Search results

The 2021-2022 Study of Family and Staff Well-Being in Head Start FACES Programs (2021-2022 study), builds on the Head Start Family and Child Experiences Survey (FACES), which has been a source of national information about Head Start programs and participants since 1997. The motivation and goals of the Study of Family and Staff Well-Being in Head Start Family and Child Experiences Survey Programs (the 2021-2022 study) came from a need that arose as the COVID-19 pandemic continued into another year of affecting Head Start families' and staff's lives.

The 2021-2022 study included two components. Firstly, the Program, Staff, and Family Study, was conducted in 60 programs, and included the collection of parent surveys and Teacher Child Reports (TCRs) in fall 2021 and spring 2022, as well as a teacher survey in fall 2021. Secondly, the Program and Staff Study, conducted in the 60 programs participating in the Program, Staff, and Family Study plus an additional 120 programs, included the collection of program director, center director, and teacher surveys in spring 2022.

The 2021-2022 study aimed to describe the national population of Head Start programs, centers, teachers, classrooms, and children during the 2021-2022 program year. However, the Data Producers were unable to fully meet this goal because of challenges related to the COVID-19 pandemic. A nationally representative sample of Head Start programs was selected. However, fewer of the programs participated than expected. Probability samples of centers, teachers, and children within the participating programs were selected. Weights are available for analysis to account for the probability that children and their teachers, centers, and programs were selected for the study. This lessens the risk of bias due to study non-participation and survey nonresponse; and provide results that represent, to the extent possible, all programs, centers, teachers, classrooms, and children in Head Start. The responding sample may not fully represent the population due to higher-than-expected non-response that may not have been adequately addressed with weighting adjustments.

Despite these limitations, the 2021-2022 study sample design supports many analyses for programs and teachers, as well as children. The data from the programs in the Program, Staff, and Family Study can address questions about the children and parents who participate in the program, including about children's development across one year in the Head Start program for both newly entering children and those returning for a second year. The study also supports research questions related to subgroups of interest, such as families with low income and specific racial/ethnic groups, as well as policy issues that emerge during the study. In addition, the research questions investigate the characteristics of Head Start programs, centers, and teachers, and the classrooms they teach. Users can use the same data to answer questions about the relationships between program and classroom characteristics and child and family well-being. The data from the larger sample of programs in the Program and Staff Study are most useful for answering questions about Head Start programs, classrooms, teachers, and program and center directors.

The Annual Health Survey (AHS), conducted by the Government of India between July 2010 and May 2013, investigates maternal and child health in nine states: Assam, Bihar, Chhattisgarh, Jharkhand, Madhya Pradesh, Orissa, Rajasthan, Uttarakhand, and Uttar Pradesh. These states constitute about 70 percent of neonatal deaths in India and about one-in-five neonatal deaths globally. The AHS consists of a three-round panel that interviewed over 4 million households in each round, as well as a one-time Clinical, Anthropometric, and Bio-Chemical Survey (CAB). The data were originally released to the public in 2015 as a set of 45 .csv files. The .csv files are included in a restricted-use zipped package as part of the ICPSR release (see dataset 21).

The survey focused on topics such as household composition, caste, fertility, family planning, pre- and post-natal care, breastfeeding, infant mortality, illness, disease, disability, and health care practices. Demographic information includes sex, age, education, occupation, marital status, household size, and religion. The CAB files contain biometric data including but not limited to height, weight, blood pressure, hemoglobin, pulse, and blood glucose.

Potential data users should note that the public-use and restricted-use versions of the datasets are the same except for the masking of day component variables for certain dates in the public-use versions of the files (please see the Description of Variables section for full details). Therefore, only researchers with a limited set of research questions that require full birth, marriage, and death dates will need to apply for the restricted-use versions of the data files.

Additionally, because the final data files are very large and potentially very time consuming to analyze on personal computers, researchers have the option to download ten-percent samples of each file (see datasets 3, 4, 7, 8, 11, 12, 15, 16, 19, and 20). These samples contain the same variables as the original files but only ten percent of the records. The samples were determined by taking a randomly selected ten percent of households in each district. P.I. codebooks were not produced for these samples. Please note that the ten-percent samples for each dataset were selected independently, so it is not advised to merge across datasets within the AHS using these samples, as the match rates will be very low.

The overall goal of the Baby's First Years study is to assess the causal role played by household income in affecting children's early cognitive, socio-emotional, and brain development. Recent advances in developmental neuroscience suggest that experiences early in life have profound and enduring impacts on the developing brain. Family economic resources shape the nature of many of these experiences, yet the extent to which they affect children's development is unknown. The Baby's First Years project is the first randomized controlled trial to provide estimates of the causal impacts of unconditional cash gifts on the cognitive, socio-emotional, and brain development of infants and young children in low-income U.S. families.

Specifically, 1,000 recruited mothers of infants with incomes below the federal poverty line from four diverse U.S. communities are receiving monthly cash gift payments by debit card. Mothers were initially told the gifts would last for the first 40 months of their child's life, but we have secured funding to continue the payments for three additional years (i.e., for a total of 76 months). Parents in the high cash gift group (n=400 in the study sample) are receiving a cash gift of $333 per month ($4,000 per year), while parents in the low cash gift group (n=600) are receiving a nominal monthly gift payment of $20 ($240 per year), also for 76 months.

In order to measure the impacts of the unconditional cash gift income on children's cognitive and behavioral development, we are assessing high and low cash gift group differences at ages 4, 6, and 8 (and, for a subset of measures, we capture interim development at ages 1, 2, and 3) in measures of cognitive, language, memory, self-regulation, and socio-emotional development. In order to understand the processes by which child impacts emerge, we are measuring a host of family process measures summarized in our pre-registration chart. Our data collection points are referred to as: "baseline", "age 1", "age 2," "age 3", "age 4", "age 6", and "age 8".

Additional information on the project, survey design, sample, variables, and COVID-19 pandemic adjustments are available from:

• The User Guides for Baseline, Age 1, Age 2, Age 3, and Age 4, which are included under the "Data and Documentation" tab
• The project's website: babysfirstyears.com

The researchers request that all peer-reviewed papers using BFY Data:

• be submitted to PubMed https://publicaccess.nih.gov immediately upon acceptance for publication
• include the following citation to the data in their bibliography:

Citation

Magnuson, Katherine A., Kimberly Noble, Greg J. Duncan, Nathan A. Fox, Lisa A. Gennetian, Hirokazu Yoshikawa, and Sarah Halpern-Meekin. Baby's First Years (BFY), New York City, New Orleans, Omaha, and Twin Cities, 2018-2023. ICPSR37871-v8. Ann Arbor, MI: Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research [distributor], YYYY-MM-DD. http://doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR37871.v8

• and include the following in their acknowledgements:

Acknowledgement

This research uses data from the Baby's First Years study. Research reported in this publication was supported by the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development of the National Institutes of Health under Award Number R01HD087384 and 2R01HD087384. The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the National Institutes of Health. This research was additionally supported by the US Department of Health and Human Services, Administration for Children and Families, Office of Planning, Research and Evaluation; Office of Behavioral and Social Sciences Research-Office of the Director, National Institutes of Health; Andrew and Julie Klingenstein Family Fund; Annie E. Casey Foundation; Arnold Ventures; Arrow Impact; BCBS of Louisiana Foundation; Bezos Family Foundation, Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation; Bill Hammack and Janice Parmelee, Brady Education Fund; Chan Zuckerberg Initiative (Silicon Valley Community Foundation); Charles and Lynn Schusterman Family Philanthropies; Child Welfare Fund; Esther A. and Joseph Klingenstein Fund; Ford Foundation; Greater New Orleans Foundation; Heising-Simons Foundation; Holland Foundation; Jacobs Foundation; JPB Foundation; J-PAL North America; Lozier Foundation; New York City Mayor's Office for Economic Opportunity; Perigee Fund; Robin Hood Foundation; Robert Wood Johnson Foundation; Russell Sage Foundation; Sherwood Foundation; Valhalla Foundation; Weitz Family Foundation; W.K. Kellogg Foundation; and three anonymous donors.

