Skip to main content
Back to Top

SSRC Library

The SSRC Library allows visitors to access materials related to self-sufficiency programs, practice and research. Visitors can view common search terms, conduct a keyword search or create a custom search using any combination of the filters at the left side of this page. To conduct a keyword search, type a term or combination of terms into the search box below, select whether you want to search the exact phrase or the words in any order, and click on the blue button to the right of the search box to view relevant results.

Writing a paper? Working on a literature review? Citing research in a funding proposal? Use the SSRC Citation Assistance Tool to compile citations.

  • Conduct a search and filter parameters as desired.
  • "Check" the box next to the resources for which you would like a citation.
  • Select "Download Selected Citation" at the top of the Library Search Page.
  • Select your export style:
    • Text File.
    • RIS Format.
    • APA format.
  • Select submit and download your citations.

The SSRC Library includes resources which may be available only via journal subscription. The SSRC may be able to provide users without subscription access to a particular journal with a single use copy of the full text.  Please email the SSRC with your request.

The SSRC Library collection is constantly growing and new research is added regularly. We welcome our users to submit a library item to help us grow our collection in response to your needs.


  • Individual Author: Bernstein, Sara; Malone, Lizabeth; Klein, Ashley Kopack; Bush, Charles; Feeney, Kathleen; Reid, Maya; Lukashanets, Serge; Aikens, Nikki
    Reference Type: Report
    Year: 2018

    Introduction

    AI/AN FACES 2015 is the first national study of Region XI AI/AN Head Start children and their families, classrooms, and programs. This set of tables presents data on the demographic backgrounds and developmental outcomes of children enrolled in Region XI AI/AN Head Start programs during the 2015–16 Head Start year. The tables also detail aspects of their home environment and family life. Data on children’s classrooms, teachers, centers, and programs, including aspects of classroom quality and practice, teacher and director characteristics, and characteristics of the center and program environments, provide context for children’s experiences. We also provide information on the AI/AN FACES 2015 study methodology and collaborative design process, sample, and measures.

    The study design, implementation, and dissemination has been informed by extensive collaboration with a workgroup comprised of Region XI Head Start directors, early childhood researchers with experience working with tribal communities, Mathematica researchers, and federal...

    Introduction

    AI/AN FACES 2015 is the first national study of Region XI AI/AN Head Start children and their families, classrooms, and programs. This set of tables presents data on the demographic backgrounds and developmental outcomes of children enrolled in Region XI AI/AN Head Start programs during the 2015–16 Head Start year. The tables also detail aspects of their home environment and family life. Data on children’s classrooms, teachers, centers, and programs, including aspects of classroom quality and practice, teacher and director characteristics, and characteristics of the center and program environments, provide context for children’s experiences. We also provide information on the AI/AN FACES 2015 study methodology and collaborative design process, sample, and measures.

    The study design, implementation, and dissemination has been informed by extensive collaboration with a workgroup comprised of Region XI Head Start directors, early childhood researchers with experience working with tribal communities, Mathematica researchers, and federal government officials from the Office of Head Start and the Office of Planning, Research, and Evaluation. The AI/AN FACES 2015 child sample was selected to represent all children enrolled in Region XI Head Start in fall 2015, drawing on participants from 21 randomly selected Region XI programs from across the country. AI/AN FACES 2015 includes a battery of child assessments across many developmental domains; surveys of children’s parents, teachers, and program managers; and classroom observations.

    The study is conducted by Mathematica Policy Research and its partner—Educational Testing Service—under contract to the Office of Planning, Research, and Evaluation, Administration for Children and Families, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.

    Purpose

    The purpose of this report is two-fold: (1) to provide information about the AI/AN FACES 2015 study, including the background, design, methodology, measures, and analytic methods, and (2) to report detailed descriptive statistics in a series of tables on children, their families, and their classrooms, centers, and programs. The data provide descriptive information from parent surveys, direct child assessments, teacher child reports, teacher surveys, classroom observations, and center and program director surveys.

    Key Findings and Highlights

    The data tables provide descriptive information on Region XI Head Start children, their families, classrooms, centers, and programs.

