How did NSAF enhance the policy debate on low-income families?
There’s controversy on how government measures poverty. What the NSAF did is novel in that it both replicated the way the federal government measures poverty and defined poverty in its own way by creating what we call a social family. Government defines poverty very rigidly. We expand that definition to cover same-sex partners or partners who are contributing income. That really enhances the debate because it provides a measurement of poverty that the government doesn’t detect. Also, our well-being measures can be cross-referenced. It helps to be able to see, for instance, how a parent suffering from mental illness might affect how well the child is doing in school. That extra dimension is a big enhancement. Also, no other household survey queries on child care. When parents go to work, where do the kids go? And, how do low-income parents afford reliable care? Many of our papers based on the NSAF research address those child-care issues. This is an angle that no one else really examine