Principal Investigators

Katherine Magnuson, PhD; University of Wisconsin-Madison, lead PI social and behavioral science

Kimberly Noble, MD, PhD; Teachers College, Columbia University, lead PI neuroscience

In alphabetical order:

Greg Duncan, PhD; University of California, Irvine

Nathan A. Fox, PhD; University of Maryland

Lisa A. Gennetian, PhD; Duke University Sanford School of Public Policy

Hirokazu Yoshikawa, PhD; New York University

Principal Investigators of Qualitative Substudy

Sarah Halpern-Meekin, PhD; University of Wisconsin-Madison

Katherine Magnuson, PhD; University of Wisconsin-Madison

Study Management

Lauren Meyer, Teachers College, Columbia University; National Project Director

Andrea Karsh, University of California, Irvine; Administrative Director

Matthew Maury, Duke University, Production and Retention Management

Study Co-Investigators

Sarah Black, PhD; University of New Orleans

William Fifer, PhD; Sackler Institute for Developmental Psychobiology, Columbia University Medical Center

Michael Georgieff, MD; University of Minnesota

Joseph Isler, PhD; Columbia University Medical Center

Debra Karhson, PhD; University of New Orleans

Alicia Kunin-Batson, PhD, University of Minnesota

Connie Lamm, PhD; University of Arkansas

Dennis Molfese, PhD; University of Nebraska, Lincoln

Victoria Molfese, PhD; University of Nebraska, Lincoln

Jennifer Mize Nelson, PhD; University of Nebraska, Lincoln

Timothy Nelson, PhD; University of Nebraska, Lincoln

Sonya Troller-Renfree, PhD; Teachers College, Columbia University

Study Data Collectors

The Survey Research Center, Institute for Social Research, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, is responsible for recruitment and baseline, age-1, age-2, and age-3 data collection waves. Starting at age-4 through age-8, SRC is responsible for tracking families and assisting site-based staff in locating families. SRC data collection operations are overseen by: Stephanie Chardoul, Director of Survey Research Operations and Piotr Dworak, Senior Survey Specialist, Survey Research Operations.

Contact

To contact the study investigators, email them at [email protected]

Website: babysfirstyears.com

The Chitwan Valley [Nepal] Family Study: Labor Outmigration, Agricultural Productivity and Food Security is a three year project with the aim to investigate the consequences of labor outmigration on agricultural productivity in a poor agricultural country persistently facing food security problems. A Data Guide for this study is available as a web page and for download.

This project's data collection is made up of twenty-five datasets:

Datasets 1-6: The Household Agriculture and Migration Survey includes information on household agricultural practices and remittances received by the household. Face-to-face interviews were conducted to collect data from household members who previously participated in the Chitwan Valley Family Study (ICPSR 4538).

Topics of the survey include crop production and farm technology use, wealth, assets, income, consumption, food security and information about each household member currently away from home. The survey also collected information on gender, ethnicity, and age.

Datasets 7-16: Measured yields of major crops grown by farm households that previously participated in the Chitwan Valley Family Study (ICPSR 4538).

Dataset 17: A monthly demographic event registry administered to all households that previously participated in the Chitwan Valley Family Study (ICPSR 4538).

Datasets 18-23: The Women's Time Use Survey was designed and administered to married, Nepalese women to collect information on changes in their time and involvement in agriculture and other activities. Face-to-face interviews and telephone interviews were conducted to collect data from women who previously participated in the Chitwan Valley Family Study (ICPSR 4538).

The collection covered a range of topics including farm work, hygiene, finances, health, and religion. Further, respondents were queried concerning socialization and assisting children and the elderly.

Datasets 24-25: The Women's Time Use Survey was designed and administered to married, Nepalese women to collect information on changes in their time and involvement in agriculture and other activities. Face-to-face interviews and telephone interviews were conducted to collect data from women who previously participated in the Chitwan Valley Family Study (ICPSR 4538).

Dating It Safe is a longitudinal cohort study of 1,042 youth in southeast Texas. Primarily freshmen high school students were recruited and assessed in the spring of 2010. Follow-up waves were collected annually each spring from 2011 through 2017 (Waves 2-8). The primary aims of this research study were to examine the:

• longitudinal association between the three different forms of teen dating violence (TDV; i.e., physical violence, psychological abuse, and sexual aggression), and
• risk and protective factors of TDV perpetration and victimization.

Exposure to traumatic events is a common experience for children and adolescents. Accurate early assessment of acute stress responses can help predict risk for longer term sequelae and can guide secondary prevention to reduce the incidence and severity of post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) after trauma exposure.

The goal of this project was to develop a practical self-report measure of acute stress disorder (ASD) for children and adolescents, and to provide initial evidence as to its reliability and validity. The specific aims of the project were to:

• Aim 1: Establish the content validity of a pilot Child ASD measure for ages 8 to 17, based on expert review and youth feedback.
• Aim 2: In a sample of recently injured children (n=176), assess the psychometric properties of the measure: internal consistency, test-retest reliability, convergent and discriminant validity with other measures and other reporters.
• Aim 3: Provide initial data regarding the predictive validity of the Child ASD measure in relation to later PTSD development in the same sample of children.

Children and youth, aged 8 - 18 years, were invited to participate in this study after being treated in an emergency department (ED) for an injury resulting from interpersonal community violence. Each invited youth also had to have been living within specified postal codes (urban areas surrounding the hospital). Following the youth's baseline assessment (T1), participants completed between 0 and 4 follow-up assessments. The timing of each follow-up assessment was scheduled according to the relative time since the index (violent injury) event occurred. The average follow-up assessment was conducted at 27 days (T3), 75 days (T5), 199 days (T7), and 467 days (T10).

After pediatric injury, posttraumatic stress and other emotional outcomes in children and their parents often go unrecognized and untreated. This is due in part to the challenges in identifying at-risk children and their parents in the emergency care setting. The aims of this study were to assess the extent to which nurses were able to implement a brief screener for posttraumatic stress symptoms risk within the course of normal care of injured patients, and to assess posttraumatic stress and depression symptoms in injured children (aged 8-17 years) and their parents after emergency department care, and the relationship of these symptoms to parent-reported overall recovery.

The objectives of the current study were to describe child post-traumatic stress (PTS), coping behavior, and parent coping assistance following a child's injury. The study enrolled children age 8 to 17 treated at the emergency department or admitted to the hospital for unintentional injury, and one parent per child. Children and parents completed measures of child PTS, coping, and coping assistance at 2 weeks post-injury and 3 months post-injury. The research team addressed these questions:

1. What types of coping do children use following an injury?
2. Is parent coping assistance related to child coping behavior?
3. Are child coping strategies associated with PTS symptoms?
4. Is early parent coping assistance related to later development of child PTS symptoms?

This study was originally conceived as a prospective randomized trial to evaluate the efficacy of secondary prevention messages conveyed in printed informational materials (handouts and workbooks) for children and parents after pediatric injury. Children and their parents received 1 of 5 randomly assigned workbook sections (each addressing a different key theme). No differences were observed between groups for parent/child knowledge and beliefs about PTS and adaptive coping, nor in child PTS symptoms. Thus, data from all groups have been combined for analyses of prospective PTS outcomes and coping processes.

Because the emergency department (ED) is often the only point of contact with the health care system for violently injured adolescents, it provides a unique opportunity to assess children following a violent injury. In violently injured teens, depressive and acute posttraumatic stress symptoms may help predict future behavioral risk factors and reinjury. The objective of this study was to examine whether emergency department (ED) assessments of depressive and posttraumatic stress symptoms after an episode of interpersonal violence are associated with future risk behaviors, re-injury and posttraumatic stress symptoms in adolescents.

Injured adolescents (age 12-17 years) were assessed for posttraumatic stress and depression symptoms and self-reported risk behaviors either during or soon after (within 2 weeks) an ED visit and completed a telephone follow-up assessment between 6 and 18 months later, during which they were assessed again for self-reported risk behaviors, posttraumatic stress symptoms and re-injury.

Trajectory modeling can identify patterns of posttraumatic stress symptoms in children and parents. This study aimed to describe trajectories of child and parent posttraumatic stress symptoms across 2 years post-injury, and to examine potential risk factors predicting problematic trajectories. The study enrolled children age 7 to 16 admitted to general or intensive care units for treatment of accidental injury, and one parent/caregiver per child. Within 2 weeks of injury, and at 4-6 weeks, 6 months, and (a subset) at 2 years post-injury, children and parents were assessed for posttraumatic stress symptoms. Parents also completed measures of parenting behavior and pre-injury child mental health.

This study prospectively assessed psychological and cognitive sequelae of traumatic brain injury (TBI) in children. Multiple factors may influence children's functioning following head injury including injury severity, pre-injury child factors, and family factors. Overall study aims were to describe the relationships between these factors and children's recovery in the eighteen months following their injury, to examine the relationship between children's cognitive impairments post injury and psychological distress related to the injury event, and to examine the role of PTSD in children's recovery from TBI.

The study enrolled children age 6 to 15 admitted to hospital after an accident resulting in mild to severe TBI, and one parent per child. Children and parents completed research assessments within 2 months of the accident, and at 3, 6, 12, and 18 months post-accident. Child health and behavior, health-related quality of life, parenting, and parent posttraumatic stress were assessed at all time points, and child posttraumatic stress symptoms were assessed at 3, 6, 12, and 18 months.

