Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Using Administrative Data to Create Local-level Child Well-Being Indices Robert Goerge Roopa Seshadri.

Similar presentations

Presentation on theme: "Using Administrative Data to Create Local-level Child Well-Being Indices Robert Goerge Roopa Seshadri."— Presentation transcript:

1 Using Administrative Data to Create Local-level Child Well-Being Indices Robert Goerge Roopa Seshadri

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 VariableMeanStd DevMin25th PctlMedian75th PctlMax Area (sq. mi.)2.941.810.591.752.853.5511 0-5 population31862124.1941477277242138980 0-17 population85825621577448678591175325946 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 Elevated blood 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 Methods 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

8 Indices IndexMeanStd DevMin25th PctlMedian75th PctlMax Poverty rate01-1.72-0.79-0.020.642.27 Early Childhood Risk Index00.77-1.52- Child Well-being Index00.75-1.18-0.62-0.20.512.08 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) IndicatorMin25th PctlMedian75th PctlMax Birth rate-2.2-0.760.050.662.33 % Medicaid-paid births-2.28-0.440.340.831.14 % Births to single mothers-1.72-0.79-0.020.941.53 % Low Birth Weight-1.46-0.76-0.340.63.91 0-5 Abuse-neglect rate-1.24-0.81-0.290.793.9

10 Child Well-being Index (CWI) IndicatorMin25th PctlMedian75th PctlMax 0-17 Poverty rate-1.72-0.79-0.020.642.27 Children in MSF-1.13-0.81-0.240.742.43 Head Start eligibility-0.41-0.37-0.31-0.176.29 % Low Birth Weight-1.46-0.76-0.340.63.91 0-5 Abuse-Neglect rate-1.24-0.81-0.290.793.9 % Elevated blood lead level-1.4-0.77-0.140.632.81 3rd grade retention rate-1.43-0.78-0.350.842.27 High school dropout rate-2.42-0.660.080.592.26 Violent crime rate-1.02-0.71-0.340.433.59 Property crime rate-1.06-0.67-

11 Poverty rate vs. ECRI r=0.71

12 Poverty vs. ECRI CCA 0-17 poverty rate Birth rate % Medicaid births % births to single mothers % Low birth weight 0-5 abuse- neglect rate ECRI better than Poverty rate Near North Side0.59-2.01-1.61-1.1-0.07-0.43 Near West Side1.09-0.95-1.06-0.520.030.95 Douglas1.73-1.64-0.130.451.540.2 Washington Park2.270.190.851.41.241.48 ECRI worse than Poverty rate Montclare-1.210.660.24-0.29-0.41-0.88 Fuller Park0.241.050.981.443.911.13 Archer Heights-1.071.440.77-0.02-0.88-0.7 West Elsdon-0.92.320.4-0.28-0.38-0.86 West Lawn-0.932.010.46-0.12-0.63-0.82

13 Poverty rate vs. CWI r=0.85

14 Poverty vs. CWI CCA Povert y rate 0-17 in MSF Head Start eligibili ty % LBW 0-5 abuse- neglect rate % Elevate d BLL 3 rd Grade retenti on rate High- school dropou t rate Violent crime rate Proper ty crime rate CWI better than Poverty rate South Lawndale 1.09-0.59-0.24-0.81-0.290.56-0.82-0.38-0.2-0.49 Lower West Side 1.05-0.56-0.3-0.55-0.350.49-0.910.030.150.19 Douglas1.731.1-0.021.540.2- Riverdale1.991.951.740.463.9- CWI worse than poverty rate Loop-1.720.05-0.41-0.78-1.24-1.4-0.61-1.96-0.351.55 Fuller Park

15 CWI vs. ECRI r=0.8

16 Use of the (an) index Policymakers Service providers Funders Real estate agents Researchers

Download ppt "Using Administrative Data to Create Local-level Child Well-Being Indices Robert Goerge Roopa Seshadri."

Similar presentations

Ads by Google