Supplement C

OMB No.: 0970-0439
Expiration Date: 09/30/2016

ATTACHMENT C:
QUESTION-BY-QUESTION JUSTIFICATION AND SURVEYS REFERENCED FOR
THE CSPED 12-MONTH FOLLOW-UP SURVEY

Table1. CSPED 12-Month Follow-up Survey: Question-by-Question Justification

Question

Source

Rationale

Introduction and Contact Information
Introduction (i1-i8)

PACT
tailored for
CSPED

Questions are asked to ascertain whether the respondent is the
sample member and to inform the respondent about: the
expected length of the interview, the Certificate of Confidentiality,
and the possibility that the interview may be recorded.

Contact information (A1a-A2)

BSF 36month
follow-up
tailored for
CSPED

Obtaining the exact spelling of the respondent’s name is
important so that we can send them the respondent payment.

Marital status and educational
attainment (A3-A4)

OMB tailored
for CSPED;
CBRA
tailored for
CSPED

Obtaining updated information on marital status and educational
attainment to assess whether the program had an influence on
either of these factors.

Child Roster and Father Involvement
Roster of children born to
father since random
assignment (B1- B3g)

PACT
tailored for
CSPED; BSF
15-month
follow-up
tailored for
CSPED

For all the children the
respondent has had since
random assignment: age,
gender, name of mother of
child, establishment of
siblingship with respondent’s
other children (B3d and e, B3c,
B3f, B3g, B3h, B3i, B3g)

PACT

Whether lived with child since
random assignment (B4)

FFCWS
tailored for
CSPED

Number of nights stayed with
child in last month (B5-B6)

FFCWS
tailored for
CSPED; WFNJ
tailored for
CSPED

Any contact with child in last
month (B7)

EHS tailored
for CSPED

In-person contact with child in
last month (B8)

EHS tailored
for CSPED

Most recent in-person contact
with child (B9-B10)

PACT

Assessment of relationship
quality (B11)

EHS tailored
for CSPED

Questions are asked about any children the father has had since
random assignment for two reasons. First, some men did not have
children at random assignment but were expecting babies; it will
be important to know how the program has affected the
respondent’s parenting of the baby. Second, the program may
reduce the likelihood that the father has had more children since
random assignment. The questions about the child are the same
as the questions about the father’s other children at baseline.

A key goal of CSPED is to increase parental involvement with
children. These questions allow us to assess the program’s impact
on the living arrangements of the child and the respondent’s
involvement with the child. These questions are asked of all the
respondent’s children.

Relationship with Mother/Fathers
Status of relationship with
mother/father (C1-C2)

BSF tailored
for CSPED

These questions ask about marital status, romantic involvement,
and contact with the mother. They are asked about all the

1

Table1. Follow-up RF Survey: Question-by-Question Justification (continued)

Question

Source

Rationale
mothers of the respondent’s children.

Any contact with mother/father
in the past 30 days (C3)

PACT
tailored for
CSPED

Lives with mother/father (C4)

BSF tailored
for CSPED

Nights in past 30 days stays
with mother/father (C5)

PACT
tailored for
CSPED

Quality of relationship with
mother/father (C6)

FFCWS

Quality of the collaborative coparenting relationship (C7)

PAM

Formal and informal support
paid to mother in last month
(C8–C17a)

BSF, FFCWS
tailored for
CSPED

CSPED might improve noncustodial parents’ relationship skills and
co-parenting relationships, increasing the likelihood that parents
are involved with the other parent of at least one of their children
at follow-up and improving the quality of the co-parent
relationship. A father’s romantic relationship with the child’s
mother is related to his contact with his children (Tach, Mincy,
and Edin 2010).

A key goal of CSPED is to promote responsible parenting,
including fathers’ material support of their children. Financial
support of children through formal and informal monetary
payments and in-kind purchases will be important measures of
CSPED’s impact. These questions capture whether the father has
paid the mother directly or through formal child support orders.
These questions are asked about all the mothers of the
respondent’s children.
Formal payments made through child support orders will also be
collected through administrative records; however informal
payments will not be included in those records. It is necessary to
ask about all child support payments on the survey in order to
distinguish between formal and informal payments.
In addition to provision of material support to their children,
CSPED may affect noncustodial parents’ understanding of their
child support responsibilities; this understanding will be reflected
in the survey responses and may differ from administrative
records.