The broad aims of this overall project were to examine predictors of children's adjustment, mainly post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), after a single-incident injury. The overarching hypothesis was that a combination of physiological/biological, cognitive, and parental anxiety factors would predict children's later adjustment. The dataset in this collection comes from the combination of two broad projects that recruited from the same hospitals, with the first (smaller) project being built upon by the second project (which contained additional measures and an additional follow-up).

Children and adolescents aged 7 to 17 and their families (n=135) were recruited for the study after presentation to either of two major metropolitan Australian hospitals following a single-incident injury. Children's heart rate was recorded at hospital triage. Children and parents completed risk screening measures within 4 weeks of injury. Measures for cognitive appraisals, social support, traumatic stress, depression, and anxiety symptoms were assessed at 3 months and 6 months post-injury.

The aims of this study were to describe the course of posttraumatic stress responses in children after exposure to a hurricane and to examine potential predictors of child outcomes.

Three months after a major hurricane, the study enrolled students in grades three to five (age 7 to 12) in local schools. At the initial (3 month) assessment, children reported on specific hurricane-related trauma exposures, posttraumatic stress and anxiety symptoms, coping, and social support; at 7 months and 10 months post-hurricane, children reported on posttraumatic stress, anxiety, and coping.

This study enrolled children ages 7 to 15 who received medical care at the hospital after an acute traffic accident or burn injury, and up to two parents/caregivers per child. Within 1 month of injury, and at 3 months, and 6 months post-injury, children and parents were assessed for posttraumatic stress symptoms (PTSS) and depression. Parents also completed measures of their own anxiety symptoms and of child behavior and health-related quality of life. The study aimed to achieve a better understanding of dysfunctional trauma-related cognitions considering child and environmental factors in a cross-sectional and a longitudinal design.

The overall objective of this study was to examine trajectories and predictors of posttraumatic stress and depression in children and parents after a major hurricane, with a particular focus on hurricane exposure and on parenting variables that might be amenable to intervention.

Three months after the hurricane, the study enrolled students in grades four through eight (age 8 to 16) in local schools and invited parent participation, and conducted assessments at four time points post-hurricane. Children reported on prior violence exposure and hurricane-related trauma exposure, and on posttraumatic stress, coping, social support; and parents reported on child behavior as well as their own posttraumatic stress and other mental health symptoms, coping, and parenting practices. (Note: The current dataset does not include measures of parenting practices.)

Millions of children suffer unintentional injuries annually. While the majority display transient psychological distress, a significant minority develop significant, persistent symptoms of posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) that are associated with poorer general health outcomes and impaired quality of life. Understanding variables that contribute to the development of PTSD is an essential step in identifying children at increased risk for PTSD and improving secondary prevention to reduce the incidence of PTSD in children following medical events.

The objective of this study was to examine the interplay of biological, psychological (cognitive appraisals, coping), and environmental (parent influence) factors during the peri-trauma time period as these relate to the development of child PTSD symptoms over time.

Children age 8-13 with a recent injury (within the past 2 weeks) and one parent / caregiver per child were enrolled during an inpatient hospitalization. At the time of enrollment, and again 6 weeks and 12 weeks post-injury, children and parents completed measures of cognitive appraisals, coping, coping assistance, and PTSD symptoms. A brief parent-child interaction task was completed at the time of the baseline assessment - data from this task-based assessment are not included in this dataset.

The Head Start Family and Child Experiences Survey (FACES) has been a source of information on the Head Start program and the children and families it serves. The 2019 Head Start Family and Child Experiences Survey, or FACES 2019, is the seventh in a series of national studies of Head Start, with earlier studies conducted in 1997, 2000, 2003, 2006, 2009, and 2014. It includes nationally representative samples of Head Start programs and centers, classrooms, and children and their families during the 2019-2020 program year. Data from surveys of Head Start program and center directors and classroom teachers provide descriptive information about program policies and practices, classroom activities, and the background of Head Start staff. These data compromise the Classroom Study. A sample of these programs also provides data from parent surveys, teacher child reports, and direct child assessments as part of the Classroom + Child Outcomes Study. FACES 2019 is designed to help policymakers address current policy questions and to support programs and practitioners working with Head Start families.

According to the study design, FACES would have assessed children's readiness for school, surveyed parents, and asked teachers to provide information on children in both fall 2019 and spring 2020. In response to the COVID-19 (for coronavirus disease 2019) pandemic, however, FACES 2019 cancelled the first piece--the in-person data collection of child assessments in spring 2020. In-person classroom observations as part of the Classroom Study were also cancelled in spring 2020.

FACES is designed so that researchers can answer a wide range of research questions that are crucial for aiding program directors and policymakers. FACES 2019 data may be used to describe (1) the quality and characteristics of Head Start programs, teachers, and classrooms; (2) the changes or trends in the quality and characteristics of the classrooms, programs, and staff over time; (3) the school readiness skills and family characteristics of the children who participate in Head Start; (4) the factors or characteristics that predict differences in classroom quality; (5) the changes or trends in the children's outcomes and family characteristics over time; and (6) the factors or characteristics at multiple levels that predict differences in the children's outcomes. The study also supports research questions related to subgroups of interest, such as children with identified disabilities and children who are dual-language learners (DLLs), as well as policy issues that emerge during the study. The study addresses changes in children's outcomes and experiences as well as changes in the characteristics of Head Start classrooms over time and across the rounds of FACES. Some of the questions that are central to FACES include:

1. What are the characteristics of Head Start programs, including structural characteristics and program policies and practices?
2. What are the characteristics and observed quality of Head Start classrooms?
3. What are the characteristics and qualifications of Head Start teachers and management staff?
4. Are the characteristics of programs, classrooms, and staff changing over time?
5. What are the demographic characteristics and home environments of children and families who participate in Head Start?
6. Are family demographic characteristics and aspects of home environments changing over time?
7. How do families make early care and education decisions?
8. What are the experiences of families and children in Head Start?
9. What are the average school readiness skills and developmental outcomes of the population of Head Start children in fall and spring of the Head Start year?
10. What gains do children make during a year of Head Start?
11. Are children's school readiness skills (average skills or average gains in skills) improving over time?
12. Does classroom quality vary by characteristics of classrooms, teachers, or programs?
13. What characteristics of programs, teachers, or classrooms are associated with aspects of classroom quality?
14. Do the school readiness skills of children in fall and spring and their gains in skills vary by child, family, program, and classroom characteristics?
15. What is the association between observed classroom quality and children's school readiness skills? Between child and family characteristics and children's school readiness skills?

The User Guide provides detailed information about the FACES 2019 study design, execution, and data to inform and assist researchers who may be interested in using the data for future analyses. The following items are provided in the User Guide as appendices.

• Appendix A. Elements of the FACES Design and Key Instruments Used (and Child Outcomes Captured): FACES 1997-FACES 2019
• Appendix B. Copyright Permissions
• Appendix C. Instrument Content Matrices
• Appendix D. Instruments
• Appendix E. Spring 2020 Center/Program Codebook
• Appendix F. Spring 2020 Classroom/Teacher Codebook
• Appendix G. Fall 2019-Spring 2020 Child Codebook
• Appendix H. Descriptions of Composite Variables

The Head Start Family and Child Experiences Survey (FACES) is an ongoing national longitudinal study of the cognitive, social, emotional, and physical development of Head Start children. It examines the characteristics, well-being, and accomplishments of families, the observed quality of Head Start classrooms, and the characteristics and opinions of Head Start teachers and other program staff. FACES was designed to address four central questions related to program performance objectives:

1. Does Head Start enhance children's development and school readiness?
2. Does Head Start strengthen families as the primary nurturers of their children?
3. Does Head Start provide children with high quality educational, health, and nutritional services?
4. How is classroom quality related to child outcomes?

The FACES 1997 Cohort involved a nationally representative sample of children and families in Head Start programs in the United States who were studied at entry into the program in the fall of 1997, assessed in the spring at the completion of one or two years of Head Start, and followed up in the spring of the kindergarten and first grade years. During these visits, the research team completed individual interviews with staff and parents, child and classroom observations, direct child assessments through one-on-one interviews, and indirect assessments of children by their teachers and parents.

The data collection instruments used in FACES were designed to measure several different types of skills, accomplishments, and behaviors that are relevant to a child's school readiness and social competence:

1. The parent interview was designed to collect up-to-date information about current Head Start families while being sensitive to differences based on the background of the respondents. The interview provided descriptive information about the parents (education, work status, health, nativity, depression, social support, use of discipline and rules, exposure to violence), the household (income, housing, activities with children, use of child care), and the children (gender, ethnicity, health, behavior, literacy skills, disabilities, exposure to violence). Additionally, parents reported how their families came to Head Start and how they perceived their Head Start experiences.
2. The staff interview was designed to provide a profile of the background, qualifications, and training of Head start personnel as well as an understanding of classroom activities, family activities, services, local programs offered to families, and staff perspectives on their programs and the families they served.
3. The child and classroom observations were designed to record information from the observations of children's behavior and home environments. Some of the assessments used included Peabody Picture Vocabulary Tests (PPVTs), Woodcock-Johnson Revised Tests of Achievement, Norm Referenced Cognitive Tests, Story and Print Concepts, and McCarthy Scales of Children's Abilities.

