Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2014 Dec 9.
Published in final edited form as: Child Youth Serv Rev. 2007 Jun;29(6):698–720. doi: 10.1016/j.childyouth.2006.12.002

Table 1.

Sample characteristics and survey field periods, by study

Study Sample or sub-sample N Timing of survey waves
1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003
WES1 753 Wave 1 Wave 2 Wave 3 Wave 4 Wave 5
IFS2 1,363 Wave 1 Wave 2 Wave 3 Wave 4
MTAS3 687 Wave 1 Wave 2 Wave 3
FF4 1,447 Wave 1 Wave 2 Wave 3
3-City5 894 Wave 1 Wave 2
1

Original sample drawn from the February 1997 TANF caseload in one urban Michigan county; sample size in table reflects all Wave 1 survey respondents (response rate 86%).

2

Original sample (N=1,899) drawn from the September, October, and November 1998 TANF caseloads in nine Illinois counties, representing approximately three-quarters of the state’s welfare population; sample size in table reflects all Wave 1 survey respondents (response rate 72%).

3

Original sample included 1,075 TANF applicants (a 98% response rate) who applied for TANF assistance in 1999 in Milwaukee County; sample size reflected in table represents all Wave 1 survey respondents who received TANF assistance within one month of their application.

4

Original sample included 4,898 mothers (86% participation rate) who gave birth to a focal child in an urban hospital setting during the period 1998–2000; sample size in table reflects all mothers who were receiving TANF and/or Food Stamps. (Note: it was not possible to distinguish between TANF and Food Stamp recipients in the baseline FF survey; as a result, the sub-sample used for this analysis may include some respondents who received only Food Stamps in Wave 1). The FF survey waves each spanned two years. The year representing the start of each survey field period is presented in the table. Both Wave 1 and Wave 2 were fielded during 1999 and 2000 (in different cities) and Waves 2 and 3 were fielded in 2001.

5

Original sample included approximately 2,400 low-income families (74% response rate) residing in Boston, Chicago, or San Antonio in 1999; sample size in table reflects the number of Wave 1 respondents who were receiving TANF at that point.