1 / 0

Creating Local Child Well-Being Indices with Administrative Data: A Comprehensive Approach

This study, conducted by Robert Goerge and Roopa Seshadri, explores the development of child well-being indices at the local level using administrative data. It highlights the purpose of the index creation, provides background information, and outlines the various levels of aggregation. The research methodology is detailed, showcasing how data is collected and analyzed to derive meaningful insights. Results indicate the practical applications of the indices, which aim to enhance local policy-making and resource allocation for improving child welfare.

oona
Télécharger la présentation

Creating Local Child Well-Being Indices with Administrative Data: A Comprehensive Approach

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Using Administrative Data to Create Local-level Child Well-Being Indices

    Robert Goerge RoopaSeshadri
  2. Overview Purpose Background Level of Aggregation Data Description Methods Results Use of the index
  3. Purpose Build point-in-time indices of child well-being using administrative data Compare communities in Chicago Compare indices with poverty rate – Is it sufficient to use poverty rate in Chicago How might it be used?
  4. Level of aggregation Does it depend on purpose? Chicago community area - 77 communities Census tracts – 854 tracts Or some combination of tracts? If interested in general well-being, 77 may be fine, but if we are trying to address the problems, 854 may be more appropriate. Speaks to issues of resource allocation.
  5. Chicago Community Areas Described in the 1920s and divided Chicago into 77 areas. Collections of census tracts and roughly corresponded to neighborhoods. Although characteristics and homogeneity within the neighborhoods has changed over time, they continue to be used for research and policy planning purposes since their boundaries are static.
  6. Data description Poverty Poverty rate, Head Start eligibility Birth Birth rate, Births to single mothers, Birth weight Early Childhood Elevatedblood lead level, Childhood Poverty rate, Educational outcomes, Child welfare Family/Neighborhood MSF, Crime Data are annual rates and range from 2007 to 2009, depending on availability.
  7. Robust centering and autoscaling of individual indicators. Accounts for skewed distribution Standardized to a scale with mean=0 and SD=1. Accounts for the different scales and ranges Composite scores calculated as the mean of the component indicators. Equal weight to each indicator within an index Methods
  8. Indices ECRI: Composite measure of 5 indicators of early childhood (under age 6) focusing on health and welfare. Originally created to assess home visitation for early childhood care need CWI: Composite measure of 10 indicators spanning the entire range of childhood and multiple domains.
  9. Early Childhood Risk Index (ECRI)
  10. Child Well-being Index (CWI)
  11. Poverty rate vs. ECRI r=0.71
  12. Poverty vs. ECRI
  13. Poverty rate vs. CWI r=0.85
  14. Poverty vs. CWI
  15. CWI vs. ECRI r=0.8
  16. Use of the (an) index Policymakers Service providers Funders Real estate agents Researchers
More Related