The Head Start Family and Child Experiences Survey (FACES) is an ongoing national longitudinal study of the cognitive, social, emotional, and physical development of Head Start children. It examines the characteristics, well-being, and accomplishments of families, the observed quality of Head Start classrooms, and the characteristics and opinions of Head Start teachers and other program staff. FACES was designed to address four central questions related to program performance objectives:

1. Does Head Start enhance children's development and school readiness?
2. Does Head Start strengthen families as the primary nurturers of their children?
3. Does head Start provide children with high quality educational, health, and nutritional services?
4. How is classroom quality related to child outcomes?

The FACES 2003 Cohort involved a nationally representative sample of children and families in Head Start programs in the United States who were studied at entry into the program in the fall of 2003, assessed at the completion of their program experience, and followed up at the end of their kindergarten year. The FACES 2003 battery has five main components: the child assessment, parent interview, teacher and staff interviews, classroom observations and teacher-child reports.

1. The child assessments included the major components of school readiness, and were collected through direct child assessments and rating scales completed by parents and teachers. Some of the direct child assessments included the Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test Third Edition-Revised (PPVT-III), Woodcock-Johnson Psycho-Educational Battery-Revised, McCarthy Scales of Children's Abilities, story and print concepts, social awareness, color names and one-to-one counting and assessor ratings.

2. The parent interview was designed to provide Head Start with a comprehensive understanding of the families that they serve, including the characteristics of households and household members, levels and types of participation in the program and in other community services, involvement with their children, and an understanding of their children's development. In addition to this, parents were asked to rate each child on a set of behaviors that assessed the child's basic social skills and behavior problems.

3. The teacher and staff interview was designed to provide information on Head Start personnel experience, education, and training as well as knowledge and beliefs about child development, and educational activities with children and parents.

4. The classroom observations were designed to measure peer interactions, friendships of children, and the extent to which Head Start programs employed skilled teachers and provided developmentally appropriate environments and curricula for their children. Some of the assessments used included the Assessment Profile, Early Childhood Environment Rating Scale-Revised (ECERS-R), classroom observation of teacher-directed activities, and the Arnett Caregiver Interaction Scale.

5. The teacher-child report was designed to capture important sources of information about children's learning and behavior through the use of the Teacher-Child Report (TCR), social skills ratings, the Behavior Problems scale and the Preschool Learning Behavior Scale (PLBS).

The Head Start Family and Child Experiences Survey (FACES) is a periodic, ongoing longitudinal study of program performance. Successive nationally representative samples of Head Start children, their families, classrooms, and programs provide descriptive information on the population of children and families served; staff qualifications, credentials, and opinions; Head Start classroom practices and quality measures; and child and family outcomes. FACES includes a battery of child assessments across multiple developmental domains (cognitive, social, emotional, and physical). FACES 2009 is the latest FACES cohort study and followed children from Head Start entry in fall 2009 through one or two years of program participation and to kindergarten.

For nearly a decade, the Office of Head Start, the Administration for Children and Families, other federal agencies, local programs, and the public have depended on FACES for valid and reliable national information on (1) the skills and abilities of Head Start children, (2) how Head Start children's skills and abilities compare with preschool children nationally, (3) Head Start children's readiness for and subsequent performance in kindergarten, and (4) the characteristics of the children's home and classroom environments. The FACES study is designed to enable researchers to answer a wide range of research questions that are crucial for aiding program managers and policymakers. Some of the questions that are central to FACES include:

1. What are the demographic characteristics of the population of children and families served by Head Start? How has the population served by Head Start changed?
2. What are the experiences of families and children in the Head Start program? How have they changed?
3. What are the cognitive and social skills of Head Start children at the beginning and end of their first year in the program? Has Head Start program performance improved over time?
4. Do the gains in cognitive and social skills that Head Start children achieve carry over into kindergarten? Do larger gains (or greater declines in problem behavior) translate into higher achievement at the end of kindergarten?
5. What are the qualifications of Head Start teachers in terms of education, experience, and credentials? Are average teacher education levels rising in Head Start?
6. What is the observed quality of Head Start classrooms as early learning environments, including the level and range of teaching and interactions, provisions for learning, emotional and instructional support, and classroom organization? How has quality changed over time? What program- and classroom-level factors are related to observed classroom quality? How is observed quality related to children's outcomes and developmental gains?

In response to recent trends and mandates, FACES 2009 expanded the information collected on families and children who speak a primary language other than English and the information collected on children who are homeless. Earlier cohorts of FACES gathered information on the languages spoken in the home and used for classroom instruction. Given the growth in the population of Hispanic/Latino preschoolers (Hernandez 2006), FACES 2009 placed additional emphasis on Dual Language Learners (DLLs). In addition, given the 2007 Head Start Act's focus on children and families who are homeless, FACES 2009 expanded coverage on the enrollment of such children, how the program ensures that they enroll in Head Start, and the special services available to such children and their families.

FACES 2009 carefully balanced the need for consistent measurement of outcomes against the need for improvements in instrumentation and techniques. In some instances, new instruments were added to obtain more comprehensive information on Head Start children. For example, the Expressive One-Word Picture Vocabulary Test was added to assess children's expressive language, which is related to later reading achievement even more so than receptive language (National Early Literacy Panel 2008). A measure of phonemic awareness from the Early Childhood Longitudinal Study-Birth Cohort (ECLS-B) preschool wave was also added to assess children's knowledge of beginning and ending sounds in words. Further, FACES 2009 included a direct assessment of executive functioning-a pencil tapping task to examine children's inhibitory control, working memory, and attention-which has been shown to relate to young children's development in mathematics, vocabulary, and literacy (Blair and Razza 2007; Espy et al. 2004; McClelland et al. 2007).

The User Guide provides detailed information about the FACES 2009 study design, execution, and data to inform and assist researchers who may be interested in using the data for future analyses. The following items are provided in the User Guide as appendices.

• Appendix A - Copyright statements
• Appendix B - Instrument Content Matrices
• Appendix C - Questionnaires
• Appendix D - Center/Program Codebook
• Appendix E - Classroom/Teacher Codebook
• Appendix F - Child Codebook
• Appendix G - Description of Constructed/Derived Variables

FACES provides national information about Head Start programs and participants. Beginning in 1997, a series of nationally representative samples of Head Start children and their families, classrooms, and programs has described the population served by Head Start; staff qualifications, credentials, and opinions; Head Start classroom practices and quality measures; and the experiences and well-being of children and families. FACES studies have included assessments that measure children's cognitive skills, social-emotional skills, and physical status; observations of classroom quality; and surveys of children's parents, teachers, center directors, and program directors.

The Family and Child Experiences Survey (FACES 2014) Contextual Variables Data File contains 28 contextual, community-level variables about 399 Head Start centers included in the FACES 2014 study sample. It does not contain data collected as part of the FACES 2014 study; instead, it contains information from publicly available data sources and is designed to merge with other FACES 2014 data files to enhance the understanding of Head Start center communities. The contextual variables data describe characteristics of the census tract or block group in which Head Start centers are located.

The contextual variables include three index variables constructed by research institutions, 24 demographic and socioeconomic variables derived from the American Community Survey (ACS), and a measure of rural/urban status from the U.S. Department of Agriculture. The FACES 2014 Contextual Variables Data File is intended to be used with the other FACES 2014 data files. For example, in conjunction with the other FACES 2014 data, these data could be used to:

• describe the characteristics of neighborhoods where children attend Head Start,
• describe how children's experiences or Head Start quality differ by neighborhood characteristics, or
• explore associations among neighborhoods, Head Start experiences, and child and family well-being.

The 2014 Head Start Family and Child Experiences Survey, or FACES 2014, is the sixth in a series of national studies of Head Start, with earlier studies conducted in 1997, 2000, 2003, 2006, and 2009. FACES 2014 used a new study design that differs from earlier rounds of FACES in several important ways: (1) it included larger program and classroom samples, (2) all data were collected in a single program year, (3) the baseline sample of children included both children enrolled in their first and second year of Head Start, and (4) several special studies were conducted along with the main (Classroom + Child Outcomes Core and Classroom Core) study to collect more detailed information about a given topic, to study new populations of Head Start programs and participants, and to evaluate measures for possible use in future rounds of FACES. For example, the Family Engagement Plus study collected information from parents and staff (teachers and family services staff) on family engagement efforts and service provision in Head Start programs.