    For children’s characteristics, family demographics, and home environment, the tables show:

    • Demographic characteristics (e.g., age, race/ethnicity, home language environment, household composition)
    • Parent education, employment status, household income as a percentage of the federal poverty threshold, household financial strain, and food security
    • Parent’s tribal language use and parent cultural connections and identity
    • Community activities with the child in the past month
    • Home learning activities, joint book reading, and storytelling frequency
    • Child’s health care home use
    • Parent health behaviors and depressive symptoms
    • Parent neighborhood characteristics and neighborhood problems

    For children’s cognitive, social-emotional, and health and physical development, the tables show:

    • Reliability of assessments of child cognitive and social emotional measures
    • Language, literacy, and math skills of children
    • Children’s executive function, social skills, problem behaviors, and approaches to learning
    • Parent-reported child health status, and children’s height, weight, and body mass index

    For children’s classroom, center, and program cultural and language environment, the tables show:

    • Children’s classroom AI/AN composition and race/ethnicity of children’s classroom staff
    • Staff’s connection to community in children’s classrooms
    • Children’s classroom exposure to cultural items and practices
    • Culture and tribal language exposure, and cultural curricula and assessment tools in children’s classrooms and centers

    For children’s classroom, teacher, center, and program characteristics, the tables show:

    • The quality of Region XI Head Start children’s classrooms
    • Curricula and assessment tools used and frequency of reading, language, and math activities in children’s classrooms
    • Mentoring and training received by children’s teachers
    • Children’s lead teachers’ background characteristics, depressive symptoms, attitudes, and job satisfaction
    • Structural characteristics of children’s Region XI Head Start programs (such as enrollment, agency type, source of revenue) and centers (staffing and turnover)
    • Children’s center and program director background characteristics
    • Training and technical assistance efforts in children’s programs (including professional development offered to staff)

    The tables provide this information for all Region XI Head Start children. For some tables, information is also provided for only Region XI Head Start children who are American Indian or Alaska Native.

    Methods

    The AI/AN FACES 2015 sample provides information about Region XI Head Start children, their families, classrooms, centers, and programs. We selected a sample of Region XI Head Start programs from the 2012-2013 Head Start Program Information Report, selecting one to two centers per program and two to four classrooms per center. Within each classroom, all children were selected for the study. Twenty-one programs, 36 centers, 73 classrooms, and 1,049 children participated in the study.

    The statistics in these tables are estimates of key characteristics of the population of Region XI Head Start children and their families in fall 2015 and spring 2016 and of children’s classrooms, centers, and programs in spring 2016. The data used to report on fall 2015 characteristics are weighted to represent all children enrolled in Region XI programs in fall 2015. The data used to report on spring 2016 characteristics and on fall-spring change are weighted to represent all children enrolled in Region XI programs in fall 2015 and who were still enrolled in spring 2016. (Author introduction)

  • Individual Author: Malone, Lizabeth; Bernstein, Sara; Atkins-Burnett, Sally; Xue, Yange
    Reference Type: Report
    Year: 2018

    Introduction

    AI/AN FACES 2015 is the first national study of Region XI AI/AN Head Start children and their families, classrooms, and programs. To date, the Head Start Family and Child Experiences Survey (FACES) has been a major source of descriptive information on Head Start and preschool children ages 3 to 5 years old who attend the program. FACES gathers data from Regions I-X, the 10 geographically based Head Start regions, with the most recent round conducted in 2014.

    The AI/AN FACES 2015 study presents a new opportunity to explore the psychometric performance of commonly used measures of preschoolers’ cognitive and social-emotional development. The reliability and validity of a measure are not inherent but depend on its use. Norming samples for most child assessment measures do not include large numbers of AI/AN children and as a result little is known about measure performance when administered to AI/AN children. Concerns exist about whether scores from these measures accurately reflect the children’s abilities, skills, and knowledge. Previous...

    Introduction

    AI/AN FACES 2015 is the first national study of Region XI AI/AN Head Start children and their families, classrooms, and programs. To date, the Head Start Family and Child Experiences Survey (FACES) has been a major source of descriptive information on Head Start and preschool children ages 3 to 5 years old who attend the program. FACES gathers data from Regions I-X, the 10 geographically based Head Start regions, with the most recent round conducted in 2014.

    The AI/AN FACES 2015 study presents a new opportunity to explore the psychometric performance of commonly used measures of preschoolers’ cognitive and social-emotional development. The reliability and validity of a measure are not inherent but depend on its use. Norming samples for most child assessment measures do not include large numbers of AI/AN children and as a result little is known about measure performance when administered to AI/AN children. Concerns exist about whether scores from these measures accurately reflect the children’s abilities, skills, and knowledge. Previous smaller studies have used these measures with AI/AN children, but none were large enough to test the measures’ psychometric performance. Child outcomes measures in AI/AN FACES 2015 were aligned with those in FACES 2014. Therefore, this alignment allows us to learn how standardized child development measures performed when administered to a large sample of AI/AN children.

    This report describes the performance of cognitive and social-emotional measures of preschoolers’ development for AI/AN children, using recent data from AI/AN FACES 2015 and FACES 2014.

