Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.
Reducing Intergenerational Poverty Greg J. Duncan, Jennifer Appleton Gootman, Priyanka Nalamada, Editors Committee on Policies and Programs to Reduce Intergenerational Poverty Board on Children, Youth, and Families Committee on National Statistics Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education Consensus Study Report PREPUBLICATION COPY-UNCORRECTED PROOFS
NATIONAL ACADEMIES PRESS 500 Fifth Street, NW Washington, DC 20001 This activity was supported by contracts between the National Academy of Sciences and the Administration for Children and Families, a division of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (75ACF121C00093), Bainum Family Foundation (7608), Doris Duke Foundation (2021249), Foundation for Child Development (NAS 03-2021), National Academy of Sciences W.K. Kellogg Fund, Russell Sage Foundation (2104-31166), and W.K. Kellogg Foundation (P-6000158-2021). Support for the work of the Board on Children, Youth, and Families is provided by the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation (79846). Any opinions, findings, conclusions, or recommendations expressed in this publication do not necessarily reflect the views of any organization or agency that provided support for the project. International Standard Book Number-13: XXX International Standard Book Number-10: XXX Digital Object Identifier: https://doi.org/10.7226/27058 This publication is available from the National Academies Press, 500 Fifth Street, NW, Keck 360, Washington, DC 20001; (800) 624-6242 or (202) 334-3313; http://www.nap.edu. Copyright 2023 by the National Academy of Sciences. National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine and National Academies Press and the graphical logos for each are all trademarks of the National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved. Printed in the United States of America. Suggested citation: National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2023. Reducing Intergenerational Poverty. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.7226/27058. PREPUBLICATION COPY, UNCORRECTED PROOFS
The National Academy of Sciences was established in 1863 by an Act of Congress, signed by President Lincoln, as a private, nongovernmental institution to advise the nation on issues related to science and technology. Members are elected by their peers for outstanding contributions to research. Dr. Marcia McNutt is president. The National Academy of Engineering was established in 1964 under the charter of the National Academy of Sciences to bring the practices of engineering to advising the nation. Members are elected by their peers for extraordinary contributions to engineering. Dr. John L. Anderson is president. The National Academy of Medicine (formerly the Institute of Medicine) was established in 1970 under the charter of the National Academy of Sciences to advise the nation on medical and health issues. Members are elected by their peers for distinguished contributions to medicine and health. Dr. Victor J. Dzau is president. The three Academies work together as the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine to provide independent, objective analysis and advice to the nation and conduct other activities to solve complex problems and inform public policy decisions. The National Academies also encourage education and research, recognize outstanding contributions to knowledge, and increase public understanding in matters of science, engineering, and medicine. Learn more about the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine at www.nationalacademies.org. PREPUBLICATION COPY, UNCORRECTED PROOFS
Consensus Study Reports published by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine document the evidence-based consensus on the studyâs statement of task by an authoring committee of experts. Reports typically include findings, conclusions, and recommendations based on information gathered by the committee and the committeeâs deliberations. Each report has been subjected to a rigorous and independent peer-review process and it represents the position of the National Academies on the statement of task. Proceedings published by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine chronicle the presentations and discussions at a workshop, symposium, or other event convened by the National Academies. The statements and opinions contained in proceedings are those of the participants and are not endorsed by other participants, the planning committee, or the National Academies. Rapid Expert Consultations published by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine are authored by subject-matter experts on narrowly focused topics that can be supported by a body of evidence. The discussions contained in rapid expert consultations are considered those of the authors and do not contain policy recommendations. Rapid expert consultations are reviewed by the institution before release. For information about other products and activities of the National Academies, please visit www.nationalacademies.org/about/whatwedo. PREPUBLICATION COPY, UNCORRECTED PROOFS