The FACES 2014 Family Engagement Plus study took place in spring 2015 within the 60 programs that participated in the child-level data collection in the Classroom + Child Outcomes Core study. This Plus study describes family engagement practices in Head Start from the perspectives of parents and Head Start staff. It examines how practices align with the Head Start Parent, Family, and Community Engagement (PFCE) Framework and targeted family outcomes. It also explores how programs engage with community partners to provide comprehensive services to families and how parents and staff characterize their relationships with one another. It includes semi-structured interviews with parents and family services staff (FSS) as well as supplemental content added to the Core parent and teacher surveys. This release includes open-ended qualitative data from the semi-structured interviews included in the Family Engagement Plus study.

The primary research questions for the Family Engagement Plus study are as follows:

1. What do family engagement efforts look like in Head Start?
2. How are families engaged in Head Start and in their children's learning and development at home and in the community?
3. What staff are involved in family engagement efforts, and in what ways are they involved in those efforts?
4. How are comprehensive family services provided in Head Start?
5. How do parents and staff characterize their relationships and interactions with one another?
6. How do family engagement efforts and service provisions align with the Head Start Parent, Family, and Community Engagement (PFCE) Framework?

The User's Manual provides detailed information about the Family Engagement Plus study design, execution, and data to inform and assist researchers who may be interested in using the data for future analyses or pairing the Family Engagement qualitative data collection sources with other FACES 2014 sources.

The 2014 Head Start Family and Child Experiences Survey, or FACES 2014, is the sixth in a series of national studies of Head Start, with earlier studies conducted in 1997, 2000, 2003, 2006, and 2009. This release includes nationally representative samples of Head Start programs and centers, classrooms, children and their families through spring of 2017. Data from surveys of Head Start program and center directors, classroom teachers, and parents provided descriptive information about program policies and practices, classroom activities, and the background and experiences of Head Start staff and families. Classroom observations were used to assess the quality of Head Start classrooms. Children in the study participated in a direct assessment that provided a picture of their school readiness skills at different time points.

FACES 2014 used a new study design that differs from earlier rounds of FACES in several important ways: (1) it included larger program and classroom samples, (2) all data were collected in a single program year, (3) the baseline sample of children included both children enrolled in their first and second year of Head Start, and (4) several special studies were conducted along with the main (Core) study to collect more detailed information about a given topic, to study new populations of Head Start programs and participants, and to evaluate measures for possible use in future rounds of FACES. For example, the Family Engagement Plus study collected information from parents and staff (teachers and family services staff) on family engagement efforts and service provision in Head Start programs.

The Office of Head Start, the Administration for Children and Families, other federal agencies, local programs, and the public have depended on FACES for valid and reliable national information on (1) the skills and abilities of Head Start children, (2) how Head Start children's skills and abilities compare with preschool children nationally, (3) Head Start children's readiness for and subsequent performance in kindergarten, and (4) the characteristics of the children's home and classroom environments. The FACES study was designed to enable researchers to answer a wide range of research questions that are crucial for aiding program managers and policymakers. Some of the questions that are central to FACES include:

1. What are the demographic characteristics of the population of children and families served by Head Start? How has the population served by Head Start changed?
2. What are the experiences of families and children in the Head Start program? How have they changed?
3. What are the cognitive and social skills of Head Start children at the beginning and end of the program year? Has Head Start program performance improved over time?
4. What are the qualifications of Head Start teachers in terms of education, experience, and credentials? Are average teacher education levels rising in Head Start?
5. What is the observed quality of Head Start classrooms as early learning environments, including the level and range of teaching and interactions, provisions for learning, emotional and instructional support, and classroom organization? How has quality changed over time?
6. What program- and classroom-level factors are related to observed classroom quality?
7. How is observed quality related to children's outcomes and developmental gains?

The User Guide provides detailed information about the FACES 2014 study design, execution, and data to inform and assist researchers who may be interested in using the data for future analyses. The following items are provided in the User Guide as appendices.

• Appendix A - Elements Of The FACES Design And Key Measures Used (And Child Outcomes Captured): FACES 1997 - FACES 2014
• Appendix B - Copyright Permissions
• Appendix C - Instrument Content Matrices
• Appendix D - Instruments
• Appendix E - Spring 2015 Center/Program Codebook
• Appendix F - Spring 2015 Classroom/Teacher Codebook
• Appendix G - 2014-2015 Child Codebook
• Appendix H - Spring 2015 Family Engagement Family Service Staff Interview Codebook
• Appendix I - Spring 2015 Family Engagement Parent Interview Codebook
• Appendix J - Spring 2017 Center/Program Codebook
• Appendix K - Spring 2017 Classroom/Teacher Codebook
• Appendix L - Descriptions of Constructed/Derived Variables
• Appendix M - Synthetic Estimation for Child Growth Across Two Years

The Housing and Children's Healthy Development (HCHD) Study included four main aims:

1. to learn how parents make choices about where to live while negotiating tradeoffs between dwelling unit quality, neighborhood quality, and school quality;
2. to assess how features of the child's social contexts--home, neighborhood, and school--combine to influence key cognitive, socio-emotional, and health outcomes among parents and their children;
3. to examine how the quality of housing affects parenting practices and outcomes for children and their caregivers; and
4. to enhance the study of child development through theoretical and methodological advances in the study of housing and the other social contexts related to housing.

For this collection, the study team conducted Wave 1 data collection with families in Cleveland, Ohio (Cuyahoga County) and Dallas, Texas, United States, using a randomized controlled trial design. One-half of the sample was an experimental sample consisting of applicants for a federal housing voucher, including both voucher winners (treatment group) and voucher losers (control group). The other half of the sample was generated through a random selection and screening process in census blocks that varied by household income weighted toward lower-income blocks.

Interviews were conducted with primary caregivers, lasting about 90 minutes, and included the collection of anthropometric measures from primary caregivers and children and administration of Woodcock-Johnson tests to children. Primary caregiver voucher sample participants were asked for three blood pressure measurements, and blood spots were collected from voucher sample primary caregivers and children. The data collection also includes laser tape measurement of all rooms in a household, 8 block face neighborhood observations, and post-interview observations. Four-day leave-behind child time diary data were collected but are not available.

The Housing and Children's Healthy Development (HCHD) Study included four main aims:

1. to learn how parents make choices about where to live while negotiating tradeoffs between dwelling unit quality, neighborhood quality, and school quality;
2. to assess how features of the child's social contexts--home, neighborhood, and school--combine to influence key cognitive, socio-emotional, and health outcomes among parents and their children;
3. to examine how the quality of housing affects parenting practices and outcomes for children and their caregivers; and
4. to enhance the study of child development through theoretical and methodological advances in the study of housing and the other social contexts related to housing.

This collection includes data from Wave 2 of the HCHD Study. In Wave 2, telephone interviews were completed with 1,413 primary caregivers (PCGs) from the Wave 1 data collection. The PCGs also provided reports for 1,954 focal children who were still living in the household of the caregiver at the time of the Wave 2 survey. Wave 2 data collection included a coverscreen to gather updated location and contact information for the PCGs and children to determine household eligibility, and a PCG questionnaire based largely on the Wave 1 protocol with modifications for telephone interviewing.

This study, known as the Los Angeles Neighborhood Services and Characteristics data (L.A.NSC) includes data from governmental and business data sources on the characteristics of census tracts in Los Angeles County from 1980 to 2010. The unit of analysis is 1990 census tract (census tracts using 1990 census tract boundaries). The data also include crosswalks for census boundaries across census years. It is public use data.

The L.A.NSC data were assembled by the L.A.FANS projects to be used with L.A.FANS survey data restricted data versions 2, 2.5, and 3 all of which contain 1990 census tract numbers which can be linked with data in this file. However, the L.A.NSC files includes ALL census tracts in Los Angeles County, not just the 65 tracts sampled by L.A.FANS. Thus, the L.A.NSC data can be analyzed on their own without linkage to L.A.FANS survey data and provide longitudinal data on the characteristics of Los Angeles census tracts over a 30 year period.

Additional information on the data is available at the RAND website. See also:

• The L.A.NSC Database Users' Guides (The Los Angeles Neighborhood Services and Characteristics Database: Codebook and 2010 Neighborhood Services and Characteristics Database: NSC2).

This study is a restricted data file of data from the L.A.FANS Neighborhood Observation Study, an in-person observational by trained L.A.FANS interviewers of the census blocks on which L.A.FANS respondents lived during L.A.FANS Wave 1. Interviewers were trained to walk each block face and record social and physical observations on precoded check sheets. Each block face was observed by several different interviewers working independently at different times of the day and week. These data are designed to be used with L.A.FANS Wave-1 survey interview data restricted versions 2.5 or 3 to provide data on the census block and census tract in which individual respondents lived.

