Search results

The Americans' Changing Lives (ACL) survey series is an ongoing, nationally representative, longitudinal study focusing especially on differences between Black and White Americans in middle and late life. These data constitute the first, second, third, fourth, fifth, and sixth waves in a panel survey covering a wide range of sociological, psychological, mental, and physical health items. Wave I of the study began in 1986 with a nation face-to-face survey of 3,617 adults ages 25 and up, with Black Americans and people aged 60 and over over-sampled at twice the rate of the others. Wave II constitutes face-to-face re-interviews in 1989 of those still alive. Survivors have been re-interviewed by telephone, and when necessary face-to-face, in 1994 (Wave III), 2001/02 (Wave IV), 2011 (Wave V), and 2019/21 (Wave VI).

Please note that for Wave VI, the majority of data collection occurred in 2019, with only a small subset (n=39) of participants surveyed in 2021.

ACL was designed and sought to investigate the following: (1) The ways in which a wide range of activities and social relationships that people engage in are broadly "productive," (2) how individuals adapt to acute life events and chronic stresses that threaten the maintenance of health, effective functioning, and productive activity, and (3) sociocultural variations in the nature, meaning, determinants, and consequences of productive activity and relationships. Among the topics covered are interpersonal relationships (spouse/partner, children, parents, friends), sources and levels of satisfaction, social interactions and leisure activities, traumatic life events (physical assault, serious illness, divorce, death of a loved one, financial or legal problems), perceptions of retirement, health behaviors (smoking, alcohol consumption, overweight, rest), and utilization of health care services (doctor visits, hospitalization, nursing home institutionalization, bed days). Also included are measures of physical health, psychological well-being, and indices referring to cognitive functioning.

Demographic information provided for individuals includes household composition, number of children and grandchildren, employment status, occupation and work history, income, family financial situation, religious beliefs and practices, ethnicity, race, education, sex, and region of residence.

The Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS) is a system of health-related telephone surveys that collect state data about U.S. residents regarding their health-related risk behaviors, chronic health conditions, and use of preventive services. Established in 1984 with 15 states, BRFSS now collects data in all 50 states as well as the District of Columbia and three U.S. territories. BRFSS completes more than 400,000 adult interviews each year.

This project was a mixed-method, multi-level study of low income families of children with special needs and the system which served them, focusing primarily on child care, employment, and balancing work and family. This approach included an analysis of existing national and state-level data sets, statewide surveys of parents and child care providers, and a field study to look at these issues at the local level in three selected communities in the state of Maine: Portland, Lewiston/Auburn, and Presque Isle. While the primary focus was on access to child care, this project also looked at the related issues of welfare reform, the impact of work force participation on having a child with special needs, and the issue of coordination of early intervention services with the child care system. The goal was to understand better the issues facing low income families with special needs children across the programs and policies affecting their employment, access to child care, and meeting the special needs of their children. In the first year of the study, qualitative research was conducted to learn directly from parents about their experiences. In the second and third years, a field study of three communities was conducted as well as statewide surveys and analysis of national data bases to supplement the data collected in the first year. This data collection is comprised of the two quantitative data files produced during the second and third years of the study which are described in more detail below.

Child Care Provider Survey: The Child Care Provider Survey was a statewide survey of child care providers selected at random from the list of licensed providers in Maine given by the state licensing agency. Questions focused on the perspective of child care providers on the issues of access and inclusion that parents raised.

Parent Survey: The Parent Survey was a statewide survey of parents and children aged 0-18 years with diagnosed special needs (enrolled in Maine Care - Katie Beckett and Title V eligibility groups - and Child Development Services early intervention caseloads). Questions focused on child care utilization and work experiences in relation to children with special needs.

Researchers interested in information about the qualitative data should contact the Child Care and Children with Special Needs Project Web site.

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).

This collection includes a combined dataset of the Generations study wave 1 (baseline) survey and the TransPop study transgender survey. The two studies have many overlapping variables, and they examined topics such as respondents' health outcomes and behaviors, experiences with discrimination, identity, and transition-related experiences. Data from these studies were merged to allow for analysis of the combined LGBT populations. This dataset has also been reweighted to be representative of these populations.

The complete Generations study data (baseline, wave 2, and wave 3 survey data) can be found under study number 37166, and the complete TransPop study data (transgender and cisgender survey data) can be found under study number 37938. For detailed information on the Generations and TransPop studies, including related publications, please refer to their respective DSDR/ICPSR study pages.

The Consumer Expenditure Survey (CE) program provides a continuous and comprehensive flow of data on the buying habits of American consumers including data on their expenditures, income, and consumer unit (families and single consumers) characteristics. These data are used widely in economic research and analysis, and in support of revisions of the Consumer Price Index.