COMMITTEE ON POLICIES AND PROGRAMS TO REDUCE INTERGENERATIONAL POVERTY GREG J. DUNCAN (Chair), University of California, Irvine FENABA R. ADDO, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill ANNA AIZER, Brown University MARGARET R. BURCHINAL, University of Virginia RAJ CHETTY, Harvard University STEPHANIE FRYBERG, University of Michigan HARRY J. HOLZER, Georgetown University VONNIE C. MCLOYD, University of Michigan KIMBERLY G. MONTEZ, Wake Forest School of Medicine AISHA D. NYANDORO, Springboard to Opportunities MARY E. PATTILLO, Northwestern University JESSE ROTHSTEIN, University of California, Berkeley MICHAEL R. STRAIN, American Enterprise Institute STEPHEN J. TREJO, University of Texas at Austin RITA HAMAD (Consultant), James C. Puffer American Board of Family Medicine / National Academy of Medicine Fellow, Harvard School of Public Health Study Staff JENNIFER APPLETON GOOTMAN, Study Director (from March 2022) SUZANNE LE MENESTREL, Study Director (until January 2022) PRIYANKA NALAMADA, Program Officer BRIANA SMITH, Senior Program Assistant (from July 2022) MARISSA GLOVER, Senior Program Assistant (until July 2022) EMILY P. BACKES, Deputy Board Director PREPUBLICATION COPY, UNCORRECTED PROOFS v
BOARD ON CHILDREN, YOUTH, AND FAMILIES JONATHAN TODRES (Chair), Georgia State University College of Law RICHARD F. CATALANO, JR., University of Washington School of Social Work TAMMY CHANG, University of Michigan DIMITRI A. CHRISTAKIS, Seattle Childrenâs Research Institute, University of Washington ANDREA GONZALEZ, McMaster University NANCY E. HILL, Harvard University CHARLES HOMER, Economic Mobility Pathways MARGARET KUKLINSKI, University of Washington MICHAEL C. LU, UC Berkeley School of Public Health STEPHANIE J. MONROE, Wrenwood Group STEPHEN RUSSELL, The University of Texas at Austin NISHA SACHDEV, Premnas Partners, Washington, DC JANE WALDFOGEL, Columbia University School of Social Work JOANNA L. WILLIAMS, Rutgers University Staff NATACHA BLAIN, Senior Board Director EMILY P. BACKES, Deputy Board Director PREPUBLICATION COPY, UNCORRECTED PROOFS vi
Reviewers This Consensus Study Report was reviewed in draft form by individuals chosen for their diverse perspectives and technical expertise. The purpose of this independent review is to provide candid and critical comments that will assist the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine in making each published report as sound as possible and to ensure that it meets the institutional standards for quality, objectivity, evidence, and responsiveness to the study charge. The review comments and draft manuscript remain confidential to protect the integrity of the deliberative process. We thank the following individuals for their review of this report: RICHARD V. BURKHAUSER, Cornell University RONALD F. FERGUSON, Harvard University VIVIAN L. GADSDEN, University of Pennsylvania CHARLES J. HOMER, Economic Mobility Pathways KATHERINE MAGNUSON, University of WisconsinâMadison CYNTHIA S. OSBORNE, Vanderbilt University STEVEN RAPHAEL, University of California, Berkeley H. LUKE SHAEFER, University of Michigan C. MATTHEW SNIPP, Stanford University FLORENCIA TORCHE, Stanford University Although the reviewers listed above provided many constructive comments and suggestions, they were not asked to endorse the conclusions or recommendations of this report nor did they see the final draft before its release. The review of this report was overseen by KENNETH A. DODGE, Duke University, and SHERRY GLIED, New York University. They were responsible for making certain that an independent examination of this report was carried out in accordance with the standards of the National Academies and that all review comments were carefully considered. Responsibility for the final content rests entirely with the authoring committee and the National Academies. PREPUBLICATION COPY, UNCORRECTED PROOFS vii
