IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/cysrev/v155y2023ics0190740923003857.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The third national survey of child and adolescent well-being: Design overview and methodological lessons learned during the baseline wave

Author

Listed:
  • Dolan, Melissa
  • Biemer, Paul
  • Ringeisen, Heather
  • Testa, Mark
  • Keeney, Jennifer
  • Casanueva, Cecilia
  • Smith, Keith
  • Day, Orin

Abstract

The National Survey of Child and Adolescent Well-Being (NSCAW) is a national survey that follows children and families who have been the subjects of investigation by child protective services agencies. NSCAW is the only source of nationally representative, longitudinal data on the well-being of children and families involved with the child welfare system (CWS). The survey examines child and family well-being outcomes in detail and seeks to relate those outcomes to experience with the CWS and to family characteristics, service needs and receipt, community environments, and other factors. To date, there have been three cohorts of NSCAW. The design of NSCAW III was guided by three priorities: (1) keeping NSCAW III as comparable to the two previous cohorts as possible, (2) minimizing response burden for all participants, and (3) updating the NSCAW III sample and instruments as needed to reflect the composition and characteristics of children being served by the CWS in 2017. NSCAW III includes 3,298 children ranging in age from 0 to 17.5 years old at the time of sampling. Children were sampled from child welfare investigations closed between July 2017 and September 2021. We provide information about methodological and operational challenges faced during the enrollment of NSCAW III (e.g., COVID-19 pandemic, state-level refusals) that required a new level of persistence and creativity, a pivot from past approaches, and the identification of solutions to maintain the integrity of this nationally representative study.