The CE program consists of two surveys, the quarterly Interview Survey and the Diary Survey (ICPSR 29883). The quarterly Interview survey is designed to collect data on major items of expense which respondents can be expected to recall for 3 months or longer. These include relatively large expenditures, such as those for property, automobiles, and major durable goods, and those that occur on a regular basis, such as rent or utilities. The Interview survey does not collect data on expenses for housekeeping supplies, personal care products, and nonprescription drugs, which contribute about 5 to 15 percent of total expenditures.

The microdata in this collection are available as SAS, STATA, SPSS data sets or ASCII text and comma-delimited files. The 2009 Interview release contains seven groups of Interview data files (FMLY, MEMB, MTAB, ITAB, ITAB_IMPUTE, FPAR, and MCHI), 50 EXPN files, and processing files.

The FMLY, MEMB, MTAB, ITAB, and ITAB_IMPUTE files are organized by the calendar quarter of the year in which the data were collected. There are five quarterly data sets for each of these files, running from the first quarter of 2009 through the first quarter of 2010. The FMLY file contains consumer unit (CU) characteristics, income, and summary level expenditures; the MEMB file contains member characteristics and income data; the MTAB file contains expenditures organized on a monthly basis at the Universal Classification Code (UCC) level; the ITAB file contains income data converted to a monthly time frame and assigned to UCCs; and the ITAB_IMPUTE file contains the five imputation variants of the income data converted to a monthly time frame and assigned to UCCs.

The FPAR and MCHI datasets are grouped as 2-year datasets (2008 and 2009), plus the first quarter of the 2010. The FPAR file contains CU level data about the Interview survey, including paradata collected about the interview within the interview collection instrument (CAPI). This data includes information on the amount of time required to collect each interview and interview section, as well as other interviewer entered information about the resulting survey. The MCHI file contains data about each interview contact attempt, including reasons for refusal and times of contact. Both FPAR and MCHI files contain five quarters of data.

Each of the 50 EXPN files contains five quarters of data. The EXPN files contain data directly derived from their respective questionnaire sections.

The processing files enhance computer processing and tabulation of data, and provide descriptive information on item codes. The processing files are: (1) aggregation scheme files used in the published consumer expenditure survey interview tables and integrated tables (ISTUB and INTSTUB), (2) a UCC file that contains UCCs and their abbreviated titles, identifying the expenditure, income, or demographic item represented by each UCC, (3) a vehicle make file (CAPIVEHI), and (4) files containing sample programs. The processing files are further explained in the Interview User Guide, Section III.F.6. PROCESSING FILES. There is also a second user guide, "User's Guide to Income Imputation in the CE", which includes information on how to appropriately use the imputed income data.

Demographic and family characteristics data include age, sex, race, marital status, and CU relationships each CU member. Income information, such as wage, salary, unemployment compensation, child support, and alimony, as well as information on the employment of each CU member age 14 and over was also collected.

The Consumer Expenditure Survey (CE) program provides a continuous and comprehensive flow of data on the buying habits of American consumers including data on their expenditures, income, and consumer unit (families and single consumers) characteristics. These data are used widely in economic research and analysis, and in support of revisions of the Consumer Price Index.

The CE program is comprised of two separate components (each with its own questionnaire and independent sample), the quarterly Interview Survey and the Diary Survey (ICPSR 32482). This data collection contains the quarterly Interview Survey data, which was designed to collect data on major items of expense which respondents could be expected to recall for 3 months or longer. These included relatively large expenditures, such as those for property, automobiles, and major durable goods, and those that occurred on a regular basis, such as rent or utilities. The Interview Survey does not collect data on expenses for housekeeping supplies, personal care products, and nonprescription drugs, which contribute about 5 to 15 percent of total expenditures.

The microdata in this collection are available as SAS, STATA, SPSS data sets or ASCII text and comma-delimited files. The 2010 Interview Survey release contains seven groups of Interview data files (FMLY, MEMB, MTAB, ITAB, ITAB_IMPUTE, FPAR, and MCHI), 50 EXPN files, and processing files.

The FMLY, MEMB, MTAB, ITAB, and ITAB_IMPUTE files are organized by the calendar quarter of the year in which the data were collected. There are five quarterly data sets for each of these files, running from the first quarter of 2010 through the first quarter of 2011. The FMLY file contains consumer unit (CU) characteristics, income, and summary level expenditures; the MEMB file contains member characteristics and income data; the MTAB file contains expenditures organized on a monthly basis at the Universal Classification Code (UCC) level; the ITAB file contains income data converted to a monthly time frame and assigned to UCCs; and the ITAB_IMPUTE file contains the five imputation variants of the income data converted to a monthly time frame and assigned to UCCs.

The FPAR and MCHI datasets are grouped as 2-year datasets (2009 and 2010), plus the first quarter of the 2011. The FPAR file contains CU level data about the Interview survey, including paradata collected about the interview within the interview collection instrument (CAPI). This data includes information on the amount of time required to collect each interview and interview section, as well as other interviewer entered information about the resulting survey. The MCHI file contains data about each interview contact attempt, including reasons for refusal and times of contact. Both FPAR and MCHI files contain five quarters of data.

