Letter from Lado to Court RE: Request for Information with Enclosed Second Parent Survey and Additional Codes

    3 = 3 National Office » 

A A 
Suite 1600 

NAACP LEGAL DEFENSE 99 Hudson Street 

AND EDUCATIONAL FUND, INC. New York, N.Y. 10013-2897 (212) 219-1900 Fax: (212) 226-7592 

October 12, 1992 

John R. Whalen 

Assistant Attorney General 
Office of the Attorney General 
State of Connecticut 

MacKenzie Hall 
110 Sherman Street 

Hartford, .CT 06105 

Re: Sheff v. O'Neill 

Dear John: & 

This letter and its attachments are in response to requests 

for information made by David Armor in his letter to Lloyd Calvert 

dated August 28, 1992, as conveyed to plaintiffs by your letter 

dated August 31, 1992 and Defendants’ Second Set of Interrogatories 

and Second Request for Production of Documents. 

As you know, with regard to Dr. Robert Crain’s study of 

Project Concern, plaintiffs have already sent (1) two copies of a 

diskette containing the data used by Dr. Crain in the study, (2) 

the draft and the final version of Crain, Miller Hawes & Peichert, 

"Finding Niches: Desegregated Students Sixteen Years Later," (3) 

Crain & Strauss, "School Desegregation and Black Occupational 

Attainments: Results from a Long-Term Experiment, (4) the 1982 

Hartford Youth Employment Study Student Questionnaire, (5) the 1982 

Hartford Youth Employment Study Parent Supplement, (6) the 1982 

Hartford Youth Employment Study Interviewer Training Manual, and 

(7) the Codebook, which is in the form of computer printouts. 

Enclosed please also find the following materials that Dr. 

Crain located in response to Dr. Armor’s letter: 

1. A second parent survey. (19 pages.) (See Dr. Armor’s 

letter, point #4.) Every parent respondent received the 

parent questionnaire. If there was more than one child in the 

family, the data on the second child was gathered with the 

parent supplement, repeating questions 1-38 of the parent 

survey. Questions 40-51 of the parent survey are in columns 

695-735 according to Dr. Crain’s codebook. Question 39 was 

not keypunched. Questions 53-60 may not be on the file, as 

they reflected interviewer reports of their work and were not 

part of the questionnaire. 

Regional Offices 

Contributions are The NAACP Legal Defense & Educational Fund, Inc. (LDF) is not part Suite 301 Suite 208 

deductible for U.S. of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People 1275 K Street, NW 315 West Ninth Street 

income tax purposes. (NAACP) although LDF was founded by the NAACP and shares its Washington, DC 20005 Los Angeles, CA 90015 

commitment to equal rights. LDF has had for over 30 years a separate 
Board, program, staff, office and budget. 

(202) 682-1300 (213) 624-2405 
Fax: (202) 682-1312 Fax: (213) 624-0075 

 



  

—-—- 

2. Additional codes of the sending and receiving schools, 

occupation codes and additional recoding instructions. (8 

pages.) 

Dr. Crain also provided the following specific responses to 

questions raised by Dr. Armor. First, in response to point #1, the 

raw data provided on the diskette is the "archived" version of the 

data. Any working files or "system files" were not documented nor 

preserved. The code book was built using SPSS, but not for the 

purpose of documenting a system file. Moreover, Dr. Crain does not 

believe that either the system files that were used in the study or 

their documentation exist. If Dr. Crain were to reanalyze the 

data, he would work from the raw file that has been sent to 

defendants. 

Second, in response to point #2, Dr. Crain advises that some 

of the data was not analyzed and was not usable. The test data was 

not used after it was discovered that approximately twenty 

different tests had been used and much information had been 

missing. Dr. Crain did use a third grade test score as a control 

variable in studying the effect of Project Concern on some other 

outcome but no longer has a code book for the test data. 

Third, in response to point #3, questions 4-9 of the parent 

supplement do seem to be omitted from the data file. Dr. Crain 

does not believe that these variables were used in the analysis, 

however he offers the following suggestion. These questions would 

probably occupy approximately nine columns of data. There is only 

one column that is unidentified, column 647. The next variable in 

the file, PWHYLEA V seems to be only five characters long, so it 

may be that the notations that it occupies 648-657 is incorrect. 

If school codes are in the file, they would be in alphabetic order. 

As a result, this can be checked. 

Finally, in answer to Dr. Armor’s fifth and last point, please 

note that none of the recodes are archived. Moreover, most of the 

variables referred to by Dr. Armor were not used. Dr. Crain does 

advise, however, that PYOURJOB and PMATEJOB, with codes ranging 

from 12 to 390, are for multiple answers. For example, 390 is 3, 

9, and 10, 

I hope that this information is of assistance. I apologize 

for the time that it has taken to obtain the information. We have 

attempted to provide answers to the questions raised by Dr. Armor 

and to ensure that all information is legible. 

Sincerely, 

To Sent Ik 
Marianne Engelman Lado 

cc. Phil Tegeler, CCLU