This paper asks whether universal pre-kindergarten (UPK) raises parents' earnings and how much these earnings effects matter for evaluating the economic returns to UPK programs. Using a randomized lottery design, we estimate the effects of enrolling in a full-day UPK program in New Haven, Connecticut on parents' labor market outcomes as well as educational expenditures and children's academic performance. During children's pre-kindergarten years, UPK enrollment increases weekly childcare coverage by 11 hours. Enrollment has limited impacts on children's academic outcomes between kindergarten and 8th grade, likely due to a combination of rapid effect fadeout and substitution away from other programs of similar quality but with shorter days. In contrast, parents work more hours, and their earnings increase by 21.7%. Parents' earnings gains persist for at least six years after the end of pre-kindergarten. Excluding impacts on children, each dollar of net government expenditure yields $5.51 in after-tax benefits for families, almost entirely from parents' earnings gains. This return is large compared to other labor market policies. Conversely, excluding earnings gains for parents, each dollar of net government expenditure yields only $0.46 to $1.32 in benefits, lower than many other education and children's health interventions. We conclude that the economic returns to investing in UPK are high, largely because of full-day UPK's effectiveness as an active labor market policy.
There is a large gender wage gap among college graduates. This gender gap could be partially driven by differences in college major and prior skills. We use Swedish register data to study how much of the gender gap can be explained by differences in majors, skills, and skill prices. College majors explain 60 percent of the gender wage gap, but large gaps remain within majors. We find that within-major wage gaps are driven by neither differences in multidimensional skills nor returns to these skills. In fact, women are positively selected in terms of college preparation and skills in almost every major.
More than two million U.S. households have an eviction case filed against them each year. Policymakers at the federal, state, and local levels are increasingly pursuing policies to reduce the number of evictions, citing harm to tenants and high public expenditures related to homelessness. We study the consequences of eviction for tenants using newly linked administrative data from two major urban areas: Cook County (which includes Chicago) and New York City. We document that prior to housing court, tenants experience declines in earnings and employment and increases in financial distress and hospital visits. These pre-trends pose a challenge for disentangling correlation and causation. To address this problem, we use an instrumental variables approach based on cases randomly assigned to judges of varying leniency. We find that an eviction order increases homelessness and hospital visits and reduces earnings, durable goods consumption, and access to credit in the first two years. Effects on housing and labor market outcomes are driven by impacts for female and Black tenants. In the longer run, eviction increases indebtedness and reduces credit scores.
This chapter uses a college-by-graduate degree fixed effects estimator to evaluate the returns to 19 different graduate degrees for men and women. We find substantial variation across degrees, and evidence that OLS overestimates the returns to degrees with the highest average earnings and underestimates the returns to degrees with the lowest average earnings. Second, we decompose the impacts on earnings into effects on wage rates and effects on hours. For most degrees, the earnings gains come from increased wage rates, though hours play an important role in some degrees, such as medicine, especially for women. Third, we estimate the net present value and internal rate of return for each degree, which account for the time and monetary costs of degrees. Finally, we provide descriptive evidence that satisfaction gains are large for some degrees with smaller economic returns, such as education and humanities degrees, especially for men.
There is no published national research reporting child care professionals’ physical health, depression, or stress during the COVID-19 pandemic. Given their central role in supporting children’s development, child care professionals’ overall physical and mental health is important. In this large-scale national survey, data were collected through an online survey from May 22, 2020 to June 8, 2020. We analyzed the association of sociodemographic characteristics with four physical health conditions (asthma, heart disease, diabetes, and obesity), depression, and stress weighted to national representativeness. Sociodemographic characteristics included race, ethnicity, age, gender, medical insurance status, and child care type. Our findings highlight that child care professionals’ depression rates during the pandemic were much higher than before the pandemic, and depression, stress and asthma rates were higher than U.S. adult depression rates during the pandemic. Given the essential work child care professionals provide during the pandemic, policy makers and public health officials should consider what can be done to support the physical and mental health of child care professionals.
More than two million U.S. households have an eviction case filed against them each year. Policymakers at the federal, state, and local levels are increasingly pursuing policies to reduce the number of evictions, citing harm to tenants and high public expenditures related to homelessness. We study the consequences of eviction for tenants using newly linked administrative data from two large cities. We document that prior to housing court, tenants experience declines in earnings and employment and increases in financial distress and hospital visits. These pre-trends are more pronounced for tenants who are evicted, which poses a challenge for disentangling correlation and causation. To address this problem, we use an instrumental variables approach based on cases randomly assigned to judges of varying leniency. We find that an eviction order increases homelessness, and reduces earnings, durable consumption, and access to credit. Effects on housing and labor market outcomes are driven by impacts for female and Black tenants.
More than two million U.S. households have an eviction case led against them each year. Policymakers at the federal, state, and local levels are increasingly pursuing policies to reduce the number of evictions, citing harm to tenants and high public expenditures related to homelessness. We study the consequences of eviction for tenants using newly linked administrative data from two large cities. We document that prior to housing court, tenants experience declines in earnings and employment and increases in financial distress and hospital visits. These pre-trends are more pronounced for tenants who are evicted, which poses a challenge for disentangling correlation and causation. To address this problem, we use an instrumental variables approach based on cases randomly assigned to judges of varying leniency. We find that an eviction order increases homelessness, and reduces earnings, durable consumption, and access to credit. Eects on housing and labor market outcomes are driven by impacts for female and Black tenants.
