Nola du Toit Jennifer Brown Cathy Haggerty

1. Who Really Lives here and does it Matter? Household Structure Trajectories for Children Living with Other Adults in the Home Nola du Toit Jennifer Brown Cathy Haggerty

2. Background • Household structure is important for child well-being (Manning and Brown 2006, McClanahan and Sandefur 1994) • Transitions and changes in family structure can be detrimental to child wellbeing (Brown 2006, Magnuson and Berger 2009) • Most examine household structure based on relationships of parents • Single, two-parent, married, cohabiting, etc.

3. Background • What about other adults in the home besides parents? • Current trends shows a resurgence of people living with extended families (Glick et al 1997, Goldscheider and Bures2003)

4. Background • Previous findings (du Toit, Bachtell, and Haggerty 2011) • Children in low-income neighborhoods • 12% live with extended family adults • 22% live with grandparents • 6% live with non-related adults • 10% have no parent present

5. Overall Research Questions What does household structure look like when include other adults? • Household structure “through the eyes of the child” • Not focused on relationship status of parents • Who is actually in the home with the child? How are children affected by other people living in the home over time? • Considering new household structure, what are childhood trajectories?

6. Data • Making Connections Survey • Funded by Annie E. Casey Foundation • Households in low-income neighborhoods • 10 US cities • 3 waves of data (6-7 years) • Baseline 2002-2004 • Wave 2 2005-2007 • Wave 3 2008-2011, 7 cities

7. Data • Economic hardship, neighborhoodinvolvement, services and amenities, employment history, etc. • Data on children • Activities, schooling, health, etc. • Randomly selected focal child • All children in household (W23) • Relationship of adults to focal child • Grandparent • Extended (aunts, uncles, adults cousins) • Non-related adult (roommate, boarder, other)

8. Data • Analytic subset of cases • W123 panel households with children • Same focal child in all waves • Valid on relationship variables • N=672 households

9. Household Structure Relationship data to identify five household structures

10. Household Structure at W1

11. Household Structure Trajectories • Household structures change over time • Example for W1 single-parent-only trajectories

12. Household Structure Trajectories • Across W123 waves = 125 possible trajectories • Five stable trajectories (no change) • SOSOSO (single parent only) • SPSPSP (single parent plus) • 2O2O2O (two parent only) • 2P2P2P (two parent plus) • NPNPNP (no parent) • Many instable trajectories (change in at least one wave)

13. Household Structure Trajectories 78/125 trajectories recognized (not all shown) 45% stable across 3 waves More than half experienced changed

14. Types of Trajectories How many children experience trajectories that include … …change at all waves? …other adults? …non parent households?

15. Types of Trajectories

16. Odds of Instability • We examine the odds of instability across waves for each Wave 1 household type • Instability in at least one wave • For example, if child starts in SO, what are odds of experiencing instability compared to other household structures? • Controlling for race/ethnicity, education, number of adults, number of children, income

17. Odds of Instability *p<0.05, **p<0.01, ***p<0.001. Note: Controlling for education, race/ethnicity, number of adults/children, HH income Odds of experiencing instability is significantly greater for HH with other adults than single-parent-only and two-parent-only

18. Do Trajectories Matter? Do stable or instable trajectories matter? So what if there is change in household structure? • W1W3 • Odds of decrease in household income • Odds of increase in economic hardship

19. Do Trajectories Matter? • Household income • Wave 1 (categories) v. Wave 3 (continuous) • $5k increments • $0  $5k • $5  $10k, etc… • Decrease in household income 0 = same or higher income category in W3 1 = lower income category in W3

20. Do Trajectories Matter? • Economic hardship is a scale of 5 items • No money for phone, prescriptions, bills, utilities, food • Increase in economic hardship 0 = same/less economic hardship in W3 1 = greater economic hardship in W3 • Controlling for race/ethnicity, education, number of adults/children, income (economic hardship)

21. Do Trajectories Matter?

22. Overall Findings • Nearly half of children will spend time in households with other adults • 14% of children will live with no parents • Other adults increase odds of children experiencing instability in household structure • Instability increases odds that children experience decrease in household income and increase in economic hardship

23. Limitations • Sample size • Low income neighborhoods • Grandparents ~= roommates? • Two parents married or cohabiting? • Ignores change in household children

24. Conclusions • Presence of other adults in the home matters • More research should examine how children are affected by these other adults • Economic • Non-economic • Over time • Future research • Look at all household children, not just focal child

25. Nola du Toit: dutoit-nola@norc.org Jennifer Brown: brown-jennifer@norc.org Cathy Haggerty: haggerty-cathy@norc.org