Acknowledgments An ad hoc consensus study committee of the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine was convened to analyze the evidence on key determinants of intergenerational poverty and the effectiveness of programs designed to address those determinants in order to identify policies and programs with the potential to reduce long-term, intergenerational poverty. The committee thanks the sponsors of this study for their support: the Administration for Children and Families, a division of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, the Bainum Family Foundation, the Doris Duke Foundation, the Foundation for Child Development, the National Academy of Sciences W.K. Kellogg Fund, the Russell Sage Foundation, and the W.K. Kellogg Foundation. This report would not have been possible without the contributions of many people. Special thanks go to the members of the committee, who dedicated extensive time, expertise, and energy to the drafting of the report. The committee also thanks the members of the staff of the National Academies for their significant contributions to the report: Jennifer Appleton Gootman, Priyanka Nalamada, Emily Backes, and Briana Smith, as well as Suzanne LeMenestral and Marissa Glover, who both contributed to the early stages of working with the committee. The committee is also grateful to Javed Kahn, Pamella Atayi, and Lisa Alston for their administrative and financial assistance on this project. From the Office of Reports and Communication of the Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education (DBASSE), Kirsten Sampson Snyder, Viola Horek, Douglas Sprunger, and Meredith Fender shepherded the report through the review and the production process and assisted with its communication and dissemination. Hannah Fuller and Megan Lowry, of the Office of News and Public Information, and Sandra McDermin and Julie Eubank, of the Office of Congressional and Government Affairs, were instrumental in the release and promotion of the report. The committee also thanks Clair Woolley of the National Academies Press and Bea Porter of DBASSE for their assistance with the production of the final report; Anne Marie Houppert, in the National Academies research library, for her assistance with fact checking and literature searches; and Connie Citro and Alix Beatty, National Academies staff, for their skillful writing and editing contributions. Many individuals volunteered significant time and effort to address and educate the committee during our information gathering sessions. Their willingness to share their perspectives, research, and personal experiences was essential to the committeeâs work. We thank: Megan Bang, Northwestern University; Jill Duerr Berrick, UC Berkeley; Cheryl Crazy Bull, American Indian College Fund; Matt Gregg, Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis; Brenda Jones Harden, University of Maryland; Anna Haskins, University of Notre Dame; Joe Hobot, American Indian OIC; Kevin Killer, Oglala Sioux Tribe; Judith Leblanc, Native Organizers Alliance and Parents; Jens Ludwig, The University of Chicago; Susan Mangold, Juvenile Law Center; Leslie Paik, Arizona State University; Steven Raphael, UC Berkeley; Beth Redbird, Northwestern University; Emilia Simeonova, Johns Hopkins University; C. Matt Snipp, Stanford University; Karina L. Walters, University of Washington; Bruce Western, Columbia University; and the parents, caregivers, organizational representatives, and policy experts who participated in our listening sessions. The committee thanks the researchers who conducted original analyses and prepared commissioned papers: Lawrence M. Berger, Sophie Collyer, Brenda Jones Harden, Margaret Thomas, Jane Waldfogel, Chris Wimer; as well as the staff at Ascend, Aspen Institute, for PREPUBLICATION COPY, UNCORRECTED PROOFS viii
organizing and shepherding the committeeâs listening sessions: Marjorie Sims and Andrea Camp. The committee also thanks the following individuals for their contributions to this study and the final report: Nicholas Ainsworth, Dorothy Duncan, Jonathan Fisher, Abby Hiller, David Johnson, Zachary Parolin, and Austen Zheng. Throughout the project, Natacha Blain, director of the Board on Children, Youth, and Families, Carlotta Arthur and Patti Simon, executive director and associate executive director of DBASSE, and Mary Ellen OâConnell and Monica Feit, the then executive director and deputy executive director of DBASSE, provided valuable oversight and guidance. Greg J. Duncan, Chair Committee on Policies and Programs to Reduce Intergenerational Poverty PREPUBLICATION COPY, UNCORRECTED PROOFS ix