More than two million U.S. households have an eviction case led against them each year. Policymakers at the federal, state, and local levels are increasingly pursuing policies to reduce the number of evictions, citing harm to tenants and high public expenditures related to homelessness. We study the consequences of eviction for tenants using newly linked administrative data from two large cities. We document that prior to housing court, tenants experience declines in earnings and employment and increases in financial distress and hospital visits. These pre-trends are more pronounced for tenants who are evicted, which poses a challenge for disentangling correlation and causation. To address this problem, we use an instrumental variables approach based on cases randomly assigned to judges of varying leniency. We find that an eviction order increases homelessness, and reduces earnings, durable consumption, and access to credit. Eects on housing and labor market outcomes are driven by impacts for female and Black tenants.
This paper uses a college-by-graduate degree fixed effects estimator to evaluate the returns to 19 different graduate degrees for men and women. We find substantial variation across degrees, and evidence that OLS overestimates the returns to degrees with high average earnings and underestimates the returns to degrees with low average earnings. Second, we decompose the impacts on earnings into effects on wage rates and effects on hours. For most degrees, the earnings gains come from increased wage rates, though hours play an important role in some degrees, such as medicine, especially for women. Third, we estimate the net present value and internal rate of return for each degree, which account for the time and monetary costs of degrees. We show annual earnings and hours worked while enrolled in graduate school vary a lot by gender and degree. Finally, we provide descriptive evidence that gains in overall job satisfaction and satisfaction with contribution to society vary substantially across degrees.
This paper studies the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on small businesses between March and November 2020 using new survey data on 35,000 small businesses in eight Latin American countries. We document that the pandemic had large negative impacts on employment and beliefs regarding the future, which in turn predict meaningful economic outcomes in the medium-term. Despite the unprecedented amount of aid, policies had limited impact for small and informal firms. These firms were less aware of programs, applied less, and received less assistance. This may have lasting consequences, as businesses that received aid reported better outcomes and expectations about the future.
The relationship between the use of nonpharmaceutical interventions and COVID-19 vaccination among U.S. child care providers remains unknown. If unvaccinated child care providers are also less likely to employ nonpharmaceutical interventions, then a vaccine mandate across child care programs may have larger health and safety benefits. To assess and quantify the relationship between the use of nonpharmaceutical interventions and COVID-19 vaccination among U.S. child care providers, we conducted a prospective cohort study of child care providers (N = 20,013) from all 50 states, the District of Columbia, and Puerto Rico. Child care providers were asked to complete a self-administered email survey in May-June 2020 assessing the use of nonpharmaceutical interventions (predictors) and a follow-up survey in May-June 2021 assessing COVID-19 vaccination (outcome). Nonpharmaceutical interventions were dichotomized as personal mitigation measures (e.g., masking, social distancing, handwashing) and classroom mitigation measures (e.g., temperature checks of staff/children, symptom screening for staff/children, cohorting).
For each unendorsed personal mitigation measure during 2020, the likelihood of vaccination in 2021 decreased by 7% (Risk Ratio = 0.93 [95% 0.93 – 0.95]). No significant association was found between classroom mitigation measures and child care provider vaccination (Risk Ratio = 1.01 [95% CI 1.00-1.01]).
Child care providers who used less personal mitigation measures were also less likely to get vaccinated for COVID-19 as an alternative form of protection. The combined nonadherence to multiple types of preventative health behaviors, that is, both nonpharmaceutical interventions and vaccination, among some child care providers may support a role for mandatory vaccination to achieve pandemic control.
To characterize vaccine uptake among US child care providers, we conducted a multistate cross-sectional survey of the child care workforce. Providers were identified through various national databases and state registries. A link to the survey was sent via e-mail between May 26 and June 23, 2021. A 37.8% response yielded 21 663 respondents, with 20 013 satisfying inclusion criteria. Overall COVID-19 vaccine uptake among US child care providers (78.2%, 90% confidence interval: 77.5% to 78.9%) was higher than the US general adult population (65%). Vaccination rates varied between states from 53.5% to 89.4%. Vaccine uptake among respondents differed significantly (P < .01) based on respondent age (70.0% for ages 25–34, 91.6% for ages 75–84), race (70.0% for Black or African Americans, 92.5% for Asian Americans), annual household income (70.8% for <$35 000, 85.1% for >$75 000), and child care setting (73.0% for home-based, 79.7% for center-based).
The COVID-19 pandemic and resulting childcare closures have left many parents and guardians struggling to find care for their children while continuing to work, leading to adverse mental health and financial outcomes for families. Thus, keeping childcare programs open safely is of paramount importance. Although exposure to childcare early in the pandemic demonstrated no increased risk of contracting COVID-19, the highly contagious B.1.617.2 (Delta) variant has increased community prevalence, and COVID-19 outbreaks in childcare and among younger children are now well described. Furthermore, the attack rate for the B.1.1.7 (Alpha) variant, another highly contagious strain, is similar for both children and adults during childcare outbreaks.
Face masks reduce SARS-CoV-2 respiratory droplet transmission in the community and high-risk environments. In kindergarten through 12th grade schools, masks are part of successful risk mitigation bundles that facilitate a safe return to in-person education. Studies suggest that with strict masking policies social distancing can be safely reduced from 6 to 3 feet. However, child masking has not been studied in childcare, where children are typically younger than 5 years, social distancing is challenging, and adherence to masking is less than in older children. This gap in science is particularly problematic given current public debate regarding the benefits and risks of masking younger children not yet eligible for vaccination. We hypothesized that child masking, regardless of social distancing practices, is associated with reduced risk of a childcare program closing because of COVID-19 cases in either staff or children.