Each of the 50 EXPN files contains five quarters of data. The EXPN files contain data directly derived from their respective questionnaire sections.

The processing files enhance computer processing and tabulation of data, and provide descriptive information on item codes. The processing files are: (1) aggregation scheme files used in the published consumer expenditure survey interview tables and integrated tables (ISTUB and INTSTUB), (2) a UCC file that contains UCCs and their abbreviated titles, identifying the expenditure, income, or demographic item represented by each UCC, (3) a vehicle make file (CAPIVEHI), and (4) files containing sample programs. The processing files are further explained in the Interview User Guide, Section III.F.6. PROCESSING FILES. There is also a second user guide, "User's Guide to Income Imputation in the CE", which includes information on how to appropriately use the imputed income data.

Demographic and family characteristics data include age, sex, race, marital status, and CU relationships for each CU member. Income information, such as wage, salary, unemployment compensation, child support, and alimony, as well as information on the employment of each CU member age 14 and over was also collected.

The Consumer Expenditure Survey (CE) program provides a continuous and comprehensive flow of data on the buying habits of American consumers including data on their expenditures, income, and consumer unit (families and single consumers) characteristics. These data are used widely in economic research and analysis, and in support of revisions of the Consumer Price Index.

The CE program is comprised of two separate components (each with its own questionnaire and independent sample), the quarterly Interview Survey and the Diary Survey (ICPSR 34442). This data collection contains the quarterly Interview Survey data, which was designed to collect data on major items of expense which respondents could be expected to recall for 3 months or longer. These included relatively large expenditures, such as those for property, automobiles, and major durable goods, and those that occurred on a regular basis, such as rent or utilities. The Interview Survey does not collect data on expenses for housekeeping supplies, personal care products, and nonprescription drugs, which contribute about 5 to 15 percent of total expenditures.

The microdata in this collection are available as SAS, SPSS, and STATA datasets or ASCII comma-delimited files. The 2011 Interview Survey release contains seven groups of Interview data files (FMLY, MEMB, MTBI, ITBI, ITII, FPAR, and MCHI), 50 EXPN files, and processing files.

The FMLY, MEMB, MTBI, ITBI, and ITII files are organized by the calendar quarter of the year in which the data were collected. There are five quarterly datasets for each of these files, running from the first quarter of 2011 through the first quarter of 2012. The FMLY file contains consumer unit (CU) characteristics, income, and summary level expenditures; the MEMB file contains member characteristics and income data; the MTBI file contains expenditures organized on a monthly basis at the Universal Classification Code (UCC) level; the ITBI file contains income data converted to a monthly time frame and assigned to UCCs; and the ITII file contains the five imputation variants of the income data converted to a monthly time frame and assigned to UCCs.

The FPAR and MCHI datasets are grouped as 2-year datasets (2010 and 2011), plus the first quarter of the 2012 and contain paradata about the Interview survey. The FPAR file contains CU level data about the Interview survey, including timing and record use. The MCHI file contains data about each interview contact attempt, including reasons for refusal and times of contact. Both FPAR and MCHI files contain five quarters of data.

The EXPN files contain expenditure data and ancillary descriptive information, often not available on the FMLY or MTBI files, in a format similar to the Interview questionnaire. In addition to the extra information available on the EXPN files, users can identify distinct spending categories easily and reduce processing time due to the organization of the files by type of expenditure. Each of the 50 EXPN files contains five quarters of data, directly derived from their respective questionnaire sections.

The processing files enhance computer processing and tabulation of data, and provide descriptive information on item codes. The processing files are: (1) aggregation scheme files used in the published consumer expenditure survey interview tables and integrated tables (ISTUB and INTSTUB), (2) a UCC file that contains UCCs and their abbreviated titles, identifying the expenditure, income, or demographic item represented by each UCC, (3) a vehicle make file (CAPIVEHI), and (4) files containing sample programs. The processing files are further explained in the Interview User Guide, Section III.G.8. "PROCESSING FILES." There is also a second user guide, User's Guide to Income Imputation in the CE, which includes information on how to appropriately use the imputed income data.

Demographic and family characteristics data include age, sex, race, marital status, and CU relationships for each CU member. Income information, such as wage, salary, unemployment compensation, child support, and alimony, as well as information on the employment of each CU member age 14 and over was also collected.

The Consumer Expenditure Survey (CE) program provides a continuous and comprehensive flow of data on the buying habits of American consumers, including data on their expenditures, income, and consumer unit (families and single consumers) characteristics. These data are used widely in economic research and analysis, and in support of revisions of the Consumer Price Index.