Barriers to parent involvement
(C18-C19)

EHS tailored
for CSPED

Because the geographic distance between nonresident fathers and
their children is negatively associated with father involvement,
CSPED might have smaller impacts on noncustodial parent
involvement with the noncustodial parent lives a larger distance
from the child.

Parenting time/visitation
orders (C20-C22)

New

A key goal of CSPED is to improve the relationship between
nonresident parents and their children. Parenting time orders
determine the visitation structure between nonresident parents
and their children and establish processes for nonresident parents
to spend time with their children in person. CSPED programs may
offer parenting time assistance as a component of parenting
services. These questions will determine whether or not the
respondent had a parenting time order prior to or following
random assignment, and whether or not that order has been
modified since random assignment.

Attitudes toward parental
support and involvement (C23C24)

Fragile
Families
tailored for
CSPED

Parenting self-assessment
(C25)

PSI; IFSS
tailored for
CSPED

Parenting programs are a core component of CSPED services.
CSPED may improve parenting attitude, quality of parenting and
parenting behaviors. Hence, the survey includes attitudinal
questions, questions about the types of activities that the father
may do with the child, focusing on active engagement, and
questions on parenting behaviors and discipline techniques. The
question tailors the activities asked about to the age of the child.

2

Table1. Follow-up RF Survey: Question-by-Question Justification (continued)

Question

Source

Rationale

Activities with focal child in the
last month (C26-C26_1)

PACT

Warmth, supportiveness and
discipline (C27-C27_1)

CTSPC
tailored for
CSPED; PPQ
tailored for
CSPED

Presence and structure of
parenting time orders (C28C29_SPECIFY)

New

A key goal of CSPED is to improve the relationship between
nonresident parents and their children. Parenting time orders
determine the visitation structure between nonresident parents
and their children and establish processes for nonresident parents
to spend time with their children in person. CSPED programs may
offer parenting time assistance as a component of parenting
services. These questions will determine whether or not the
respondent has a parenting time order for each focal child and
how much time the respondent is ordered to spend with the child.

Whether parent has other
romantic partner (C30-C31)

PACT, WFNJ
tailored for
CSPED

Parents’ relationship status
with partner (C32)

WFNJ
tailored for
CSPED

Having a spouse or a cohabiting partner is associated with more
favorable labor market outcomes for men and economic benefits
for women, so noncustodial parents’ relationships with new
partners are expected to be predictive of later economic
outcomes. Having a new partner and living with the children of a
new partner may also be associated with less involvement by
fathers in the lives of their children from prior relationships.

Whether parent lives with
partner (C33)

BSF tailored
for CSPED

Number of nights parent spent
with partner in past 30 days
(C34)

CSPEDdeveloped

Whether partner has children
under age 18 (C35)

PACT
tailored for
CSPED

Whether partner’s children
stayed with partner and
respondent in last 30 days
(C36)

PACT
tailored for
CSPED

Child Support Program: Attitudes and Interactions
Attitudes towards child support
system (D1-D5)

Fragile
Families;
PACT
tailored for
CSPED

CSPED teaches parents about their legal rights and
responsibilities. Further, CSPED programs emphasize that parents
can work with child support enforcement to address their needs.
These questions ask about respondent attitudes regarding the
child support system, interactions with the child support system,
and attitudes towards paying child support.

WIA; PACT

Encouraging employment is one of the primary goals of CSPED.
Therefore it is critical that the evaluation has a complete picture
of the employment history of study participants. With that goal,
the evaluation will include employment information drawn from
both the survey and administrative records. Administrative and
survey-based employment information have different strengths.
Collecting information from both sources will allow the evaluation
team to draw on the distinct strengths of these two data sources.