Users who apply for these restricted data must also be approved for using restricted version 2.5 or 3. Please note that L.A. FANS restricted data may only be accessed within the ICPSR Virtual Data Enclave (VDE) and must be merged with the L.A. FANS public data prior to beginning any analysis.

The study is described in detail in the L.A.FANS Neighborhood Observations Codebook.

Further information is available in:

Jones, M., Pebley, A. R., and Sastry, N. (2011). Eyes on the block: Measuring urban physical disorder through in-person observation. Social Science Research, 40(2), 523-537.

This study includes public user data files of two waves of interviews with L.A.FANS respondents. There often are multiple respondents in L.A.FANS households and Wave 2 includes both panel respondents and a new sample. Users' Guides which explain the design and how to use the sample are available for Wave 1 and Wave 2 at the RAND website.

The Los Angeles Family and Neighborhood Survey (L.A.FANS) is a two-wave study of adults and children in Los Angeles County and of the neighborhoods in which they live. The first wave (L.A.FANS-1), which was fielded between April 2000 and January 2002, interviewed adults and children living in 3,085 households in a stratified probability sample of 65 neighborhoods throughout Los Angeles County. The samples of neighborhoods and individuals were representative of neighborhoods and residents of Los Angeles County. Poorer neighborhoods and households with children were oversampled. In Wave 2 of L.A.FANS (L.A.FANS-2), Wave 1 respondents living in Los Angeles County were reinterviewed and updated information was collected on Wave 1 respondents who had moved away from Los Angeles County. A sample of individuals who moved into each sampled neighborhood between Waves 1 and 2 was also interviewed, for a total of 2,319 adults and 1,382 children (ages less than 18 years). Additional information on the project is available at the RAND website.

Additional information on the project, survey design, sample, and variables are available from:

• Sastry, Narayan, Bonnie Ghosh-Dastidar, John Adams, and Anne R. Pebley (2006). The Design of a Multilevel Survey of Children, Families, and Communities: The Los Angeles Family and Neighborhood Survey, Social Science Research, Volume 35, Number 4, Pages 1000-1024
• The Users' Guides (Wave 1 and Wave 2)
• RAND Documentation Reports page

This study includes a restricted data file for Wave 1 of the L.A.FANS data. To compare L.A.FANS restricted data, version 1 with other restricted data versions, see the table on the series page for the L.A.FANS data here. Data in this study are designed for use with the public use data files for L.A.FANS, Wave 1 (study 1). This file adds only a few variables to the L.A.FANS, Wave 1 public use files. Specifically, it adds a "pseudo-tract ID" which is a number from 1 to 65, randomly assigned to each census tract (neighborhood) in the study. It is not possible to link pseudo-tract IDs in any way to real tract IDs or other neighborhood characteristics. However, pseudo-tract IDs permit users to conduct analyses which take into account the clustered sample design in which neighborhoods (tracts) were selected first and then individuals were sampled within neighborhoods. Pseudo-tract IDs do so because they identify which respondents live in the same neighborhood. It also includes certain variables, thought to be sensitive, which are not available in the public use data. These variables are identified in the L.A.FANS Wave 1 Users Guide and Codebook. Finally, some distance variables and individual characteristics which are treated in the public use data to make it harder to identify individuals are provided in an untreated form in the Version 1 restricted data file. Please note that L.A. FANS restricted data may only be accessed within the ICPSR Virtual Data Enclave (VDE) and must be merged with the L.A. FANS public data prior to beginning any analysis.

A Users' Guide which explains the design and how to use the samples are available for Wave 1 at the RAND website.

Additional information on the project, survey design, sample, and variables are available from:

• Sastry, Narayan, Bonnie Ghosh-Dastidar, John Adams, and Anne R. Pebley (2006). The Design of a Multilevel Survey of Children, Families, and Communities: The Los Angeles Family and Neighborhood Survey, Social Science Research, Volume 35, Number 4, Pages 1000-1024
• The Users' Guides (Wave 1 and Wave 2)
• RAND Documentation Reports page

This study includes restricted data file, version 2, for Wave 1 of the L.A.FANS data. To compare L.A.FANS restricted data, version 2 with other restricted data versions, see the table on the series page for the L.A.FANS data here. Data in this study are designed for use with the public use data files for L.A.FANS, Wave 1 (study 1). This file adds only a few variables to the L.A.FANS, Wave 1 public use files. Specifically, it adds the census tract number for the tract each respondent lives in. It also includes certain variables, thought to be sensitive, which are not available in the public use data. These variables are identified in the L.A.FANS Wave 1 Users Guide and Codebook. Finally, some distance variables and individual characteristics which are treated in the public use data to make it harder to identify individuals are provided in an untreated form in the Version 2 restricted data file. Please note that L.A. FANS restricted data may only be accessed within the ICPSR Virtual Data Enclave (VDE) and must be merged with the L.A. FANS public data prior to beginning any analysis.

A Users' Guide which explains the design and how to use the samples are available for Wave 1 at the RAND website.

Additional information on the project, survey design, sample, and variables are available from:

• Sastry, Narayan, Bonnie Ghosh-Dastidar, John Adams, and Anne R. Pebley (2006). The Design of a Multilevel Survey of Children, Families, and Communities: The Los Angeles Family and Neighborhood Survey, Social Science Research, Volume 35, Number 4, Pages 1000-1024
• The Users' Guides (Wave 1 and Wave 2)
• RAND Documentation Reports page

This study includes restricted data version 2.5, for Wave 1 of the L.A.FANS data. To compare L.A.FANS restricted data, version 2.5 with other restricted data versions, see the table on the series page for the L.A.FANS data here. Data in this study are designed for use with the public use data files for L.A.FANS, Wave 1 (study 1). This file adds only a few variables to the L.A.FANS, Wave 1 public use files. Specifically, it adds the census tract and block number for the tract each respondent lives in. It also includes certain variables, thought to be sensitive, which are not available in the public use data. These variables are identified in the L.A.FANS Wave 1 Users Guide and Codebook. Finally, some distance variables and individual characteristics which are treated in the public use data to make it harder to identify individuals are provided in an untreated form in the Version 2.5 restricted data file. Please note that L.A. FANS restricted data may only be accessed within the ICPSR Virtual Data Enclave (VDE) and must be merged with the L.A. FANS public data prior to beginning any analysis.

A Users' Guide which explains the design and how to use the samples are available for Wave 1 at the RAND website.

Additional information on the project, survey design, sample, and variables are available from:

• Sastry, Narayan, Bonnie Ghosh-Dastidar, John Adams, and Anne R. Pebley (2006). The Design of a Multilevel Survey of Children, Families, and Communities: The Los Angeles Family and Neighborhood Survey, Social Science Research, Volume 35, Number 4, Pages 1000-1024
• The Users' Guides (Wave 1 and Wave 2)
• RAND Documentation Reports page

This study includes restricted data version 3, for Wave 1 of the L.A.FANS data. To compare L.A.FANS restricted data, version 3 with other restricted data versions, see the table on the series page for the L.A.FANS data here. Data in this study are designed for use with the public use data files for L.A.FANS, Wave 1 (study 1). This file adds only a few variables to the L.A.FANS, Wave 1 public use files. Specifically, it adds the census tract and block number for the tract each respondent lives in and geographic coordinates data for a number of locations reported by the respondent (including home, grocery store, place of work, place of worship, schools, etc.). It also includes certain variables, thought to be sensitive, which are not available in the public use data. These variables are identified in the L.A.FANS Wave 1 Users Guide and Codebook. Finally, some distance variables and individual characteristics which are treated in the public use data to make it harder to identify individuals are provided in an untreated form in the Version 3 restricted data file. Please note that L.A. FANS restricted data may only be accessed within the ICPSR Virtual Data Enclave (VDE) and must be merged with the L.A. FANS public data prior to beginning any analysis.

A Users' Guide which explains the design and how to use the samples are available for Wave 1 at the RAND website.

Additional information on the project, survey design, sample, and variables are available from:

• Sastry, Narayan, Bonnie Ghosh-Dastidar, John Adams, and Anne R. Pebley (2006). The Design of a Multilevel Survey of Children, Families, and Communities: The Los Angeles Family and Neighborhood Survey, Social Science Research, Volume 35, Number 4, Pages 1000-1024
• The Users' Guides (Wave 1 and Wave 2)
• RAND Documentation Reports page

The Los Angeles Family and Neighborhood Survey (L.A.FANS) is a two-wave study of adults and children in Los Angeles County and of the neighborhoods in which they live. The first wave (L.A.FANS-1), which was fielded between April 2000 and January 2002, interviewed adults and children living in 3,085 households in a stratified probability sample of 65 neighborhoods throughout Los Angeles County. The samples of neighborhoods and individuals were representative of neighborhoods and residents of Los Angeles County. Poorer neighborhoods and households with children were oversampled. In Wave 2 of L.A.FANS (L.A.FANS-2), Wave 1 respondents living in Los Angeles County were reinterviewed and updated information was collected on Wave 1 respondents who had moved away from Los Angeles County. A sample of individuals who moved into each sampled neighborhood between Waves 1 and 2 was also interviewed, for a total of 2,319 adults and 1,382 children (ages less than 18 years).