The CE program is comprised of two separate components, each with its own questionnaire and independent sample: (1) the quarterly Interview Survey, and (2) the Diary Survey. This data collection contains the quarterly Interview Survey data, which was designed to collect data on major items of expense which respondents could be expected to recall for 3 months or longer. Items include relatively large expenditures, such as those for property, automobiles, and major durable goods, and those that occurred on a regular basis, such as rent or utilities. The Interview Survey does not collect data on expenses for housekeeping supplies, personal care products, and nonprescription drugs, which contribute about 5 to 15 percent of total expenditures.

The 2013 Interview Survey contains eight groups of Interview data files (FMLI, MEMI, MTBI, ITBI, ITII, NTAXI, FPAR, and MCHI), forty-three Detailed Expenditure (EXPN) files, and processing files. The FMLI, MEMI, MTBI, ITBI, ITII, and NTAXI files are organized by the calendar quarter of the year in which the data were collected. There are five quarterly datasets for each of these files, running from the first quarter of 2013 through the first quarter of 2014 (with NTAXI files starting the second quarter of 2013). The FMLI file contains consumer unit (CU) characteristics, income, and summary level expenditures; the MEMI file contains member characteristics and income data; the MTBI file contains expenditures organized on a monthly basis at the Universal Classification Code (UCC) level; the ITBI file contains income data converted to a monthly time frame and assigned to UCCs; and the ITII file contains the five imputation variants of the income data converted to a monthly time frame and assigned to UCCs. The NTAXI file contains federal and state tax information for each tax unit within the CU.

The FPAR and MCHI datasets are grouped as 2-year datasets (2012 and 2013), plus the first quarter of 2014, and contain paradata about the Interview survey. The FPAR file contains CU level data about the Interview survey, including timing and record use. The MCHI file contains data about each interview contact attempt, including reasons for refusal and times of contact. Both FPAR and MCHI files contain five quarters of data.

The EXPN files contain expenditure data and ancillary descriptive information, often not available on the FMLI or MTBI files, in a format similar to the Interview questionnaire. In addition to the extra information available on the EXPN files, users can identify distinct spending categories easily and reduce processing time due to the organization of the files by type of expenditure. Each of the 43 EXPN files contains five quarters of data, directly derived from their respective questionnaire sections.

The processing files enhance computer processing and tabulation of data, and provide descriptive information on item codes. There are two types of processing files: (1) aggregation scheme files used in the published consumer expenditure survey interview tables and integrated tables (ISTUB and INTSTUB), and (2) a vehicle make file (CAPIVEHI). The processing files are further explained in the Interview Survey Users' Guide, Section III.H.9. "Processing Files." In addition to the primary users' guide, the Users' Guide to Income Imputation provides information on how to appropriately use the imputed income data.

Demographic and family characteristics data include age, sex, race, marital status, and CU relationships for each CU member. Income information was also collected, such as wage, salary, unemployment compensation, child support, and alimony, as well as information on the employment of each CU member age 14 and over.

The unpublished integrated CE data tables produced by the BLS are available to download through NADAC (click on "Other" in the Dataset(s) section). The tables show average and percentile expenditures for detailed items, as well as the standard error and coefficient of variation (CV) for each spending estimate. The BLS unpublished integrated CE data tables are provided as an easy-to-use tool for obtaining spending estimates. However, users are cautioned to read the BLS explanatory letter accompanying the tables. The letter explains that estimates of average expenditures on detailed spending items (such as leisure and art-related categories) may be unreliable due to so few reports of expenditures for those items.

The Consumer Pyramids is the largest survey of households in India. The survey contains record-level data that are delivered in the form of population estimates. The survey contains multiple databases that contain population estimates on household demographics, household income and expenses, borrowing by household, and household assets. The data also contain individual-level health status, financial inclusion, education level, and caste and literacy estimates. Demographic information collected include gender, age, religion, education, and occupation.

Database Composition: The Consumer Pyramids Survey is conducted over the course of four-month periods or waves throughout the year totaling three rounds a year. This collection includes the following six databases: People of India; Household Income and Expenses; Household Amenities, Assets, and Liabilities; Household Expenses; Composition of Incomes at the member level; Composition of Incomes at the household level.

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.

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 Displaced New Orleans Residents Pilot Study was designed to examine the current location, well-being, and plans of people who lived in the city of New Orleans when Hurricane Katrina struck on August 29, 2005. The study is based on a representative sample of pre-Katrina dwellings in New Orleans. Fieldwork focused on tracking respondents wherever they currently resided, including back to New Orleans. Respondents were administered a short paper-and-pencil interview by mail, by telephone, or in person. The pilot study was fielded in the fall of 2006, approximately one year after Hurricane Katrina. The goal of DNORPS was to assess the feasibility of the study design and thereby to lay the groundwork for launching a major longitudinal study of displaced New Orleans residents.

ICPSR only holds the public data for the pilot study. The main study (DNORS) was carried out 2009-2010. These data are not yet publicly available, but for more information, visit the RAND Corporation website.