Economic Stability
Information on all jobs
respondent has had in the past
year (E1-E9c)

Unlike self-reported survey data, earnings measures based on UI
administrative records are not subject to nonresponse or recall
error. However, administrative data do not cover all jobs. Workers

3

Table1. Follow-up RF Survey: Question-by-Question Justification (continued)

Question

Source

Rationale
excluded from UI earnings records include self-employed workers,
railroad employees, workers in service for relatives, most
agricultural labor, some domestic service workers, part-time
employees of nonprofit organizations, and some workers who are
casually employed. Workers in these sectors comprise about 10
percent of workers in the U.S. economy (Hotz and Scholz 2002).
Informal employment that is not covered in the UI system is likely
to be more common for the low wage population that CSPED
targets. For that reason, the survey asks specifically about
informal employment and earnings from all jobs (survey items E1E9). These questions ask about all the jobs that the respondent
has currently and since random assignment. We ask about when
the job began, ended (if applicable), type of job (e.g. full time,
part time, self-employed, day laborer), wage rate, hours worked,
and fringe benefits. Information on job characteristics will not be
available in administrative records.

Income received through odd
jobs or other work since
random assignment (E10-E11)

PACT

Many people, especially those with low income, do other work for
pay that may not be considered a job. For example, they may
babysit, or help out with a family business occasionally. These
questions ask about whether they have done work that they do
not consider “a job” and the amount they made from that work.

Public disability benefits
received (E12-E13)

BSF 15month
follow-up
tailored for
CSPED

CSPED programs may increase employment, thereby reducing the
need for public support benefits such as Supplemental Security
Income. Because disability benefits are often substantial for those
who receive them (and costly to the government), this information
will be important for the benefit-cost analysis. Unlike information
on receipt of other public support benefits (such as SNAP or
TANF), information on disability benefit receipt will not be
available through administrative records.

Steps taken to find
employment (C14)

PACT

CSPED programs provide services designed to help participants
take steps towards finding work. This question asks whether or
not the respondent has taken steps towards finding a job since
random assignment.

Barriers to employment (E15)

FFCWS, BSF
tailored for
CSPED

CSPED programs provide services designed to address barriers to
employment. These questions ask about the respondent’s
perceptions of barriers to finding or keeping a job.

Possession of a bank account
(E16)

New

CSPED programs help participants establish bank accounts as a
component of promoting economic stability. This question asks
whether the respondent currently has a bank account of any kind.

Financial hardship (E17)

IFSS

The program may assist the respondent in improving their
financial situation. These questions identify financial hardships
experienced by the respondent since random assignment.

Social support networks (E18E20)

BSF 15month
follow-up
tailored for
CSPED

CSPED participants may expand the network of people available to
help them in case of hardship due to interactions with new
individuals through employment or program participation. These
questions ask how many people the respondent could turn to
given different situational difficulties.

Housing stability (E20-E23a)

WFNJ, HII

Housing instability, including homelessness, eviction, frequent
movies, involuntary moves due to being unable to pay rent or
mortgage, and living with others without paying rent, is
experienced by a considerable share of urban men, especially
those who have been incarcerated (Geller and Curtis 2011).
Understanding the housing circumstances of the CSPED sample
will help capture the extent of the disadvantage. These questions
ask about where the respondent lives and who the respondent
lives with.

4

Table1. Follow-up RF Survey: Question-by-Question Justification (continued)

Question
Possession of a valid driver’s
license (E24-E25)

Source

Rationale

New

Lack of transportation can be a barrier to employment for persons
seeking to find or keep work. CSPED programs provide license
reinstatement services, which may affect the ability of participants
to find or keep work. These questions ask whether the respondent
has ever had a license, and if so, whether the respondent
currently possesses a valid license.

Arrests since random
assignment (F1-F3)

BSF; SVORI
tailored for
CSPED

Convictions since random
assignment (F4)

SVORI
tailored for
CSPED

Incarceration since random
assignment (F5-F6)

SVORI
tailored for
CSPED

Parole or probation since
random assignment (F7-F8)

SVORI
tailored for
CSPED

CSPED programs provide supportive services and employment
support to participants, which may help to decrease interaction
with the criminal justice system. Recent research suggests that a
history of incarceration and involvement with the criminal justice
system may be fairly common among fathers in the CSPED target
population (Pettit and Western 2004). Because criminal justice
involvement is extremely costly to the government and society,
this information is crucial for the benefit-cost study. These
questions ask about arrests since random assignment. The
evaluation will also make use of State administrative records
related to criminal justice involvement, however these records will
not include criminal justice activity in other States and, in most
States, these records will not include criminal justice activity at the
county or local level.

