Supplemental Poverty Measure Thresholds: Imputing School Lunch and WIC Benefits to the Consumer Expenditure Survey Using the Current Population Survey
AbstractIn March 2010 an Interagency Technical Working Group (ITWG) released guidelines on thresholds and resources for a Supplemental Poverty Measure (SPM). The ITWG recommended that thresholds include in-kind benefits that are accounted for in resources; however, only limited in-kind benefit information is available in the Consumer Expenditure Survey (CE) Interview component, the data source upon which the thresholds are based. For example, the CE collects information on food expenditures that implicitly include the cash value of benefits from the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) but no information on other food programs. This study introduces a new method, the CPS Program Participation Method, of imputing benefits for the National School Lunch Program (NSLP) and the Women, Infants, and Children program (WIC). In this study, data from the Current Population Survey (CPS), the data source upon which the SPM resource measure is based, are used to model the participation of CE households in the NSLP and WIC using the CPS Program Participation Method. These CPSbased participation rates for NSLP and WIC are then used along with U.S. Department of Agriculture information to assign benefit levels to the CE households. Thresholds based on the CPS Program Participation Method are produced for 2009 and compared to thresholds based on a method based on program eligibility guidelines, the CE Eligibility Method. SPM thresholds are produced by housing types as well as overall. No poverty rates using these thresholds are produced. Results reveal that the CE Eligibility Method overall threshold is higher than the CPS Program Participation Method overall threshold. This is not surprising since the CE threshold is based on eligibility while the CPS threshold is based on program participation. The paired CE and CPS based thresholds are also statistically significantly different from each other for owners with mortgages and for owners without mortgages. When housing tenure thresholds are compared to each other within each method group, statistically significant differences arise for two of the three pairs of thresholds. In particular, the thresholds for owners without a mortgage were found to be different from the thresholds of both owners with a mortgage and renters, while the thresholds for owners with a mortgage and renters did not differ from each other at the significance levels used for testing.
Download InfoIf you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
Bibliographic InfoPaper provided by U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics in its series Working Papers with number 457.
Length: 37 pages
Date of creation: Jul 2012
Date of revision:
Contact details of provider:
Postal: 2 Massachusetts Avenue, N.E. Room 2860, Washington, D. C. 20212
Phone: (202) 606-5900
Fax: (202) 606-7890
Web page: http://www.bls.gov
More information through EDIRC
Supplemental poverty measurement; Consumer Expenditure Survey; Current Population Survey; In-kind transfers; Imputation;
Find related papers by JEL classification:
- C25 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Single Equation Models; Single Variables - - - Discrete Regression and Qualitative Choice Models; Discrete Regressors; Proportions
- D12 - Microeconomics - - Household Behavior - - - Consumer Economics: Empirical Analysis
- I32 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Welfare, Well-Being, and Poverty - - - Measurement and Analysis of Poverty
This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:
- NEP-ALL-2012-09-03 (All new papers)
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Laura Tiehen & Alison Jacknowitz, 2008. "Why Wait?: Examining Delayed Wic Participation Among Pregnant Women," Contemporary Economic Policy, Western Economic Association International, vol. 26(4), pages 518-538, October.
- Newman, Constance & Ralston, Katherine L., 2006. "Profiles of Participants in the National School Lunch Program: Data From Two National Surveys," Economic Information Bulletin 7085, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.
- Oliveira, Victor & Frazao, Elizabeth, 2009. "The WIC Program: Background, Trends, and Economic Issues, 2009 Edition," Economic Research Report 55839, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.
- Laura Castner & James Mabli & Julie Sykes, 2009.
"Dynamics of WIC Program Participation by Infants and Children, 2001 to 2003,"
Mathematica Policy Research Reports
6258, Mathematica Policy Research.
- Laura Castner & James Mabli & Julie Sykes, 2009. "Dynamics of WIC Program Participation by Infants and Children, 2001 to 2003," Mathematica Policy Research Reports 6256, Mathematica Policy Research.
- Swann Christopher A, 2010. "WIC Eligibility and Participation: The Roles of Changing Policies, Economic Conditions, and Demographics," The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 10(1), pages 1-37, March.
- Marianne Bitler & Janet Currie, 2004. "Medicaid at Birth, WIC Take Up, and Children's Outcomes," Working Papers 172, RAND Corporation Publications Department.
- Jacknowitz, Alison & Tiehen, Laura, 2010. "WIC Participation Patterns: An Investigation of Delayed Entry and Early Exit," Economic Research Report 102759, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Gregory Kurtzon).
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.