The First Baby Study (FBS) was a prospective cohort study designed to investigate the association between mode of delivery at first childbirth (cesarean or vaginal) and subsequent fecundity and fertility over the course of a 3-year follow-up period. Women were enrolled during pregnancy and interviewed by telephone in their third trimester. Enrolled participants were followed-up with and surveyed at 1, 6, 12, 18, 24, 30 and 36 months postpartum. Participants were enrolled in 2009 to 2011 and the last interview was conducted in 2014.

The Future of Families and Child Wellbeing Study (FFCWS, formerly known as the Fragile Families and Child Wellbeing Study) follows a cohort of nearly 5,000 children born in large, U.S. cities between 1998 and 2000. The study oversampled births to unmarried couples; and, when weighted, the data are representative of births in large U.S. cities at the turn of the century. The FFCWS was originally designed to address four questions of great interest to researchers and policy makers:

1. What are the conditions and capabilities of unmarried parents, especially fathers?
2. What is the nature of the relationships between unmarried parents?
3. How do children born into these families fare?
4. How do policies and environmental conditions affect families and children?

The FFCWS consists of interviews with mothers, fathers, and/or primary caregivers at birth and again when children are ages 1, 3, 5, 9, 15, and 22. The parent interviews collected information on attitudes, relationships, parenting behavior, demographic characteristics, health (mental and physical), economic and employment status, neighborhood characteristics, and program participation. Beginning at age 9, children were interviewed directly (either during the home visit or on the telephone). The direct child interviews collected data on family relationships, home routines, schools, peers, and physical and mental health, as well as health behaviors.

A collaborative study of the FFCWS, the In-Home Longitudinal Study of Pre-School Aged Children (In-Home Study) collected data from a subset of the FFCWS Core respondents at the Year 3 and 5 follow-ups to ask how parental resources in the form of parental presence or absence, time, and money influence children under the age of 5. The In-Home Study collected information on a variety of domains of the child's environment, including: the physical environment (quality of housing, nutrition and food security, health care, adequacy of clothing and supervision) and parenting (parental discipline, parental attachment, and cognitive stimulation). In addition, the In-Home Study also collected information on several important child outcomes, including anthropometrics, child behaviors, and cognitive ability. This information was collected through interviews with the child's primary caregiver, and direct observation of the child's home environment and the child's interactions with his or her caregiver.

Similar activities were conducted during the Year 9 follow-up. At the Year 15 follow-up, a condensed set of home visit activities were conducted with a subsample of approximately 1,000 teens. Teens who participated in the In-Home Study were also invited to participate in a Sleep Study and were asked to wear an accelerometer on their non-dominant wrist for seven consecutive days to track their sleep (Sleep Actigraphy Data) and that day's behaviors and mood (Daily Sleep Actigraphy and Diary Survey Data).

An additional collaborative study collected data from the child care provider (Year 3) and teacher (Years 9 and 15) through mail-based surveys. Saliva samples were collected at Year 9 and 15 (Biomarker file and Polygenic Scores). The Study of Adolescent Neural Development (SAND) COVID Study began data collection in May 2020 following the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic. It included online surveys with the young adult and their primary caregiver.

The FFCWS began its seventh wave of data collection in October 2020, around the focal child's 22nd birthday. Data collection and interviews continued through January 2024. The Year 22 wave included a young adult (YA) survey with the original focal child and a primary caregiver (PCG) survey. Data were also collected on the children of the original focal child (referred to as Generation 3, or G3).

In 2017, the FFCWS team announced the Fragile Families (FF) Challenge, a collaborative effort in which participants were tasked with using machine learning methods and FFCWS data (Baseline to Year 9) to build a model that would predict six key outcomes at Year 15. Materials used in the FF Challenge have been archived in this collection.

Documentation for these files is available on the FFCWS website under Data and Documentation. For details of updates made to the FFCWS data files, please see the project's Data Alerts page.

Data collection for the Future of Families and Child Wellbeing Study was supported by the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (NICHD) of the National Institutes of Health under award numbers R01HD36916, R01HD39135, and R01HD40421, as well as a consortium of private foundations.

Below is the citation for use of the FFCWS data accessed through ICPSR. For information on additional citation requirements when using FFCWS in publications, please refer to this FAQ on the FFCWS project site.

The Generations study is a five-year study designed to examine health and well-being across three generations of lesbians, gay men, and bisexuals (LGB). The study explored identity, stress, health outcomes, and health care and services utilization among LGBs in three generations of adults who came of age during different historical contexts. This collection includes baseline, wave 1, and wave 2 data collected as part of the Generations study.

The study aimed to assess whether younger cohorts of LGBs differed from older cohorts in how they viewed their LGB identity and experienced stress related to prejudice and everyday forms of discrimination, as well as whether patterns of resilience differed between different LGB cohorts. Additionally, the study sought to examine how differences in stress experience affected mental health and well-being, including depressive and anxiety symptoms, substance and alcohol use, suicide ideation and behavior, and how younger LGBs utilized LGB-oriented social and health services, relative to older cohorts.