Criminal Justice Involvement

Respondent’s Well Being
Depressive symptoms (G1)

PHQ-8

By linking respondents to mental health services, providing
opportunities for social interactions, and improving relationships,
the CSPED programs may reduce depression. Eight items from the
Parental Health Questionnaire are included in this survey. The
PHQ-8 has been shown to be a valid measure of depression in
population-based studies (Kroenke et al. 2009)

Locus of control and future
orientation (G2)

FFCWS
tailored for
CSPED

Disadvantaged noncustodial parents may feel helpless to change
their circumstances and pessimistic about the future. If CSPED
programs help noncustodial parents acquire new skills or improve
their circumstances, through employment for example, they may
develop greater feelings of self-efficacy and the ability to plan for
the future.

5

Table1. Follow-up RF Survey: Question-by-Question Justification (continued)

Question

Source

Rationale

Service Receipt
Participation in group
employment services since
random assignment (H1-H3)

BSF 15month
follow-up
tailored for
CSPED

Participation in individual
employment services since
random assignment (H4-H6)

BSF 15month
follow-up
tailored for
CSPED

Participation in job training
since random assignment (H7H9)

BSF 15month
follow-up
tailored for
CSPED

Receipt of job development
services since random
assignment (H10)

BSF 15month
follow-up
tailored for
CSPED

Receipt of transportation
services for employment since
random assignment (H14)

New

Participation in GED classes
since random assignment
(H15)

BSF 15month
follow-up
tailored for
CSPED

Participation in mental health,
alcohol, or substance abuse
services since random
assignment (H16)

BSF 15month
follow-up
tailored for
CSPED

Participation in domestic
violence or anger management
services since random
assignment (H17)

BSF 15month
follow-up
tailored for
CSPED

Receipt of record expungement
services since random
assignment (H18)

New

Participation in group
parenting services since
random assignment (H19-H21)

BSF 15month
follow-up
tailored for
CSPED

Receipt of visitation/parenting
time assistance services (H22)

New

Receipt of child support case
management services (H23H25)

New

Asking both members of the program and control group about
the receipt of services will provide information about the
“counterfactual”—the services that would have been received in
the absence of participation in the program. This series of
questions asks both program and control group members about
participation services that are part of the core CSPED service
package, such as individual and group employment services and
parenting classes, child support case management services, as
well as services that CSPED programs refer participants to,
including GED and ESL classes, mental health and substance
abuse services, record expungement services, and anger
management and domestic violence services.
In order to determine the frequency and intensity of services,
respondents are asked to indicate participation in each type of
service, as well as the number of times they received the service
and duration of each service provided.

6

Table1. Follow-up RF Survey: Question-by-Question Justification (continued)

Question

Source

Receipt of subsidized or
supported employment since
random assignment (H11-H13)

Rationale

PACT; New

CSPED programs may link participants to subsidized or supported
employment programs, which could help participants find and
maintain employment. These questions ask both program and
control group members about receipt of these services since
random assignment.

BSF 15month
follow-up
tailored for
CSPED

Additional contact information is required to send the $25
appreciation payment to the respondent and in case an additional
wave of interviews will be conducted. An email address is
collected in case we have difficulty contacting the respondent
using the other information provided.

Contact Information
I1–I5

Sources:

Parents and Children Together (PACT), Building Strong Families Study (BSF), Fragile Families and
Child Well-Being Study (FFCWS), Work First New Jersey (WFNJ), Parenting Alliance Measure (PAM),
Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ), Serious Violent Offender Reentry Initiative Evaluation (SVORI),
Early Head Start survey (EHS), Parenting Practices Questionnaire (PPQ), Conflict Tactics Scale-Parent
Child (CTSPC), WIA Gold Standard Follow-up Survey (WIA), Housing Instability Index (HII), (IFSS)