A new feature in L.A.FANS-2 was the collection of physiological health measures. Interviewers collected blood pressure, pulse, height, weight, hip and waist circumference, and a pulmonary function assessment (spirometry) from respondents. Saliva samples were collected from child respondents. 50% of L.A.FANS households were selected at random and respondents were asked to provide dried blood spot (DBS) samples. The initial release of L.A.FANS-2 data included only the blood pressure and anthropometry data. This collection contains the spirometry, saliva, and DBS data. The saliva and DBS datasets each have one record per respondent who completed the health module, while the spirometry dataset has one record for each trial.

Data in this study are designed for use with the public use data files for L.A.FANS, Wave 1 (study 1) and Wave 2 (study 2). Additional information on the project is available on the L.A.FANS series page and the RAND website.

Additional information on the project, survey design, sample, and variables are available from:

• Sastry, Narayan, Bonnie Ghosh-Dastidar, John Adams, and Anne R. Pebley (2006). The Design of a Multilevel Survey of Children, Families, and Communities: The Los Angeles Family and Neighborhood Survey, Social Science Research, Volume 35, Number 4, Pages 1000-1024
• The Users' Guides (Wave 1 and Wave 2)
• RAND Documentation Reports page

This study includes public user data files of two waves of interviews with L.A.FANS respondents. There often are multiple respondents in L.A.FANS households and Wave 2 includes both panel respondents and a new sample. Users' Guides which explain the design and how to use the sample are available for Wave 1 and Wave 2 at the RAND website.

The Los Angeles Family and Neighborhood Survey (L.A.FANS) is a two-wave study of adults and children in Los Angeles County and of the neighborhoods in which they live. The first wave (L.A.FANS-1), which was fielded between April 2000 and January 2002, interviewed adults and children living in 3,085 households in a stratified probability sample of 65 neighborhoods throughout Los Angeles County. The samples of neighborhoods and individuals were representative of neighborhoods and residents of Los Angeles County. Poorer neighborhoods and households with children were oversampled. In Wave 2 of L.A.FANS (L.A.FANS-2), Wave 1 respondents living in Los Angeles County were reinterviewed and updated information was collected on Wave 1 respondents who had moved away from Los Angeles County. A sample of individuals who moved into each sampled neighborhood between Waves 1 and 2 was also interviewed, for a total of 2,319 adults and 1,382 children (ages less than 18 years). Additional information on the project is available at the RAND website.

Additional information on the project, survey design, sample, and variables are available from:

• Sastry, Narayan, Bonnie Ghosh-Dastidar, John Adams, and Anne R. Pebley (2006). The Design of a Multilevel Survey of Children, Families, and Communities: The Los Angeles Family and Neighborhood Survey, Social Science Research, Volume 35, Number 4, Pages 1000-1024
• The Users' Guides (Wave 1 and Wave 2)
• RAND Documentation Reports page

This study includes a restricted data file for Wave 2 of the L.A.FANS data. To compare L.A.FANS restricted data, version 1 with other restricted data versions, see the table on the series page for the L.A.FANS data here. Data in this study are designed for use with the public use data files for L.A.FANS, Wave 2 (study 2). This file adds only a few variables to the L.A.FANS, Wave 2 public use files. Specifically, it adds a "pseudo-tract ID" which is a number from 1 to 65, randomly assigned to each census tract (neighborhood) in the study. It is not possible to link pseudo-tract IDs in any way to real tract IDs or other neighborhood characteristics. However, pseudo-tract IDs permit users to conduct analyses which take into account the clustered sample design in which neighborhoods (tracts) were selected first and then individuals were sampled within neighborhoods. Pseudo-tract IDs do so because they identify which respondents live in the same neighborhood. It also includes certain variables, thought to be sensitive, which are not available in the public use data. These variables are identified in the L.A.FANS Wave 2 Users Guide and Codebook. Finally, some distance variables and individual characteristics which are treated in the public use data to make it harder to identify individuals are provided in an untreated form in the Version 1 restricted data file. Please note that L.A. FANS restricted data may only be accessed within the ICPSR Virtual Data Enclave (VDE) and must be merged with the L.A. FANS public data prior to beginning any analysis.

A Users' Guide which explains the design and how to use the samples are available for Wave 2 at the RAND website.

Additional information on the project, survey design, sample, and variables are available from:

• Sastry, Narayan, Bonnie Ghosh-Dastidar, John Adams, and Anne R. Pebley (2006). The Design of a Multilevel Survey of Children, Families, and Communities: The Los Angeles Family and Neighborhood Survey, Social Science Research, Volume 35, Number 4, Pages 1000-1024
• The Users' Guides (Wave 1 and Wave 2)
• RAND Documentation Reports page

This study includes a restricted data file, version 2, for Wave 2 of the L.A.FANS data. To compare L.A.FANS restricted data, version 2 with other restricted data versions, see the table on the series page for the L.A.FANS data here. Data in this study are designed for use with the public use data files for L.A.FANS, Wave 2 (study 2). This file adds only a few variables to the L.A.FANS, Wave 2 public use files. Specifically, it adds the census tract number for the tract each respondent lives in. It also includes certain variables, thought to be sensitive, which are not available in the public use data. These variables are identified in the L.A.FANS Wave 2 Users Guide and Codebook. Finally, some distance variables and individual characteristics which are treated in the public use data to make it harder to identify individuals are provided in an untreated form in the Version 2 restricted data file. Please note that L.A. FANS restricted data may only be accessed within the ICPSR Virtual Data Enclave (VDE) and must be merged with the L.A. FANS public data prior to beginning any analysis.

A Users' Guide which explains the design and how to use the samples are available for Wave 2 at the RAND website.

Additional information on the project, survey design, sample, and variables are available from:

• Sastry, Narayan, Bonnie Ghosh-Dastidar, John Adams, and Anne R. Pebley (2006). The Design of a Multilevel Survey of Children, Families, and Communities: The Los Angeles Family and Neighborhood Survey, Social Science Research, Volume 35, Number 4, Pages 1000-1024
• The Users' Guides (Wave 1 and Wave 2)
• RAND Documentation Reports page

This study includes a restricted data file, version 2.5, for Wave 2 of the L.A.FANS data. To compare L.A.FANS restricted data, version 2.5 with other restricted data versions, see the table on the series page for the L.A.FANS data here. Data in this study are designed for use with the public use data files for L.A.FANS, Wave 2 (study 2). This file adds only a few variables to the L.A.FANS, Wave 2 public use files. Specifically, it adds the census tract and block number for the tract each respondent lives in. It also includes certain variables, thought to be sensitive, which are not available in the public use data. These variables are identified in the L.A.FANS Wave 2 Users Guide and Codebook. Finally, some distance variables and individual characteristics which are treated in the public use data to make it harder to identify individuals are provided in an untreated form in the Version 2.5 restricted data file. Please note that L.A. FANS restricted data may only be accessed within the ICPSR Virtual Data Enclave (VDE) and must be merged with the L.A. FANS public data prior to beginning any analysis.

A Users' Guide which explains the design and how to use the samples are available for Wave 2 at the RAND website.

Additional information on the project, survey design, sample, and variables are available from:

• Sastry, Narayan, Bonnie Ghosh-Dastidar, John Adams, and Anne R. Pebley (2006). The Design of a Multilevel Survey of Children, Families, and Communities: The Los Angeles Family and Neighborhood Survey, Social Science Research, Volume 35, Number 4, Pages 1000-1024
• The Users' Guides (Wave 1 and Wave 2)
• RAND Documentation Reports page

This study includes a restricted data file, version 3, for Wave 2 of the L.A.FANS data. To compare L.A.FANS restricted data, version 3 with other restricted data versions, see the table on the series page for the L.A.FANS data here. Data in this study are designed for use with the public use data files for L.A.FANS, Wave 2 (study 2). This file adds only a few variables to the L.A.FANS, Wave 2 public use files. Specifically, it adds the census tract and block number for the tract each respondent lives in and geographic coordinates data for a number of locations reported by the respondent (including home, grocery store, place of work, place of worship, schools, etc.). It also includes certain variables, thought to be sensitive, which are not available in the public use data. These variables are identified in the L.A.FANS Wave 2 Users Guide and Codebook. Finally, some distance variables and individual characteristics which are treated in the public use data to make it harder to identify individuals are provided in an untreated form in the Version 3 restricted data file. Please note that L.A. FANS restricted data may only be accessed within the ICPSR Virtual Data Enclave (VDE) and must be merged with the L.A. FANS public data prior to beginning any analysis.