In wave 2, respondents were re-interviewed approximately one year after completion of the baseline (wave 1) survey. Only respondents who participated in the original sample of participants were surveyed at wave 2 (i.e., the enhancement oversample was not included in the longitudinal design of this study).

In wave 3, respondents were re-interviewed approximately one year after the completion of the wave 2 survey.

Demographic variables collected as part of this study include questions related to age, education, race, ethnicity, sexual identity, gender identity, income, employment, and religiosity.

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).

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?

FACES also supports analyses of subgroups of interest, such as children with disabilities, dual language learners, and children who are performing above or below average on standardized assessments. Its design changes in response to emerging policy and research questions. For example, in response to the growing concern about childhood obesity, measures of children's height and weight were introduced in FACES 2006.

Measures for FACES 2006 were selected to balance the need to support comparisons to previous cohorts of FACES (particularly with respect to program performance measures) against the need to update the measurement battery and address emerging policy issues and benefits from progress in the assessment field. Many of the measures used in FACES 2006 were included in previous cohorts and they are presented below by the five major measurement sources in FACES: (1) child direct assessments; (2) parent interviews; (3) teacher interviews and survey; (4) classroom observations; and (5) program director, center director, and education coordinator interviews.

1. The child direct assessments included the major components of school readiness. They included a language screener, the Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test, Fourth Edition/Test de Vocabulario de Imagines Peabody, subtests from the Woodcock-Johnson Tests of Achievement Third Edition/Bateria III Woodcock-Munoz (letter word identification, applied problems, spelling, and word attack), a measure of early math literacy based on items from the Early Childhood Longitudinal Study, Birth and Kindergarten Cohorts math assessments (geometry, patterns, and measurement), story and print concepts, and physical measurements (height and weight). At the end of the direct child assessment, interviewers rate the child's attention, organization/impulse control, activity level, and sociability using items from the Leiter-R scales.
2. The parent interview was designed to provide Head Start with a comprehensive understanding of the families that they serve, including the demographic characteristics of households and household members, parent-child relationships and the quality of the child's home life, and parent ratings of the child's behavior problems, social skills, and competencies, levels and types of participation in the program and in other community services.
3. The Head Start teacher interview was designed to collect information about classroom and teacher characteristics related to the quality of care provided by Head Start programs. Teachers were asked about their classroom activities and use of curricula, as well as their demographic and educational background and professional experience. They also used a Web survey to rate the social skills, problem behaviors, and competencies of each FACES child in their classroom. Kindergarten teachers provided information about schools attended by Head Start children, their classrooms and school experiences using a Web survey. They also completed ratings of each FACES child's social skills, behavior problems and competencies.
4. The classroom observations were designed to measure peer interactions and the extent to which Head Start programs employed skilled teachers and provided developmentally appropriate environments and curricula for their children. The measures used included the Early Childhood Environment Rating Scale-Revised (ECERS-R), the Arnett Scale of Lead Teacher Behavior, and the Instructional Support scale from the Classroom Assessment Scoring System (CLASS). Counts of children and adults were also taken to calculate group size and child-adult ratios.
5. The Program Director, Center Director, and Education Coordinator Interviews gathered information about staffing and recruitment, teacher education initiatives and training, waiting lists and program expansion, classroom activities, curriculum, overview of program management, and parent involvement.

The User Guide provides detailed information about the FACES 2006 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

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

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 Helping Young Smokers Quit (HYSQ) initiative was a multi-phase project that addressed the critical need to disseminate effective, developmentally appropriate cessation programs for young smokers. Phase I identified and described tobacco treatment programs available for youth in the United States, Phase II evaluated smoking secession programs tailored for youth to help understand what works, and Phase III identified factors associated with program sustainability. Phase II collected data from five sources: (1) program participants, (2) program providers, (3) program curricula, (4) organizational leaders, and (5) community leaders and community ordinances.

Program participants were interviewed at baseline, end-of program, 6-month follow-up, and 12-month follow-up. Topics covered by the interviews include age, gender, race, Hispanic origin, language spoken at home, employment, income, religiosity, school enrollment, education level, school grades, height, weight, extracurricular activities, recreation, sports, exercise, aspirations after high school, psychological well-being, alcohol consumption, cigarette use and use of other tobacco products, attitudes about smoking, plans to stop/continue smoking, attempts to quit smoking, reasons for participating in the program, topics/issues covered by the program, opinions about the program, and smoking experience since the beginning of the program. In addition, for each follow-up survey, the participants provided a breath sample for carbon monoxide analysis to validate self-reported quit status.

After the last session of each program delivery, the program providers, such as program leaders and cessation counselors, were interviewed about the content and delivery of the program and the reactions of the participants and themselves to the program as delivered. The program providers also kept attendance records.