Contents Summary 1 1 Introduction 18 Study Approach Organization of the Report Defining Intergenerational Poverty Organizing Our Discussion of Drivers and Interventions Applying a Racial/Ethnic Lens in Assessing the Evidence Criteria for Selecting Program and Policy Interventions Strength of the Research Evidence Magnitude of Impacts and Costs of Policies and Programs Possible Behavioral Responses to Policies and Programs Policy Conclusions Political Feasibility Considering Combinations of Programs 2 A Demographic Portrait of Intergenerational Child Poverty 32 Measuring Intergenerational Poverty The Demographics of Intergenerational Poverty A Broader Look at Intergenerational Income Mobility Across Groups Intergenerational Income Mobility Among Children of Immigrants The Geographic Distribution of Intergenerational Poverty Intergenerational Mobility: Trends and Comparisons with Other Counties Trends in U.S. Intergenerational Mobility Intergenerational Mobility in the United States Versus Other Countries 3 Racial Disparities in Intergenerational Poverty 49 Defining Disparity, Inequality, Discrimination, and Structural Racism Historical Roots of Racial Disparities in Intergenerational Mobility Contemporary Drivers of Racial Disparity in Intergenerational Poverty Education Health Wages and Employment Housing and Neighborhood Environments Crime, Victimization, and Criminal Justice Child Welfare System Some Implications for Program and Policy Interventions 4 Childrenâs Education 69 How Education Affects the Economic Mobility of Children Achievement and Attainment Differences Across Racial and Ethnic Groups Early-Life Education, Care, and Parenting PREPUBLICATION COPY, UNCORRECTED PROOFS x
Elementary and Secondary Education Postsecondary Education Career Training Education Interventions K-12 Policy and Program Ideas Based on Direct Evidence K-12 Policy and Program Ideas Based on Indirect Evidence Postsecondary Education Policy and Program Ideas Based on Direct Evidence Postsecondary Education Policy and Program Ideas Based on Indirect Evidence Career Training Policy and Program Ideas Based on Direct Evidence 5 Child and Maternal Health 87 Health Differences Across Income, Racial, and Ethnic Groups How Health Affects the Economic Mobility of Children Access to Health Care: Family Planning, Medicaid, Indian Health Services, and Mental Health Services Access to Family Planning Services Health Insurance Coverage During Pregnancy and Childhood Through Medicaid Access to Publicly Provided Health Care via the Indian Health Service (IHS) Access to Mental Health Care Environmental Influences as a Driver: Pollution, Stress, and Violence Pollution Increased Stress in Utero and During Childhood Greater Exposure to Violence, Especially Gun Violence Nutrition and Food Insecurity as a Driver Interventions Involving Childrenâs Health Increasing Access to Health Care Based on Direct Evidence Improving the Environment Based on Direct Evidence Improving Nutrition Based on Direct Evidence Health Interventions Based on Indirect Evidence Increasing Access to Medical Care Among Native American Families Increasing Access to Mental Health Care Reducing Child Exposure to Pollution Increasing Child Nutrition via WIC 6 Childrenâs Family Income, Wealth, and Parental Employment 113 Trends in Income and Earnings Family Income and Child Poverty International Comparisons of Child Poverty Rates Trends in Earnings and Employment Causes of Labor Market Trends Causes of Unequal Employment and Earnings by Gender and Race Do Family Income, Parental Employment, and Earnings During Childhood Drive Intergenerational Poverty? Childhood Poverty and Intergenerational Outcomes Parental Employment and Intergenerational Outcomes Increased Access to Work-Based Safety-Net Benefits PREPUBLICATION COPY, UNCORRECTED PROOFS xi
Wealth and Intergenerational Poverty Household Wealth and Intergenerational Outcomes Interventions Involving Childrenâs Family Income and Wealth and Parental Employment Policy and Program Ideas Based on Direct Evidence Policy and Program Ideas Based on Indirect Evidence 7 Childrenâs Family Structure 137 Trends in Family Structure Family Structure and Intergenerational Child Well-Being Does Family Structure Affect Intergenerational Mobility? Neighborhood Differences in Family Structure Incarceration and Family Structure Differences Family Structure Interventions 8 Childrenâs Housing and Neighborhood Environments 144 Housing as a Driver of Intergenerational Poverty Housing Quality Housing Crowding Housing Stability and Tenure Housing Affordability Homelessness Neighborhoods as a Driver of Intergenerational