comparison of methodologies
Table:
methodology 1: one year employment
methodology 2: two-year average employment
methodology 3: three-year average employment
methodology 4: three-year average employment and firm belongs to the size class at least two years out of three
methodology 5: final sample - methodology 4, and medium-sized firms that were previously large are excluded

number

medium-sized firms
65,659
64,885
63,894
61,630
59,397

outcome in post-transition period

remain medium-sized
57,259
53,869
50,876
50,341
48,787

become large
923
1,256
1,499
1,230
1,061

become small
7,251
8,456
9,220
7,638
7,544

go out of business
226
1,304
2,299
2,111
2,005

percent

remain medium-sized
87.2
83.0
79.6
82.1
82.1

become large
1.4
1.9
2.3
2.0
1.8

become small
11.0
13.0
14.4
12.5
12.7

go out of business
0.3
2.0
3.6
3.4
3.4

medium-sized status is observed at least twice in the three years preceding the transition year
88.8
93.4
96.0
100.0
100.0

outcome size class is observed at least twice in the three years following the transition year

become large
80.4
87.9
91.0
100.0
100.0

become small
77.8
90.4
93.3
100.0
100.0

Provide the shortest accurate answer you can to the following question, based only on the table data. Use the JSON format {"answer": ["YOUR ANSWER"]}. When several items apply, list them comma-separated. The table is captioned 'comparison of methodologies'. Relying on the table, answer the following: What was the percentage of firms identified as having become small employed fewer than 100 workers for at least two out of the three post-transition years?

{"answer": ["77.8"]}