Curriculum content was abstracted from program manuals and other materials used in each program.

Organizational leaders of the organizations that offered the programs were surveyed about various aspects of each organization, including the organization's smoking cessation program and the organization's mission, general operations, and smoking-related policies and practices.

Community-level information was collected in two ways: (1) interviews of community leaders representing local health departments, school boards, and juvenile justice offices, and (2) archival research of public ordinances relevant to tobacco and control policies.

Nine data files/datasets constitute the data. Datasets 1-4 contain the participant questionnaire data, carbon monoxide measurement data, and program attendance data. Dataset 5 comprises information about each program and its curriculum, some information about the community in which the program was located, and summary data about enforcement of tobacco-related ordinances. Dataset 6 contains information about about the program providers and each program delivery, including recruitment, logistics, content, and the reactions of providers and participants. Dataset 7 covers administrative aspects of the smoking cessation programs and each offering organization's mission, general operations, and smoking-related policies and norms. Dataset 8 contains information about local and state-level tobacco-related ordinances for every state and local jurisdiction where each program was located, and Dataset 9 condenses the information in Dataset 8 into one summary record for each community. The unit of observation for Datasets 1-4 is the participant, for Datasets 5 and 7 the smoking cessation program/offering organization, for Dataset 6 the program delivery/program cohort, for Dataset 8 the ordinance, and for Dataset 9 the community.

The first goal of this study was to identify the incidence of partner violence among Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) recipients over a three-year period. The second goal of this study was to examine the impact of partner violence on women's labor force participation over time. A final goal of this research was to explore the short and longer-term consequences of victimization on women's employment and economic well-being, as well as their physical and mental health.

This study used the first three years of data from the Illinois Families Study (IFS). The first of the annual surveys was administered between November 1999 and September 2000, the second between February 2001 and September 2001, and the third between February 2002 and September 2002.

The three data files contain very similar information including such items as a household roster, housing and neighborhood characteristics, employment, literacy and skills, parenting, and children. There is also information related to the respondent's history, health, self-efficacy, life events, experiences with domestic violence, civic participation and social support, income resources, and experiences with welfare.

The Part 1 (Wave 1 Data) data file contains 1,323 cases and 942 variables. The Part 2 (Wave 2 Data) data file contains 1,183 cases and 763 variables. The Part 3 (Wave 3 Data) data file contains 1,072 cases and 778 variables.

Additional information about the Illinois Families Study (IFS) is available on the IFS Web site.

The NIH-funded Katrina@10 Program consists of an interrelated set of three primary data collection projects that focus on specific sub-populations who were uniquely affected by Hurricane Katrina: households along Louisiana and Mississippi's Gulf Coast, low-income parents from New Orleans, and Vietnamese families living in New Orleans. In addition, the program contains two secondary analyses of data that are more broadly representative of the overall affected population, and three cores (Administrative, Data Collection, Data Management and Dissemination) to support the set of research projects. The following research questions represent the studies together as a whole:

• How well does the socio-ecological model of disaster recovery developed by the research team (Abramson et al. 2010) predict recovery across the three cohort studies?
• How do trajectories of long-term recovery differ among and within these sub-populations?
• How do the trajectories of recovery compare to those of mainstream populations?
• How do the effects of predisposing factors (such as poverty) and degree-of-impact (such as flooding depth) vary among the three sub-populations?
• How do interpretations of the disaster, resilience, and recovery differ among respondents?
• What are the determinants of long-term recovery in domains such as mental and physical health, socio-economic status, and community and social roles? How are these domains related to each other across individuals and across sub-populations?

This collection contains data from the Gulf Coast Child and Family Health Study (GCAFH), a longitudinal cohort study of families living in the Louisiana and Mississippi Gulf Coast who had been displaced or sustained extensive household damage due to Hurricane Katrina. The GCAFH research team collected survey data from the initial cohort in 2006 (n=1,079) with multiple follow-ups through 2010, assessing post-disaster recovery via indicators such as economic recovery, social engagement, personal resilience, community cohesion, infrastructure stability, and physical and mental health.

The data in this collection is from the most recent survey follow-up with participants, conducted between 2016 and 2018. A public-use version (DS1) and restricted-use version (DS2) are available. Open-ended responses, continuous respondent age, continuous total household income, and a 7-category race variable have been masked in the public-use version. These items are available in the restricted-use version.

