Nola du Toit Kate Bachtell Cathy Haggerty

21
Nola du Toit Kate Bachtell Cathy Haggerty Coming and Going: The Effect of Household Composition on the Economic Wellbeing of Families and Children

description

Coming and Going:  The Effect of Household Composition on the Economic Wellbeing of Families and Children. Nola du Toit Kate Bachtell Cathy Haggerty. Current Literature. Household structure and wellbeing of children Economic measures (poverty, material hardship) - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Transcript of Nola du Toit Kate Bachtell Cathy Haggerty

Page 1: Nola du Toit Kate Bachtell Cathy Haggerty

Nola du Toit

Kate Bachtell

Cathy Haggerty

Coming and Going:  The Effect of Household Composition on the Economic Wellbeing of Families and Children

Page 2: Nola du Toit Kate Bachtell Cathy Haggerty

2

Current Literature

• Household structure and wellbeing of children• Economic measures (poverty, material hardship)

• Family structure matters for child wellbeing• Single v. cohabiting v. married

• Instability matters for child wellbeing• Union formation or dissolution

• Focus on parents• Anyone missing?

Page 3: Nola du Toit Kate Bachtell Cathy Haggerty

3

Example: Erin

Page 4: Nola du Toit Kate Bachtell Cathy Haggerty

4

Research Questions

• Are there different types of household composition beyond the traditional?

• Do complex household compositions matter?

• Is there change in these complex household compositions over time?

• Does this change matter?

• Are some households more affected by change than others?

Page 5: Nola du Toit Kate Bachtell Cathy Haggerty

5

Data

• Making Connections survey

• Annie E. Casey Foundation

• Community initiatives

• 10 sites

• Low income households

• Longitudinal

• Baseline 2002-2004

• Wave 2 2005-2007

• Wave 3 2008-2011

Page 6: Nola du Toit Kate Bachtell Cathy Haggerty

6

Data

• Information on variety of topics• People in household, age, gender, employment• Relationships to one another• Children • Economic wellbeing

• Roster matching across waves• People coming and going in households

• Waves 2 and 3 for 6 sites

• Focus on households with children at Wave 2 (n=1964)

Page 7: Nola du Toit Kate Bachtell Cathy Haggerty

7

Focus Variable:Household Type

• Relationship of adult (18+) to focus child + number of adults

• Single parents

• Two parents

• Parent/grandparent only

• Parent/any combination

• Non-parent households

Page 8: Nola du Toit Kate Bachtell Cathy Haggerty

8

Dependent Variables:Economic Measures

• Income Per Capita• Household income/number of people in household

(log)

• Public Assistance Usage (none/any)• Food stamps, rent subsidies, section 8, public housing

• Economic hardship (none/any)• No money for food, not pay rent, phone cut off, not fill

prescriptions

• Home Ownership (not own/own)• Owned by someone in household

Page 9: Nola du Toit Kate Bachtell Cathy Haggerty

9

Dependent Variables:Instability

• Change in household type

• e.g. Two parent -> parent/grandparent only

• Decrease in income per capita

• Same or less than at Wave 2

• Increase in public assistance usage

• Increase in economic hardship

• Decrease in home ownership

Page 10: Nola du Toit Kate Bachtell Cathy Haggerty

10

Controls

• Income per capita

• Public assistance

• Average age of adults

• All female household

• Race (proxy)

• Hispanic

• At least one employed adult

Page 11: Nola du Toit Kate Bachtell Cathy Haggerty

11

Findings

• Are there different types of household composition beyond the traditional?

• Do complex household compositions matter?

• Is there change in these complex household compositions over time?

• Does this change matter?

• Are some households more affected by change than others?

Page 12: Nola du Toit Kate Bachtell Cathy Haggerty

12

Findings

• Are there different types of household composition beyond the traditional? YES!

• Do complex household compositions matter? YES!

• Is there change in these complex household compositions over time? YES!

• Does this change matter? YES!

• Are some households more affected by change than others? YES!