    Purpose

    The purpose of this technical report is to present findings from analyses of how preschool cognitive and social-emotional measures performed in AI/AN FACES 2015. We examined the internal consistency of measures when administered to AI/AN children, reviewed descriptive statistics as context of difference in mean ability across groups in the AI/AN FACES 2015 and FACES 2014 samples, conducted analyses of differential item functioning (DIF) within cognitive measures to compare the performance of AI/AN children and White children (including data from FACES 2014), and examined the strength of bivariate correlations between measures of similar constructs and different constructs to assess evidence of concurrent and discriminant validity. The findings, therefore, provide initial evidence on the reliability and validity of the measures for AI/AN preschoolers.

    Key Findings and Highlights

    For most of the measures, findings from these analyses suggest that it is appropriate to report the AI/AN FACES 2015 preschool child outcomes scores, the exception being one of the two measures of executive function (Heads-Toes-Knees-Shoulders or HTKS, which was added to AI/AN FACES 2015 to expand measurement of this construct beyond what is used in FACES 2014).

    • All measures demonstrated acceptable reliability with alphas of 0.70 or above.
    • The strength of correlations between measures is in an expected pattern. Correlations are stronger between measures of similar constructs (for example, receptive and expressive language) than between different constructs (for example, social behavior and language).
    • Among six cognitive measures flagged across reviews, none warrant additional follow-up based on the DIF analyses. Most cognitive measures did not show evidence of performing differently across groups based on DIF analysis. Two cognitive measures (Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test-Fourth Edition and Expressive One-Word Picture Vocabulary Test-Fourth Edition) had items demonstrating DIF; however, the number of items with DIF was close to or less than the number we would expect by chance and were balanced overall with some easier for AI/AN children and others easier for White children.
    • None of the teacher- and assessor-reported social-emotional measures exhibited performance concerns based on the current review.
    • Examination of the executive function measures indicated that the pencil tapping task is an appropriate measure for this sample. However, a floor problem was found with the HTKS, indicating the measure provided limited information to distinguish the children in this sample.

    These analyses are based on a specific sample of children—AI/AN children in Head Start programs operated by federally recognized tribes. While this information provides initial evidence of the reliability and validity for these measures of cognitive and social-emotional development, researchers should keep in mind the diversity of tribal communities and the AI/AN population nationwide and in Head Start more generally as compared to Region XI AI/AN Head Start when considering the use of these measures with other AI/AN children.

    Methods

    The AI/AN FACES 2015 sample provides information about Region XI Head Start children, their families, classrooms, centers, and programs. We selected a sample of Region XI Head Start programs from the 2012-2013 Head Start Program Information Report, selecting one to two centers per program and two to four classrooms per center. Within each classroom, all children (both AI/AN and non-AI/AN) were selected for the study. Twenty-one programs, 37 centers, 73 classrooms, and 1,049 children participated in the study.

    The FACES 2014 sample provides information at the national level about Head Start programs, centers, classrooms, and the children and families they serve. We selected a sample of Head Start programs from the 2012-2013 Head Start Program Information Report, with two centers per program and two classrooms per center selected for participation. Within each classroom, we randomly selected 12 children for the study. One-hundred seventy-six programs, 346 centers, 667 classrooms, and 2,206 children (in 60 programs) were still study participants in spring 2015. (Author introduction)

  • Individual Author: Bernstein, Sara; Malone, Lizabeth; AI/AN FACES 2015 Workgroup
    Reference Type: Report
    Year: 2018

    It is important for Head Start to have information about children’s and families’ strengths and needs over the course of the program year. We examine Region XI Head Start children’s growth in cognitive skills (in language, literacy, and mathematics), social-emotional skills, and executive function during the program year to learn about their progress toward being ready for school. We also consider children’s physical health at the end of the program year, as it can influence children’s readiness for school. This research brief describes the developmental progress of Region XI Head Start children as they complete a program year (from fall 2015 to spring 2016), using recent data from the American Indian and Alaska Native Head Start Family and Child Experiences Survey (AI/AN FACES 2015). (Author introduction)

    It is important for Head Start to have information about children’s and families’ strengths and needs over the course of the program year. We examine Region XI Head Start children’s growth in cognitive skills (in language, literacy, and mathematics), social-emotional skills, and executive function during the program year to learn about their progress toward being ready for school. We also consider children’s physical health at the end of the program year, as it can influence children’s readiness for school. This research brief describes the developmental progress of Region XI Head Start children as they complete a program year (from fall 2015 to spring 2016), using recent data from the American Indian and Alaska Native Head Start Family and Child Experiences Survey (AI/AN FACES 2015). (Author introduction)