7

SURVEYS REFERENCED
The list below contains brief descriptions of the eleven surveys referenced for the development
of the CSPED follow-up survey, as well as locations of the surveys referenced. Descriptions were
compiled from websites about the surveys and descriptions of Mathematica studies were gathered
from project summaries. When necessary, we tailored questions drawn from these surveys to make
them easier to understand or to have the questions align more closely with the baseline survey’s
goals.
1. Parents and Children Together (PACT)
Mathematica’s OMB-approved Parents and Children Together (PACT) impact and evaluation
study (OMB Control Number 0970-0403) assesses innovative approaches to helping fathers increase
involvement in the lives of their children and achieve economic stability. Similarly to the PACT
study, the CSPED study uses a random assignment design to examine the effects of parenthood and
employment services provided to low-income parents. Thus, the CSPED data collection instruments
were designed to draw heavily on the PACT study instruments, which will facilitate comparisons of
program outcomes between the two studies. .
Intake processes for the CSPED study are also closely modeled after the PACT study. In
addition, the CSPED and PACT studies use an MIS to perform random assignment and to track
program participation, and both studies include qualitative interviews with program staff, a web
survey of staff and community partners, baseline data collection with parents via telephone survey,
and a 12-month follow-up survey on various outcomes related to family and economic well-being.
The PACT baseline data collection instrument served as the starting point for the CSPED
baseline data collection instrument. The CSPED evaluation team reviewed each question within the
PACT instrument and made modifications. These modifications fall into three general categories:


Minor wording modifications. The CSPED target population varies slightly from the

PACT sample population in that noncustodial mothers are included in the CSPED
study. For this reason, gendered pronouns and question wording were modified
throughout the instrument to accommodate noncustodial mothers in addition to
fathers. Other minor wording changes were also made to reflect programmatic
variations, areas of analytical focus, clarify target behaviors, and maximize the reliability
and validity of data collected from the target CSPED population.


Deletion of items excluded from analysis. In order to reduce respondent burden,
the CSPED evaluation team removed any baseline items that would not be used for
analysis of the CSPED baseline survey. Examples include items about respondent
religiosity, country of origin and disability status.



Addition of items required for analysis. Several items were added in order to better
understand program effects on participant outcomes. Examples include questions

8

about employer-provided health insurance coverage, additional detail about the
respondent’s living situation, and a self-assessment of the respondent as a parent.
2. Building Strong Families Study (BSF)
The United States Department of Health and Human Services/Administration for Children and
Families (ACF) initiated the Building Strong Families (BSF) project to help interested and
romantically involved low-income, unwed parents build stronger relationships and thus enhance
their child’s well being and their own future. The BSF evaluation conducted by Mathematica was
designed to test the effectiveness of these programs for couples and children. BSF data collection
included a baseline information form to collect demographic and socioeconomic data along with
two follow-up surveys. The follow-up surveys included questions related to mother-father
relationships, family structure, fathers’ involvement in child rearing, parent-child relationships and
the home environment, family functioning, child well-being and development, and parental wellbeing.
Surveys are available from Mathematica upon request.
3. Fragile Families and Child Well-Being Study (FFCWS)
The Fragile Families and Child Well-Being Study is a longitudinal study of a cohort of nearly
5,000 children born between 1998 and 2000 from birth through age five. Approximately one-third
of the children were born to unmarried parents. Interviews were conducted with both mothers and
fathers covering a range of topics including attitudes, relationships, and parenting behavior.
Study protocols and codebooks can be found here: http://www.fragilefamilies.princeton.edu/documentation.asp
4. Work First New Jersey (WFNJ)
Mathematica evaluated the effects of New Jersey’s initiative to help welfare recipients transition
from welfare to work. WFNJ interviewed sample members annually for five years documenting
changes in household composition, income, employment, and other indicators of well-being.
Surveys are available from Mathematica upon request.
5. Early Head Start (EHS)
The U.S. Department of health and Human Services, Administration for Children and Families
funded an evaluation of the Early Head Start program—a program for pregnant women and families
with infants and toddlers that is based on the Head Start program model. The Administration for
Children and Families sponsored an experimental evaluation of the program based in 17 sites. This
study conducted five follow-up surveys after random assignment.
Surveys are available from Mathematica Policy Research
6. Workforce Investment Act Adult and Dislocated Worker Programs Gold Standard
Evaluation (WIA)