Poverty Housing and Neighborhood Interventions Policy and Program Ideas Based on Direct Evidence Policy and Program Ideas Based on Indirect Evidence 9 Neighborhood Crime and the Criminal Justice System 159 Victimization and Exposure to Violence as a Driver of Intergenerational Poverty Exposure to Neighborhood Violence Predictors of Neighborhood Violence Crime Prevention Strategies Youth Offending and the Criminal Justice System as Drivers of Intergenerational Poverty Causes of Youth Offending High-Frequency Police Encounters and Excessive Use of Force Youth Confinement Parent and Caregiver Interaction with the Criminal Justice System: Incarceration, Fines, and Fees Interventions Involving Neighborhood Crime and Criminal Justice Policy and Program Ideas Based on Direct Evidence Policy and Program Ideas Based on Indirect Evidence 10 Child Maltreatment 174 Which Children Are Involved with the Child Welfare System? Child Maltreatment and Child Welfare System Involvement as Drivers of Intergenerational Poverty Adult Correlates of Childhood Maltreatment PREPUBLICATION COPY, UNCORRECTED PROOFS xii
Consequences of Involvement with Child Protective Services Out-of-Home Care (Foster Care) Factors Leading to Child Welfare Involvement Interventions Reducing Child Maltreatment 11 Research and Data Needs for Understanding and Ameliorating Intergenerational Poverty 183 Priorities for Future Research Research Funding Principles and Guidance Principles Other Guidance Creating a Federal Data Infrastructure for Research Use Data Sources and Linkage Possibilities for Economic Resources Promising Developments Remaining Challenges for Economic Opportunity Research Conclusions and Recommendations on Research and Data Needs Experiments and Long-Term Follow-Ups A Federal Data Infrastructure for Research Use APPENDIX A: Biosketches of Committee Members 204 APPENDIX B: Perspectives on Intergenerational Poverty 211 APPENDIX C: Appendices to Chapters 217 Appendix to Chapter 2 Appendix to Chapter 3 Appendix to Chapter 4 Appendix to Chapter 5 Appendix to Chapter 6 Appendix to Chapter 8 Appendix to Chapter 9 Appendix to Chapter 10 Appendix to Chapter 11 REFERENCES 332 PREPUBLICATION COPY, UNCORRECTED PROOFS xiii
Boxes, Figures, and Tables BOXES 1-1 Statement of Task 1-2 How Much Child Poverty Is There? 1-3 Standards of Evidence Used in Identifying Program and Policy Ideas 3-1 Key Terms and Concepts 3-2 Direct-Evidence Interventions in Chapters 4 Through 10 That Have Been Shown to be Effective for Reducing Intergenerational Poverty Among Black or Latino Children 5-1 Federal Food Programs Serving Children 9-1 Useful Definitions 11-1 Research Priorities to Ameliorate Intergenerational Poverty and Facilitate Socioeconomic Mobility, by Domain 11-2 Mixed Methods and Interdisciplinary Teams in the Moving to Opportunity (MTO) Residential Mobility Experiment 11-3 Data on Health, Education, and Criminal Justice 11-4 Enhancing Panel Surveys for Intergenerational Poverty Research 11-5 Data Linkage Projects at the U.S. Census Bureau 11-6 Relevant Legislation and Statements of Support for Linked Data for Evidence C-3-1 History of Land Dispossession and the Sauk Tribe C-3-2 Labor Exploitation Through Sharecropping FIGURES S-1 Intergenerational persistence of low-income status, by racial and ethnic group S-2 Fraction of intergenerationally low-income people in different racial and ethnic groups S-3 Intergenerational mobility, by racial and ethnic group 1-1 Direct and indirect evidence of a policy change on long-run, intergenerational outcomes 2-1 Percent of low-income children who are also low income in adulthood, by racial group and type of poverty measure 2-2 Intergenerational low-income persistence, by racial and ethnic group 2-3 Fraction of children with low income in both childhood and adulthood, by racial and ethnic groups 2-4 Intergenerational earnings and household income mobility for sons 2-5 Intergenerational earnings mobility for daughters 2-6 Intergenerational mobility, by race/ethnicity 2-7 Income rank of sons with low-income parents, by fatherâs country of origin PREPUBLICATION COPY, UNCORRECTED PROOFS xiv
