Skip to main content

Currently Skimming:

Appendix C: Reconciling Different Estimates of Income and Adjunctive Eligibility
Pages 188-198

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 188...
... For example, SIPP directly asks respondents to report their monthly income, while TRIM uses annual reports of income and benefit receipt combined with respondent accounts of employment periods throughout the year to simulate monthly income. These differing approaches yield different estimates of eligibility.
From page 189...
... These imputation routines utilize the income and unemployment data from the CPS to reflect both monthly unemployment flows and the degree of income variability found in SIPP. Estimates of the proportion of infants and children income eligible from this modified CPS data base and the SIPP 1996 Panel data are presented in Table C-1.
From page 190...
... Instead of 19- and 20-percent increases in the number of incomeeligible children when only the worst month was considered, monthly income with the certification process is estimated to increase the number of income-eligible children 12 and 13 percent compared with estimates employing an annual measure of income. Comparing the estimates derived from the TRIM data with those employing data from the 1996 SIPP panel, we conclude that the marginal effect of monthly income with WIC certification periods is significantly larger when employing the SIPP data as opposed to the TRIM data.
From page 191...
... 45.5 (1.1 1) Note: Numbers in parentheses represent the percentage increase in eligibility compared with estimates using annual income.
From page 192...
... Making this calculation, we find that 41.3 percent of children in 1998 were income eligible if monthly income was employed. This is almost identical to the 41.1 percent estimated from the TRIM data.1 The upper bound estimate, "eligible in any month," increases in the SIPP data by 43 percent compared with the estimates that use monthly certification, "average monthly." The similar estimate from the TRIM increases only 18 percent.
From page 193...
... The TRIM data show a larger proportion of children with at least 1 month of eligibility falling in the 7 tol2 month group and experience an average gain of only 0.8 months.2 Thus, SIPP is indicating a much larger gain in income eligibility due to the WIC certification process and monthly income because of two factors: . SIPP reported monthly income indicates that among those children with at least one month of eligibility, the average increase in the months of eligibility is largely due to more children having only a few months (1 to 5)
From page 195...
... To examine the effect underreporting may have on the number of people who gain WIC eligibility through adjunctive eligibility, we used TRIM data with imputed participation in these programs. The imputation procedure in TRIM makes sure the number of participants for each program matches control totals recorded by the programs' administrative records.
From page 196...
... GN oo ~ ~ ~ oo ~ ~ ON ~ ON ON ~ up GN ~ GN ~ .
From page 197...
... While a clear case can be made that SIPP data may understate the marginal effect of adjunctive eligibility due to using reported as opposed to actual enrollment in these means-tested programs, the TRIM-imputed data do not necessarily represent truth. TRIM utilizes characterizations of state Medicaid programs to determine Medicaid eligibility in order to assign enrollment to those who are eligible for benefits.
From page 198...
... It is possible that TRIM may be assigning too many high-income infants and children to enrollment status and hence overstating the true marginal effect of adjunctive eligibility.


This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
More information on Chapter Skim is available.