  • Individual Author: Esposito, Andrea Mraz; Coughlin, Rebecca; Yanez, Armando; Sama-Miller, Emily; Del Grosso, Patricia ; Kleinman, Rebecca; Paulsell, Diane
    Reference Type: Report
    Year: 2017

    A portion of the federal funds that support home visiting for mothers and young children are designated specifically for supporting home visiting in tribal communities. Therefore, policymakers and program administrators need to know what research has learned about home visiting in these communities. This series of reports compiles and summarizes the findings of that research. The Home Visiting Evidence of Effectiveness (HomVEE) project is a systematic review of home visiting research (detailed information and results are available at https://homvee.acf.hhs.gov). To assess the evidence of effectiveness of culturally relevant models that have been implemented in tribal communities, HomVEE conducted a systematic review focusing specifically on studies relevant to tribal communities. The evidence base on home visiting in tribal communities is fairly small. The HomVEE tribal review has identified 49 effectiveness studies of home visiting program models either used in tribal communities or that included a sizable share (10 percent or more) of...

    A portion of the federal funds that support home visiting for mothers and young children are designated specifically for supporting home visiting in tribal communities. Therefore, policymakers and program administrators need to know what research has learned about home visiting in these communities. This series of reports compiles and summarizes the findings of that research. The Home Visiting Evidence of Effectiveness (HomVEE) project is a systematic review of home visiting research (detailed information and results are available at https://homvee.acf.hhs.gov). To assess the evidence of effectiveness of culturally relevant models that have been implemented in tribal communities, HomVEE conducted a systematic review focusing specifically on studies relevant to tribal communities. The evidence base on home visiting in tribal communities is fairly small. The HomVEE tribal review has identified 49 effectiveness studies of home visiting program models either used in tribal communities or that included a sizable share (10 percent or more) of American Indian and Alaska Native (AIAN) families. Forty-one percent of these used a sufficiently rigorous study design to provide unbiased estimates of program impacts. (The more rigorous the design, the more likely it is that a study’s impacts were caused by the program model itself, rather than by other factors.) Only six of them specifically examined the effect of a program model with tribal populations (meaning the studies included samples made up entirely of AIAN participants or reported findings by tribal community affiliation). Part 2 of the report in the Related Documents section of this page focuses on “Lessons Learned about Implementation and Evaluation”. (Author introduction)

  • Individual Author: Austin, Algernon
    Reference Type: Report
    Year: 2010

    There are two very different experiences of the recession in some regions of the country. While Alaska and the Northern Plains states have had some of the lowest unemployment rates for whites since the start of the recession, these regions have had among the highest rates of joblessness for American Indians. This Issue Brief documents these extreme regional employment disparities as well as the smaller but still significant ones between American Indians and whites from the first half of 2007 to the first half of 2010. It presents American Indian and white unemployment rates and employment-to-population ratios nationally and broken down by region.

    The key findings are:

    • From the first half of 2007 to the first half of 2010, the American Indian unemployment rate nationally increased 7.7 percentage points to 15.2%. This increase was 1.6 times the size of the white increase.
    • By the first half of 2010, the unemployment rate for Alaska Natives jumped 6.3 percentage points to 21.3%—the highest regional unemployment rate for American Indians.
    • Since the...

    There are two very different experiences of the recession in some regions of the country. While Alaska and the Northern Plains states have had some of the lowest unemployment rates for whites since the start of the recession, these regions have had among the highest rates of joblessness for American Indians. This Issue Brief documents these extreme regional employment disparities as well as the smaller but still significant ones between American Indians and whites from the first half of 2007 to the first half of 2010. It presents American Indian and white unemployment rates and employment-to-population ratios nationally and broken down by region.

    The key findings are:

    • From the first half of 2007 to the first half of 2010, the American Indian unemployment rate nationally increased 7.7 percentage points to 15.2%. This increase was 1.6 times the size of the white increase.
    • By the first half of 2010, the unemployment rate for Alaska Natives jumped 6.3 percentage points to 21.3%—the highest regional unemployment rate for American Indians.
    • Since the start of the recession, American Indians in the Midwest (see Table 1 for the states within each region) experienced the greatest increase in unemployment, growing by 10.3 percentage points to 19.3%.
    • By the first half of this year, slightly more than half—51.5%—of American Indians nationally were working, down from 58.3% in the first half of 2007.
    • In the first half of this year, only 44% of American Indians in the Northern Plains were working, the worst employment rate for Native Americans regionally.
    • The employment situation is the worst for American Indians in some of the same regions where it is best for whites: Alaska and the Northern Plains.

    (author abstract)

Sort by

Topical Area(s)

Source

Year

Year ranges from 2010 to 2018

Reference Type

Research Methodology

Geographic Focus

Target Populations