The National Academies Press

Currently Skimming:

Appendix
Pages 97-114

The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.

From page 97... ... First, for the purpose of estimating the number of school-age children who are in poor families in 1989, we compare estimates from using school lunch data for 1990 with estimates from the Census Bureau's synthetic or constant-share method that is based on 1980 census data. Second, we examine the sensitivity of various methods in estimating the 15 percent threshold for concentration grants. Read the entire page →
From page 98... ... The evaluation below compares these estimates of poor school-age children to those estimated using the census constant-share method, which applies the 1980 census shares of poor school-age children for school districts (or parts of school districts) within counties to the 1990 census county estimates of poor school-age children (synthetic method (2) Read the entire page →
From page 99... ... lunch participants. The mean unweighted algebraic percentage error is the sum over all school districts of the algebraic difference between the estimate of poor school-age children from a model and the 1990 census estimate as a proportion of the census estimate for each district, divided by the number of districts. Read the entire page →
From page 100... ... 100 SMAL L-ARE4 ESTIMATES OF SCHOOL-AGE CHILDREN IN POVERTY TABLE A-2 Mean Absolute and Algebraic Percentage Errors for Children Age 5-17 in Families in Poverty, Various Methods, New York State School Districts in Evaluation Universe, 1990, Unweighted, in percent Census Constant 1980 Share Percent of Mean Mean Districts Absolute Algebraic Category (N = 623) % Error % Error Total 100.0 53.4 31.2 1990 School District Population Under 2,500 11.9 66.3 34.0 2,500-4,999 14.3 41.2 15.8 5,000-7,499 17.5 57.7 32.6 7,500-9,999 10.8 58.7 28.3 10,000-14,999 12.5 61.3 45.1 15,000-19,999 9.5 43.5 29.8 20,000-29,999 10.8 67.2 55.8 30,000-39,999 5.3 36.5 11.6 40,000-49,999 2.9 42.6 25.1 50,000-99,999 3.9 24.9 10.7 100,000 or more 0.8 12.0 -12.0 1980-1990 Population Growth Decrease of 10.0% or more 3.9 45.5 30.6 Decrease of 5.0-9.9% 12.0 54.7 34.9 Decrease of 0.1 -4.9% 24.4 48.1 27.1 Increase of 0.0-4.9% 21.8 50.6 28.1 Increase of 5.0-9.9% 15.9 58.2 35.8 Increase of 10.0% or more 22.0 59.4 33.4 Percentage Poor School-Age Children, 1990 0.0% 2.3 0.0 0.0 0.1 %-5.9% 34.2 97.7 83.6 6.0-8.9% 16.1 42.1 20.1 9.0- 12.4% 17.0 33.1 8.7 12.5-16.4% 15.1 26.4 3.0 16.5-23.9% 11.9 23.6 -15.6 24.0% or more 3.5 24.6 -20.6 Read the entire page →
From page 101... ... APPENDIX 10 Free Lunch Mean Absolute % Error Free and Reduced-Price Lunch Mean Algebraic % Error Mean Absolute % Error Mean Algebraic % Error 48.77.1 52.114.0 57.44.6 59.810.1 40.1-0.4 41.94.2 65.830.4 71.238.8 47.2-12.1 45.7-10.1 53.222.1 60.431.3 39.3-6.3 43.11.3 47.314.1 54.327.8 37.2-9.0 38.3-3.3 36.7-14.4 36.9-8.0 24.2-7.0 26.5-2.9 5.15.1 4.7-0.9 23.4-0.9 31.810.0 63.07.0 67.511.0 39.3-10.3 40.4-4.9 47.920.4 51.227.7 43.012.0 47.220.1 60.611.3 64.619.4 0.00.0 0.00.0 81.422.2 90.237.6 41.92.7 44.88.9 41.06.8 41.710.6 22.6-2.0 22.00.8 24.3-10.4 23.4-12.3 24.2-16.3 24.5-21.4 Read the entire page →
From page 102... ... . The school lunch estimates are formed by multiplying the 1990 census estimates of related children age 5-17 in families in poverty for the county by the school district's share of the county's free (free and reduced-price) Read the entire page →
From page 103... ... For example, school districts with small total population have larger errors than districts with larger populations. An important result of this analysis is that even after some effort in data preparation, the school lunch method is still not meaningfully better than the census constant-share method. Read the entire page →
From page 104... ... 104 SMAL L-ARE4 ESTIMATES OF SCHOOL-AGE CHILDREN IN POVERTY TABLE A-3 Mean Absolute and Algebraic Percentage Errors for Children Age 5-17 in Families in Poverty, Various Methods, New York State School Districts in Evaluation Universe, 1990, Weighted by Children Age 5-17 in Poverty, 1990 Census, in percent Census Constant 1980 Share Category Percent of Districts (N = 623) Mean Absolute % Error Mean Algebraic % Error Total 100.0 23.9 0.8 1990 School District Population Under 2,500 11.9 43.4 13.8 2,500-4,999 14.3 30.4 4.2 5,000-7,499 17.5 31.6 -0.1 7,500-9,999 10.8 32.5 -4.4 10,000-14,999 12.5 34.8 13.2 15,000-19,999 9.5 21.6 4.0 20,000-29,999 10.8 37.8 21.4 30,000-39,999 5.3 31.5 -2.0 40,000-49,999 2.9 33.6 9.4 50,000-99,999 3.9 18.3 -0.4 100,000 or more 0.8 10.4 -10.4 1980- 1990 Population Growth Decrease of 10.0% or more 3.9 31.2 26.2 Decrease of 5.0-9.9% 12.0 13.7 -4.2 Decrease of 0.1-4.9% 24.4 20.8 -3.7 Increase of 0.0-4.9% 21.8 31.1 9.9 Increase of 5.0-9.9% 15.9 30.1 2.2 Increase of 10.0% or more 22.0 32.4 2.9 Percentage of Poor School-Age Children, 1990 0.0% 2.3 0.0 0.0 0.1-5.9% 34.2 53.4 40.3 6.0-8.9% 16.1 34.0 9.6 9.0- 12.4% 17.0 22.2 4.5 12.5- 16.4% 15.1 22.7 -2.1 16.5-23.9% 11.9 19.0 -14.8 24.0% or more 3.5 11.3 -10.1 Read the entire page →