The NIH-funded KATRINA@10 Program consists of an interrelated set of three primary data collection projects that focus on specific sub-populations who were uniquely affected by Hurricane Katrina: households along Louisiana and Mississippi's Gulf Coast, low-income parents from New Orleans, and Vietnamese families living in New Orleans. In addition, the program contains two secondary analyses of data that are more broadly representative of the overall affected population, and three cores (Administrative, Data Collection, Data Management and Dissemination) to support the set of research projects. The following research questions represent the studies together as a whole:

• How well does the socio-ecological model of disaster recovery developed by the research team (Abramson et al. 2010) predict recovery across the three cohort studies?
• How do trajectories of long-term recovery differ among and within these sub-populations?
• How do the trajectories of recovery compare to those of mainstream populations?
• How do the effects of predisposing factors (such as poverty) and degree-of-impact (such as flooding depth) vary among the three sub-populations?
• How do interpretations of the disaster, resilience, and recovery differ among respondents?
• What are the determinants of long-term recovery in domains such as mental and physical health, socio-economic status, and community and social roles? How are these domains related to each other across individuals and across sub-populations?

This collection contains data from the Resilience in Survivors of Katrina (RISK) Project, which was a longitudinal study of low-income parents who lived in New Orleans at the time of Hurricane Katrina (August 2005). The initial study design was intended to increase educational attainment among college students, measuring economic status, social ties, and mental and physical health starting in 2003 (initial cohort n=1,019). However, with the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina, the research design evolved to study the consequences of a disaster for the lives of vulnerable individuals and their families. Follow-up surveys and in-depth qualitative interviews were conducted with participants at one year and five years post-Katrina, regardless of where participants lived.

The data in this collection is from the most recent survey follow-up with RISK Project participants (n=716), conducted between 2016 and 2018. A public-use version (DS1) and restricted-use version (DS2) are available. Open-ended responses and continuous variables for respondent age and total household income have been masked in the public-use version; these items are available in the restricted-use version.

In 2000, the Kentucky General Assembly passed historic early childhood legislation (Kentucky's KIDS [Kentucky Invests in Developing Success] NOW Initiative) of which a component included the development of a seamless professional development system. The professional development system includes core content, articulation, credentials, scholarships and a training framework. This comprehensive professional development system, along with other initiative components in assuring maternal and child health, supporting families, enhancing early care and education, and establishing a support structure, have moved the field of early childhood care and education forward in the state and improved child and family outcomes.

This study was designed to build on the KIDS NOW Initiative by conducting research investigating the degree to which a statewide unified professional development system impacted the educational level of early care and education providers and subsequent classroom quality. It focused on three major predictors of professional development outcomes:

1. Individual teacher characteristics, including learning readiness, education (level and type), training experience, attitudes towards training, personality (conscientiousness, self-efficacy), job satisfaction (perceptions of support)
2. Characteristics of the program administrator, including administrator education and administrator support of professional development
3. Characteristics of the teacher's work setting, including program administration, and policies and procedures, and classroom setting (Child Care, Head Start, or Public Preschool)

The impact of these three predictors was measured on two major outcomes: (a) professional development outcomes, as measured by job status, learning and transfer of learning, and (b) organizational outcomes, as measured by program quality, child outcomes and staff retention.

The research questions guiding this research were focused on determining the degree to which (1) a unified professional development framework initiated at the state level results in positive child outcomes, and (2) the educational level of early care and education providers enhances the quality of classroom environments. Specifically:

• What components of a professional development framework are more effective in encouraging and supporting individuals to remain in early care and education settings?
• What components of a professional development framework are more effective in supporting early care and education professionals in enhancing classroom quality and child outcomes?
• Are there specific factors that impact early care and education professionals' ability to participate in professional development activities at various levels?
• Does the level and intensity of professional development experiences impact classroom quality and child outcomes?
• What personnel factors have the highest impact on quality classroom environments and child outcomes?
• What is the interaction between the personnel, professional development, and program variables on classroom quality and child outcomes?

The Longitudinal Study of Generations (LSOG), initiated in 1971, began as a survey of intergenerational relations among 300 three-generation California families with grandparents (then in their sixties), middle-aged parents (then in their early forties), and grandchildren (then aged 15 to 26). The study broadened in 1991 and now includes a fourth generation, the great-grandchildren of these same families.

The LSOG, with a fully elaborated generation-sequential design, allows comparisons of sets of aging parents and children at the same stage of life but during different historical periods. These comparisons make possible the investigation of the effects of social change on inter-generational solidarity or conflict across 35 years and four generations, as well as the effects of social change on the ability of families to buffer stressful life transitions (e.g., aging, divorce and remarriage, higher female labor force participation, changes in work and the economy, and possible weakening of family norms of obligation), and the effects of social change on the transmission of values, resources, and behaviors across generations.

The LSOG contains information on family structure, household composition, affectual solidarity and conflict, values, attitudes, behaviors, role importance, marital relationships, health and fitness, mental health and well-being, caregiving, leisure activities, and life events and concerns. Demographic variables include age, sex, income, employment status, marital status, socioeconomic history, education, religion, ethnicity, and military service.

The codebook for dataset 1 (DS1 Waves 1-7) is over 5000 pages long; due to complications related to the size of this document, the search function within the PDF is not yet enabled. Users seeking specific variables should use the search function within the PI Codebook, or search using the variables search tab/option from the study 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 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

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