Suggested Citation

  • Dolan, Melissa & Biemer, Paul & Ringeisen, Heather & Testa, Mark & Keeney, Jennifer & Casanueva, Cecilia & Smith, Keith & Day, Orin, 2023. "The third national survey of child and adolescent well-being: Design overview and methodological lessons learned during the baseline wave," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 155(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:cysrev:v:155:y:2023:i:c:s0190740923003857
    DOI: 10.1016/j.childyouth.2023.107189
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0190740923003857
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.childyouth.2023.107189?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Pamela Campanelli & Colm O'Muircheartaigh, 1999. "Interviewers, Interviewer Continuity, and Panel Survey Nonresponse," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 33(1), pages 59-76, February.
    2. Lynn, Peter & Kaminska, Olena & Goldstein, Harvey, 2011. "Panel attrition: how important is it to keep the same interviewer?," ISER Working Paper Series 2011-02, Institute for Social and Economic Research.
    3. Cheng, Tyrone C. & Lo, Celia C., 2018. "Racial disparities in the proportion of needed services maltreated children received," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 94(C), pages 72-81.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Adrian Chadi, 2019. "Dissatisfied with life or with being interviewed? Happiness and the motivation to participate in a survey," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 53(3), pages 519-553, October.
    2. Rebecca Vassallo & Gabriele Durrant & Peter Smith, 2017. "Separating interviewer and area effects by using a cross-classified multilevel logistic model: simulation findings and implications for survey designs," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 180(2), pages 531-550, February.
    3. Jan Pickery & Geert Loosveldt, 2002. "A Multilevel Multinomial Analysis of Interviewer Effects on Various Components of Unit Nonresponse," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 36(4), pages 427-437, November.
    4. West Brady T. & Kreuter Frauke & Jaenichen Ursula, 2013. "“Interviewer” Effects in Face-to-Face Surveys: A Function of Sampling, Measurement Error, or Nonresponse?," Journal of Official Statistics, Sciendo, vol. 29(2), pages 277-297, September.
    5. Michele Lalla & Maddalena Cavicchioli, 2020. "Nonresponse and measurement errors in income: matching individual survey data with administrative tax data," Department of Economics 0170, University of Modena and Reggio E., Faculty of Economics "Marco Biagi".
    6. Nicole Watson & Mark Wooden, 2011. "Re-engaging with Survey Non-respondents: The BHPS, SOEP and HILDA Survey Experience," Melbourne Institute Working Paper Series wp2011n02, Melbourne Institute of Applied Economic and Social Research, The University of Melbourne.
    7. Mark Amos, 2018. "Interviewer effects on patterns of nonresponse: Evaluating the impact on the reasons for contraceptive nonuse in the Indonesia and the Philippines DHS," Demographic Research, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany, vol. 39(14), pages 415-430.
    8. Schrapler, Jorg-Peter, 2003. "Respondent behaviour in panel studies: a case study for income-nonresponse by means of the British Household Panel Study (BHPS)," ISER Working Paper Series 2003-08, Institute for Social and Economic Research.
    9. Jörg-Peter Schräpler, 2002. "Respondent Behavior in Panel Studies: A Case Study for Income-Nonresponse by Means of the German Socio-Economic Panel (GSOEP)," Discussion Papers of DIW Berlin 299, DIW Berlin, German Institute for Economic Research.
    10. Brooks, Mark & Lippe, Rattiya S. & Waibel, Hermann, 2021. "PAPI is gone, but errors remain: Non-sampling errors in household surveys," 2021 Conference, August 17-31, 2021, Virtual 315277, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    11. Casanueva, Cecilia & Williams, Jason & Kluckman, Marianne & Harris, Sarah & Goldman Fraser, Jenifer, 2024. "The effect of the ZERO TO THREE Infant-Toddler Court Teams on type and time of exits from out-of-home care: A new study ten years after the first competing risks analysis," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 156(C).
    12. Sadig, Husam, 2014. "Weighting for non-monotonic response pattern in longitudinal surveys," ISER Working Paper Series 2014-34, Institute for Social and Economic Research.
    13. Geert Loosveldt & Koen Beullens, 2014. "A Procedure to Assess Interviewer Effects on Nonresponse Bias," SAGE Open, , vol. 4(1), pages 21582440145, February.
    14. Veronika Hecht & Nicole Litzel & Johannes Schäffler, 2019. "Unit nonresponse at the firm level: a cross-border analysis using the IAB-ReLOC data," Journal for Labour Market Research, Springer;Institute for Employment Research/ Institut für Arbeitsmarkt- und Berufsforschung (IAB), vol. 53(1), pages 1-18, December.
    15. Finaba Berete & Johan Van der Heyden & Stefaan Demarest & Rana Charafeddine & Lydia Gisle & Elise Braekman & Jean Tafforeau & Geert Molenberghs, 2019. "Determinants of unit nonresponse in multi-mode data collection: A multilevel analysis," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(4), pages 1-18, April.
    16. Francisco Perales & Bernard Baffour & Francis Mitrou, 2015. "Ethnic Differences in the Quality of the Interview Process and Implications for Survey Analysis: The Case of Indigenous Australians," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(6), pages 1-20, June.
    17. Michele Lalla & Davide Ferrari & Patrizio Frederic, 2012. "Unit nonresponse errors in income surveys: a case study," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 46(6), pages 1769-1794, October.
    18. Noah Uhrig, S.C., 2008. "The nature and causes of attrition in the British Household Panel Study," ISER Working Paper Series 2008-05, Institute for Social and Economic Research.
    19. Mark Brooks & Rattiya S. Lippe & Hermann Waibel, 2020. "Comprehensive data quality studies as a component of poverty assessments," TVSEP Working Papers wp-019, Leibniz Universitaet Hannover, Institute for Environmental Economics and World Trade, Project TVSEP.
    20. Pamela Campanelli & Colm O'Muircheartaigh, 2002. "The Importance of Experimental Control in Testing the Impact of Interviewer Continuity on Panel Survey Nonresponse," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 36(2), pages 129-144, May.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:cysrev:v:155:y:2023:i:c:s0190740923003857. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/childyouth .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.