2-8 Geographic distribution of children with parents in the bottom income quintile who reach the top three income quintiles 2-9 Age-35 household income of children of low-income parents in the New York City area 2-10 Percent of children earning more than their parents, by birth cohort and parental income percentile 3-1 How air pollution across America reflects racist policy from the 1930s 4-1 Employment rates for 25- to 34-year-olds in 2019, by education and sex 4-2 Median annual earnings for 25- to 34-year-old workers in 2019, by education 4-3 8th grade reading proficiency rates, by race/ethnicity, 1998-2019 4-4 College enrollment and BA+ attainment rates, by race/ethnicity 5-1 Adult health and early childhood income status, for individuals born between 1968 and 1975 5-2 Health of children living in poverty vs. other children, 2001â2005 5-3 Maternal and infant health disparities by race/ethnicity 5-4 Average suicide rate per 100,000 among children and adolescents, ages 0â19, by race/ethnicity, 2010-2020 5-5 Annual death rates for the four most common causes of death in the United States among children and adolescents, ages 1 to 19, 1999â2020 5-6 Food insecurity among children, by race and ethnicity of household head, 2008â2021 6-1 Average U.S. household income of children in the bottom, middle, and top income quintiles, 1967â2019 6-2 Child poverty in the United States and four other anglophone countries, 2016 6-3 Average real wages in the U.S. for the 10th, 50th, and 90th percentiles, 1973â2019 6-4 Median usual weekly earnings of full-time wage and salary workers by race/ethnicity and sex, 4th quarter 2022 averages 6-5 Employment-to-population ratios by race and gender, November 2022 6-6 Median net worth of U.S. families in 2019 6-7 EITC expansion options 7-1 Percent of children living with married parents and in other arrangements, 1980â2019 7-2 Percent of children living with married parents, by race/ethnicity and education, 2019 7-3 SPM child poverty rates by family composition, 2019 8-1 Inadequate housing by poverty status and race/ethnicity 8-2 Homeownership rates based on household income as a percent of area median by race/ethnicity, 2019 8-3 Housing cost burden, by tenure, income and race/ethnicity, 2020 8-4 Children living in high-poverty areas by race and ethnicity in the United States, 2017â 2021 PREPUBLICATION COPY, UNCORRECTED PROOFS xv
9-1 Violent crime victimization rates (per 1,000) in 2019, by income, age and race/ethnicity 9-2 Juvenile overall and violent crime arrest rates (per 1,000) in 2018, by race/ethnicity 9-3 Number of confined youth by type of facility in 2019 9-4 Number of youth in long-term secure facilities/detention in 2019 by offense category 10-1 Rates of substantiated maltreatment of children ages 0â17 by selected characteristics, 2008â2020 C-2-1 Intergenerational mobility based on several measures of economic status, by race/ethnicity C-2-2 Average income-to-needs of children by percentile of the AGI distribution for children under age 18 C-2-3 Adjusted gross income and income-to-needs distribution of children under 18 by tax- unit dependency status C-2-4 Average income-to-needs of children by percentile of the AGI distribution, including and excluding minor filers C-3-1 Incarceration rates by race from 1880 to 1950 C-3-2 Imprisonment rates of U.S. residents per 100,000 under the jurisdiction of state or federal correctional authorities by race/ethnicity, 2010â2020 C-3-3 Rate of youth confined in juvenile residential placement facilities per 100,000 by race/ethnicity, 2019 C-9-1 U.S. violent crime rate per 100,000 from 1960â2021 C-9-2 Incarceration rates by race, age, and education from 1960â2010 C-9-3 Rate of juvenile confinement by race/ethnicity, 1997â2019 TABLES S-1 Program and Policy Ideas Linked by Direct Evidence to Reductions in Intergenerational Poverty 8-1 Families Without Housing by Race/Ethnicity, 2020 11-1 Programs and Policies Linked by Direct Evidence to Reductions in Intergenerational Poverty C-2-1 Intergenerational Poverty Statistics Based on AGI Data in Tax Records C-2-2 Intergenerational Poverty Statistics Based on Data from the PSID C-2-3 Intergenerational Income Mobility Statistics Based on Data from the IRS and PSID C-3-1 Interventions in Chapters 4 Through 10 That Have Been Shown to Be Effective for Black, Latino, or Native American Children and Families PREPUBLICATION COPY, UNCORRECTED PROOFS xvi
C-4-1 Ratio of Statistically Significant (p < .10) Treatment Impacts to Outcomes Examined in the HomVee Literature Review C-4-2 Ratio of Statistically Significant (p < .10) Treatment Impacts Averaged Over the 2 Cohorts on Outcomes Examined in the Puma et al. (2012) Head Start Impact Study C-11-1 IRS/SSA Tax Forms and Data Elements for Accurate Measurement of Family Income Over TimeâAvailable to the Census Bureau and Needed C-11-2 Program Records of Nontaxable Benefits for Accurate Measurement of Family Income Over TimeâAvailable to the Census Bureau and Needed PREPUBLICATION COPY, UNCORRECTED PROOFS xvii
