Census

Parental HS Diploma Whether (at least) one parent had a HS diploma in 2000 CHCK, 2000 Census

Parental Citizenship Whether (at least) one parent was not a citizen in 2000 CHCK, 2000 Census

Ref=Reference Category in regressions, AIAN=American Indian or Alaska Native, HS=High School, CHCK=Census Household Composition Key

All results were approved for release by the Census Bureau Disclosure Review Board (Data Management System number P-7500378 and DRB approval number CBDRB-FY23-0527).

28