From page 105... ... APPENDIX 105 Free Lunch Mean Absolute % Error Free and Reduced-Price Lunch Mean Algebraic % Error Mean Mean Absolute Algebraic % Error % Error 22.3 38.5 31.6 34.2 32.6 32.0 24.9 36.3 27.9 34.0 21.0 3.4 9.8 10.2 17.2 32.5 29.9 39.0 0.0 47.1 34.3 36.3 19.6 18.2 5.4 1.6 -7.4 -11.2 1.3 -4.6 6.8 0.9 13.8 3.1 -6.8 -1.5 3.4 2.2 -3.8 1.9 8.6 0.3 2.0 0.0 -5.3 2.8 19.5 -1.6 1.4 -0.6 24.2 39.2 31.8 34.9 30.0 35.6 28.7 39.7 28.1 35.6 24.0 5.3 24.2 17.0 17.1 33.1 30.6 38.0 0.0 52.1 36.7 38.5 20.0 16.2 9.1 1.3 -4.5 -7.3 3.9 -4.5 10.9 5.3 21.1 3.4 -6.3 -3.2 -3.0 7.7 9.8 1.1 11.5 3.3 4.6 0.0 8.7 8.6 23.5 -2.3 -3.3 -7.8 Read the entire page →
From page 106... ... using school lunch data results in significant gains in estimating school-age children from poor families. ESTIMATES OF THE CONCENTRATION GRANT THRESHOLD Eligibility for Title I concentration grants is based on having a school-age poverty rate of at least 15 percent or at least 6,500 poor children.3 Current Title 3Children eligible for Title I are not limited to school-age children from poor families (see Chapter 1) Read the entire page →
From page 107... ... The proposed direct allocation method also permits states to aggregate the allocations to districts that have total population of less than 20,000 and reallocate this total based on alternative data, such as those from the National School Lunch Program. It is of interest to examine eligibility for concentration grants in those districts with less than 20,000 population under three different scenarios: the current two-stage process, the direct allocation process to districts without controls, and direct Read the entire page →
From page 108... ... Of the 623 districts in New York State that are in the census evaluation universe, 476 are in districts that had less than 20,000 total population in 1990. As shown in Table A-4, these 476 districts represent 76 percent of all districts in the evaluation universe for New York, but they contain only 35 percent of the poor children age 5-17 in the census evaluation universe. Read the entire page →
From page 109... ... Districts Method Poor Children Age 5-17 Number Percent Number Percent Census Counts 76 16.0 16,689 27.3 Census-based Estimates 78 16.4 14,162 23.1 Model-based Estimates 76 16.0 14,134 23.1 Free Luncha 112 23.5 21,662 35.4 Free and Reduced- 136 28.6 24,515 40.0 price Luncha NOTES: Cell entries are for school districts and poor school-age children that would be eligible for concentration grants according to various methods (see text) under the current two-stage allocation process (i.e., both county and school district have more than 6,500 or more than 15% poor school-age children) Read the entire page →
From page 110... ... o o ~ .~ �_4 . �_4 a' o �= ~ o a' ~ o a ~ so 1 o � ~ ~ o � En ~ � � ~ ca ca v � � ~ 4= o A ca ca v O='n ~ at ca ~ : ca =~ balk 4= o Z ~ ~:~ O ~ ~n ~ ~a�~ ~ .O =~ ~a<~ o Z ~ ~ :~ o . Read the entire page →
From page 111... ... Table A-9 shows mean algebraic and absolute percentage errors for the various estimation methods. Here the school lunch estimates have either been controlled to the statewide total of school-age children living in poor families for the 476 districts with populations of less than 20,000 or to a similar county total. Read the entire page →
From page 112... ... 3 � ~ � � ~ ca ca v � � ~ 4= o z ca ca v � � ~ 4= � ~ 4= � � ~ 4= o z 4= ca .~ � ~ 4= � ~ 4= ca � � - ~ 4= o z 4= � - ~ 4= ca O ~ ~n ~a�~ 4= C) Read the entire page →
From page 113... ... 113 to a' cq o ~ .0 o I ~ o it' o ~ 8 o on �0 Cd C a' ~ Cq . Read the entire page →
From page 114... ... educational authorities with students, and they participate in the school lunch program; how to allocate these students is an issue. � In New York State, the school lunch program is administered separately from most other programs, which can make use of the administrative data difficult (e.g., schools sometimes have separate identification numbers, which makes matching to other data very time consuming) Read the entire page →

From page 97...

... First, for the purpose of estimating the number of school-age children who are in poor families in 1989, we compare estimates from using school lunch data for 1990 with estimates from the Census Bureau's synthetic or constant-share method that is based on 1980 census data. Second, we examine the sensitivity of various methods in estimating the 15 percent threshold for concentration grants.

Appendix Pages 97-114

Appendix
Pages 97-114