9

The U.S. Department of Labor sponsored an experimental evaluation of the Adult and
Dislocated Worker programs funded under the Workforce Investment Act of 1998 (WIA). The
study is taking place in 28 randomly-selected local workforce investment areas across the USA. Two
follow-up surveys are being conducted with over 6,000 study participants at 15 and 30 months after
random assignment.
Surveys are available from Mathematica Policy Research.
7. Evaluation of the Serious Violent Offender Reentry Initiative (SVORI)
The Evaluation of the Serious Violent Offender Reentry Initiative (SVORI) was a multi-year,
multi-site evaluation funded by National Institute of Justice. The impact evaluation was designed to
measure the impact of enhanced reentry programming on post-release outcomes. As part of the
evaluation, interviews were conducted at four points in time.
Surveys are available from the National Archive of Criminal Justice Data.
8. Patient Health Questionnaire Screeners (PHQ)
The PHQ is a clinical tool designed to provide clinicians with screening and diagnostic tools for
mental health disorders. All PHQ instruments have been tested in clinical settings, and are designed
to improve recognition rates of depression and anxiety.
Assessments are available from Pfizer at www.phqscreeners.com.
9. Housing Instability Index (HII)
The HII is a tool created for the Safe Housing Assistance with Rent Evaluation (SHARE)
study, a CDC-funded evaluation designed to learn about the connection between domestic violence
and housing. The HII provides information about vulnerability, quality of life and health outcomes
associated with housing stability.
The index is available through the National Alliance to End Homelessness.
10. The Parenting Stress Index (PSI)
The PSI is designed to identify dysfunctional parenting and identify sources of stress within a
family unit. This empirically validated measure has been tested across languages and cultures and can
be used as a diagnostic and predictive tool for future parental behavior problems.
Assessments are available for purchase from PAR, Inc.
11. Improving Family Services Study (IFSS)
The IFSS is the baseline survey instrument for the National Evaluation of Partnerships to
Demonstrate the Effectiveness of Supportive Housing for Families in the Child Welfare System, a
multi-year, multi-site evaluation funded by Robert Wood Johnson Foundation and evaluated by the
Urban Institute.

10

12. Parent-Child Conflicts Tactics Scale (CTSPC)
The CTSPC is the parent-child version of the CTS, an instrument most frequently used to
measure psychological and physical attacks on a partner in a marital, cohabiting, or dating
relationship and use of negotiation. The CTSPC is used to measure the extent to which a parent has
carried out acts of psychological and physical maltreatment and neglect of children, regardless of
whether the child was injured. The scales of the CTSPC include: nonviolent discipline, psychological
aggression, physical assault (including questions on discipline/corporal punishment), and neglect, as
well as a supplemental scale on sexual abuse.
Assessments are available from Western Psychological Services at http://wpspublish.com/app/.

11

REFERENCES
Geller, A., and M.A. Curtis. “A Sort of Homecoming: Incarceration and the Housing Security of
Urban Men.” Social Science Research, vol. 40, 2011, pp. 1196–1213.
Hotz, V. Joseph, and John Karl Scholz. “Measuring Employment Income for Low-Income
Populations with Administrative and Survey Data.” Washington, DC: U.S. Department of
Health and Human Services, Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation, 2009.
Kroenke, Kurt, Tara W. Strine, Robert L. Spitzer, Janet B.W. Williams, Joyce T. Berry, and Ali H.
Mokdad. “The PHQ-8 as a Measure of Current Depression in the General Population.” Journal
of Affective Disorders, vol. 144, no. 1, 2009, pp. 163–173.
Pettit, B. and B. Western. “Mass Imprisonment and the Life Course: Race and Class Inequality in
U.S. Incarceration.” American Sociological Review, vol. 69, 2004, pp. 151–169.
Tach, L., R. Mincy, and K. Edin. “Parenting as a ‘Package Deal’: Relationships, Fertility, and
Nonresident Father Involvement Among Unmarried Parents.” Demography, vol. 47, 2010, pp.
181–204.

12