Page 13: Nola du Toit Kate Bachtell Cathy Haggerty

13In “Header and Footer”, Insert Presentation Title and Any Confidentiality Information

TYPES OF RELATIONSHIP OF ADULTS TO CHILDREN

UNWEIGHTED N

WEIGHTED %

Total 1964 100%

Husband/wife 1 <1%

Parent 1800 90%

Extended family 194 12%

Sibling 212 12%

Grandparent 333 22%

Non-related 119 6%

Are there types of composition beyond the traditional?

Page 14: Nola du Toit Kate Bachtell Cathy Haggerty

14

Unweighted Frequency

Weighted Percentage

1964 100

535 21

652 34

166 10

447 25

164 10

Types of Household

Total

Single parent only

Non-parent households

Two parents only

Parent and grandparent only

Parent and any other combination

Are there types of composition beyond the traditional?

Page 15: Nola du Toit Kate Bachtell Cathy Haggerty

15

Do complex households matter? Economic Measures

ECONOMIC MEASURES

Unweighted n 535 652 166 447 164Income per capita

Mean $5,582.38 $8,332.75 $5,826.98 $6,228.48 $5,842.24Std dev $24,155.99 $32,191.50 $30,210.04 $29,364.12 $21,863.27Median $3,500.00 $6,428.57 $3,750.00 $5,000.00 $5,000.00

Income per capita (log) Mean 8.2 8.7 8.3 8.0 8.4

Std dev 4.5 4.5 4.8 4.8 4.0Median 8.2 8.8 8.2 8.5 8.5

Public assistance % no assistance 29 71 41 55 48

% one or more assistance 71 29 59 45 52Economic hardship

% no economic hardship 35 50 39 42 45% one or more hardship 65 50 61 58 55

Home ownership% not own home 83 52 40 51 48

% own home 17 48 60 49 52

Single parent only

Two parents only

Parent/ grandparent

only

Parent/any other combi-

nation

Non-parent households

Page 16: Nola du Toit Kate Bachtell Cathy Haggerty

16

Is there change over time in complex households?

% EXPERIENCED CHANGE IN COMPOSITION BETWEEN WAVES

Household composition at Wave 2

Total (1964) (535) (652) (166) (447) (164)

50 38 39 63*** 58*** 83***

Single parent only

Two parents only (ref)

Parent/ grandparent

only

Parent/any other combi-

nationNon-parent households

Page 17: Nola du Toit Kate Bachtell Cathy Haggerty

17

Does change matter? Decrease in income per capita

Model 1 Model 2 Model 1 Model 2 Model 1 Model 2 Model 1 Model 2 Model 1 Model 2

Intercept -0.12** -0.92*** -0.34*** 1.27*** -0.31*** 1.70*** -0.19*** 1.57*** 0.59 1.31***

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

0.41*** 0.40*** 0.22*** 0.29*** 0.18* 0.05 -0.27*** -0.23*** -0.36 -0.26*

-2 log likelihood 9609.8 9089.2 14535.9 14044.1 4111.1 3517.7 10603.3 9967.1 4128.9 3603.3df 1 9 1 9 1 9 1 9 1 9Model 2 includes control variables

DECREASE IN INCOME PER CAPITA (log)

Single parent only (535)

Two parents only (652)

Parent and grand-parent

only (166)

Parent and any other

combination (447)

Non-parent households (164)

No change in composition (ref)

Change in composition

p<0.05, **p<0.01, p<0.001

Page 18: Nola du Toit Kate Bachtell Cathy Haggerty

18

Findings

• Many more types of households than accounted for in current research

• Many people coming and going

• Mixed results – no pattern

• 10% are non-parent households

• Introduction of another adult for single parent households is not a good idea

• Need more research on non-traditional households

Page 19: Nola du Toit Kate Bachtell Cathy Haggerty

19

Limitations

• Data not representative of nation's poor

• No higher income cases

• Missing a lot of variation within groups

• Expand control groups

• Interaction effects

Page 20: Nola du Toit Kate Bachtell Cathy Haggerty

20

Conclusions

• Look at big picture, not just parents

• Need more research

Page 21: Nola du Toit Kate Bachtell Cathy Haggerty

Thank You!

Nola du Toit: [email protected]

Kate Bachtell: [email protected]

Cathy Haggerty: [email protected]

Insert Presentation Title and Any Confidentiality Information