A Users' Guide which explains the design and how to use the samples are available for Wave 2 at the RAND website.

Additional information on the project, survey design, sample, and variables are available from:

• Sastry, Narayan, Bonnie Ghosh-Dastidar, John Adams, and Anne R. Pebley (2006). The Design of a Multilevel Survey of Children, Families, and Communities: The Los Angeles Family and Neighborhood Survey, Social Science Research, Volume 35, Number 4, Pages 1000-1024
• The Users' Guides (Wave 1 and Wave 2)
• RAND Documentation Reports page

This study includes one public use data file of follow-up interviews, conducted between 2011 and 2013, with respondents to Wave 2 of L.A.FANS (Los Angeles Family and Neighborhood Survey). This follow-up data collection effort (hereafter called L.A.FANS-3 or Wave 3) was part of the broader Mixed Income Project (MIP), which was designed to allow for detailed examination of neighborhood context, residential mobility, and mixed-income housing in Los Angeles and Chicago. The two anchor studies for the MIP are L.A.FANS and the Project on Human Development in Chicago Neighborhoods (PHDCN).

Wave 3 targeted a random probability sample of approximately 1,000 randomly selected adults and children from the prior wave of L.A.FANS, which was fielded between 2006 and 2008, who still resided within Los Angeles County. The Los Angeles field operation first assigned selected respondents to a telephone survey center for interviews. Cases that were not interviewed by telephone were transferred to experienced field interviewers in the Los Angeles area. The final response rate was 75 percent of eligible participants (i.e., residents who still resided in Los Angeles County and who were not institutionalized, incapacitated, or deceased) for a combined sample of 1,032. Two-hundred and two (202) of these respondents were reached during a preliminary Field Test in 2011, after which point the survey was slightly revised. After making these revisions, 830 respondents were reached during the Main Study. For more details on sampling procedures for the Field Test and Main Study, see Methodology section below.

For context, the L.A.FANS is a study of adults and children in Los Angeles County, and of the neighborhoods in which they live. The first wave (L.A.FANS-1 or Wave 1), which was fielded between April 2000 and January 2002, interviewed adults and children living in 3,085 households in a stratified probability sample of 65 neighborhoods throughout Los Angeles County. The samples of neighborhoods and individuals were representative of neighborhoods and residents of Los Angeles County. Poorer neighborhoods and households with children were oversampled. In Wave 2 of L.A.FANS (L.A.FANS-2), Wave 1 respondents still living in Los Angeles County were re-interviewed, while updated information was collected on Wave 1 respondents who had moved away from Los Angeles County. A sample of individuals who moved into each sampled neighborhood between Waves 1 and 2 was also interviewed, for a total of 2,319 adults and 1,382 children (ages less than 18 years). Additional information on the project is available at the RAND website.

The Malawi Longitudinal Study of Families and Health (MLSFH) is one of very few long-standing longitudinal cohort studies in a poor Sub-Saharan African (SSA) context. It provides a record of more than 25 years of demographic, socioeconomic, and health conditions in one of the world's poorest countries. Initial data collection began in 1998 under the Malawi Diffusion and Ideational Change Project (MDICP) to examine social networks and fertility decisions among married women and their husbands. While this initial study population is still followed, the scope of the project and population expanded to a broader focus on social and contextual determinants of health across the lifecourse in Malawi.

This collection includes Rounds 1 through 9 of the MLSFH, as well as supplemental data collections from Sexual Diaries, Migration Follow-Ups (MHM), a Biomarker Survey, Adverse Childhood Experiences (ACE), and a Benefits of Knowledge Intervention Survey. The MLSFH Data web page contains additional information and cohort profiles for all MLSFH data collections, including those not made available through ICPSR-DSDR.

This supplement to the longitudinal survey Panel Study of Income Dynamics (PSID) focuses on child development, and covers such topics as school progress, academic achievement and cognitive ability, social well-being, emotional well-being, and health. The Child Development Supplement (CDS) was launched in 1997 with a cohort of children aged 0-12 years, with follow-up waves in 2002 and 2007. The CDS in 2014 and 2019 collected information on the next generation of PSID children aged 0-17 years in each wave.

Detailed variable-level descriptions for CDS-2020 and CDS-2021, which enable data discovery and comparison, are available through Panel Study of Income Dynamics (PSID): Child Development Supplement, 2020-2021 (ICPSR 39179).

This catalog record includes detailed variable-level descriptions, enabling data discovery and comparison. The data are not archived at ICPSR. Users should consult the data owners (via PSID) directly for details on obtaining the data. The Child Development Supplement (CDS) to the longitudinal survey Panel Study of Income Dynamics (PSID) focuses on child development, and covers such topics as school progress, academic achievement and cognitive ability, social well-being, emotional well-being, and health.

CDS-2021 was designed as a two-year follow-up to a main wave of CDS conducted in 2019 in order to support research on the effects of a cohort of children aged 2-17 years in 2021 for whom prior interview data in CDS-2019 were collected just prior to the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic in March 2020.

The original CDS was launched in 1997 with a cohort of children aged 0-12 years, with follow-up waves in 2002 and 2007. CDS in 2014 and 2019 collected information on the next generation of PSID children aged 0-17 years in each wave. For information about these earlier data collections, see Panel Study of Income Dynamics (PSID): Child Development Supplement, 1997-2019.

The Research on Early Life and Aging Trends and Effects (RELATE) study compiles cross-national data that contain information that can be used to examine the effects of early life conditions on older adult health conditions, including heart disease, diabetes, obesity, functionality, mortality, and self-reported health. The complete cross sectional/longitudinal dataset (n=147,278) was compiled from major studies of older adults or households across the world that in most instances are representative of the older adult population either nationally, in major urban centers, or in provinces. It includes over 180 variables with information on demographic and geographic variables along with information about early life conditions and life course events for older adults in low, middle and high income countries. Selected variables were harmonized to facilitate cross national comparisons.

In this first public release of the RELATE data, a subset of the data (n=88,273) is being released. The subset includes harmonized data of older adults from the following regions of the world: Africa (Ghana and South Africa), Asia (China, India), Latin America (Costa Rica, major cities in Latin America), and the United States (Puerto Rico, Wisconsin). This first release of the data collection is composed of 19 downloadable parts: Part 1 includes the harmonized cross-national RELATE dataset, which harmonizes data from parts 2 through 19. Specifically, parts 2 through 19 include data from Costa Rica (Part 2), Puerto Rico (Part 3), the United States (Wisconsin) (Part 4), Argentina (Part 5), Barbados (Part 6), Brazil (Part 7), Chile (Part 8), Cuba (Part 9), Mexico (Parts 10 and 15), Uruguay (Part 11), China (Parts 12, 18, and 19), Ghana (Part 13), India (Part 14), Russia (Part 16), and South Africa (Part 17).

The Health and Retirement Study (HRS) was also used in the compilation of the larger RELATE data set (HRS) (N=12,527), and these data are now available for public release on the HRS data products page. To access the HRS data that are part of the RELATE data set, please see the collection notes below.

The Social Capital and Children's Development data were collected in a study of the causal effects of social capital on levels and inequalities of children's social and cognitive development during the early elementary years. The study included 52 schools in Phoenix and San Antonio, including 3,084 first graders and their families, and over 200 teachers, with half the schools randomly selected for the intervention and half serving as controls. Children from low-income Latino families were a special focus of the study. The experimental design of this study allowed for testing of the causal role of social capital. Social capital here refers to trust and shared expectations embedded in social networks of parents, teachers, and children. For young children, social capital operates primarily through their relationships with their parents, enhancing development through mechanisms of social support and social control.

The research design was experimental: social capital was manipulated through a well-tested randomized intervention, Families and Schools Together (FAST), that enhanced social capital among parents, teachers, and children through an intensive after-school program and a 2-year follow-up program. FAST is intended to reduce parental isolation, enhance family engagement with schools, and strengthen family functioning; that is, to increase social capital between families and schools, among families, and within families to improve children's education and life-long outcomes. Key aspects of child development were assessed, including (a) social skills and problem behavior from standardized behavioral ratings by parents and teachers, and (b) grade retention, attendance rates, and third-grade reading and mathematics scores from school records. Social capital was measured with repeated surveys of teachers and parents that address the extent of social networks, parent involvement, trust, and shared expectations among parents, between parents and schools, and between parents and children. Demographic variables of this study include native language, years in the United States, date of birth/age, race/ethnicity, gender, and household composition.