Using State Administrative Data to Measure Program Performance
Peter R. Mueser, Kenneth R. Troske, Alexey Gorislavsky
Abstract
Open-access reader
Peter R. Mueser, Kenneth R. Troske, Alexey Gorislavsky
Abstract
Open-access reader
This paper uses administrative data from Missouri to examine the sensitivity of job training program impact estimates based on alternative nonexperimental methods. In addition to simple regression adjustment, we consider Mahalanobis distance matching and a variety of methods using propensity score matching. In each case, we consider estimates based on levels of post-program earnings as well as difference-in-difference estimates based on comparison of pre- and post-program earnings. Specification tests suggest that the difference-in-difference estimator may provide a better measure of program impact. We find\nthat propensity score matching is generally most effective, but the detailed implementation of the method is not of critical importance. Our analyses demonstrate that existing data available at the state level can be used to obtain useful estimates of program impact.
OpenAlex reports 6 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.
A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.
Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
This paper uses administrative data from Missouri to examine the sensitivity of job training program impact estimates based on alternative nonexperimental methods. In addition to simple regression adjustment, we consider Mahalanobis distance matching and a variety of methods using propensity score matching. In each case, we consider estimates based on levels of post-program earnings as well as difference-in-difference estimates based on comparison of pre- and post-program earnings. Specification tests suggest that the difference-in-difference estimator may provide a better measure of program impact. We find\nthat propensity score matching is generally most effective, but the detailed implementation of the method is not of critical importance. Our analyses demonstrate that existing data available at the state level can be used to obtain useful estimates of program impact.
Key concepts: Propensity score matching, Matching (statistics), Measure (data warehouse), Earnings, Difference in differences, Econometrics, Computer science, Average treatment effect