SDR 2017 OMB Supporting Statement Part A (061517 - Revised)

SF-83-1 SUPPORTING STATEMENT
for the
2017
Survey of Doctorate Recipients

TABLE OF CONTENTS
A. JUSTIFICATION ................................................................................................................... 1
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.

NECESSITY FOR INFORMATION COLLECTION ....................................................... 1
USES OF INFORMATION................................................................................................ 2
CONSIDERATION OF USING IMPROVED TECHNOLOGY....................................... 7
EFFORTS TO IDENTIFY DUPLICATION ...................................................................... 7
EFFORTS TO MINIMIZE BURDEN ON SMALL BUSINESS....................................... 8
CONSEQUENCES OF LESS FREQUENT DATA COLLECTION ................................ 8
SPECIAL CIRCUMSTANCES .......................................................................................... 9
FEDERAL REGISTER ANNOUNCEMENT AND CONSULTATIONS OUTSIDE THE
AGENCY ............................................................................................................................ 9
PAYMENT OR GIFTS TO RESPONDENTS ................................................................. 15
ASSURANCE OF CONFIDENTIALITY........................................................................ 16
JUSTIFICATION FOR SENSITIVE QUESTIONS ........................................................ 17
ESTIMATE OF RESPONDENT BURDEN .................................................................... 17
COST BURDEN TO RESPONDENTS ........................................................................... 17
COST BURDEN TO THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT ................................................ 17
REASON FOR CHANGE IN BURDEN ......................................................................... 18
SCHEDULE FOR INFORMATION COLLECTION AND PUBLICATION ................ 18
DISPLAY OF OMB EXPIRATION DATE ..................................................................... 18
EXCEPTION TO THE CERTIFICATION STATEMENT ............................................. 18

B. COLLECTION OF INFORMATION EMPLOYING STATISTICAL METHODS..... 19
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.

RESPONDENT UNIVERSE AND SAMPLING METHODS ........................................ 19
STATISTICAL PROCEDURES ...................................................................................... 20
METHODS TO MAXIMIZE RESPONSE ...................................................................... 21
TESTING OF PROCEDURES ......................................................................................... 28
ADAPTIVE DESIGN GOALS, MONITORING METRICS AND NONRESPONSE
ERROR ASSESSMENT................................................................................................... 29
CONTACTS FOR STATISTICAL ASPECTS OF DATA COLLECTION .................... 32

LIST OF ATTACHMENTS
Attachment A – NSF Act of 1950; America COMPETES Reauthorization Act of 2010 .......... A-1
Attachment B – 2015 Survey of Doctorate Recipients: Sample Design and
Implementation Report ......................................................................................B-1
Attachment C – First Federal Register Announcement ...............................................................C-1
Attachment D – Draft 2017 SDR Questionnaire ........................................................................ D-1
Attachment E – Draft 2017 SDR Survey Mailing Materials ....................................................... E-1
Attachment F – 2017 SDR Sample Allocation and Selection Table ........................................... F-1

2017 SURVEY OF DOCTORATE RECIPIENTS
SUPPORTING STATEMENT
A.

JUSTIFICATION

This request is for a three-year renewal of the previously approved OMB clearance for the Survey of Doctorate
Recipients (SDR). The SDR has historically served as a valuable source of information on U.S.-trained science,
engineering, and health doctorate recipients. The SDR was last conducted in 2015 and the OMB clearance for the
2015 SDR expires August 31, 2018 (OMB No 3145-0020). Both the data collection instruments for the 2017 SDR
and sample size are largely unchanged from the prior round. Each survey cycle and in 2017, new sample members
who have earned their degree since the last SDR are added to the sample.

1.

NECESSITY FOR INFORMATION COLLECTION

In 2010, the America COMPETES Reauthorization Act of 2010 1 established the National Center for Science and
Engineering Statistics (NCSES) at the National Science Foundation (NSF) and directed NCSES to “...collect,
acquire, analyze, report, and disseminate statistical data related to the science and engineering enterprise in the
United States and other nations that is relevant and useful to practitioners, researchers, policymakers, and the
public...” Information obtained through the SDR is critically important to NCSES’s ability to measure the
education and employment outcomes of scientists and engineers. Furthermore, the SDR and NCSES’s National
Survey of College Graduates (NSCG) are coordinated in both survey content and timing to form data collections
that serve as the nation’s only source of comprehensive information about the size and characteristics of the
science and engineering (S&E) workforce. 2 These data are solicited under the authority of the NSF Act of 1950 3,
as amended, and are central to the analysis presented in a pair of congressionally-mandated reports 4,5 published by
NSF – Science and Engineering Indicators and Women, Minorities, and Persons with Disabilities in Science and
Engineering. The latter report results from the Science and Engineering Equal Opportunities Act of 1980 that
directs NSF to provide to Congress and the Executive Branch an “accounting and comparison by sex, race, and
ethnic group and by discipline, of the participation of women and men in scientific and engineering positions.” 6
The SDR and NSCG provide much of the information to meet this mandate. The coordinated designs of these two
surveys were developed throughout the past two decades and are based on recommendations of the National
Research Council’s Committee on National Statistics (CNSTAT) report to NSF.7

SDR Background
The SDR provides education and employment-related information on scientists and engineers who were awarded a
research doctoral degree from a U.S. institution in a science, engineering or health (SEH) field. A research
doctorate is a doctoral degree that (1) requires completion of an original intellectual contribution in the form of a
dissertation or an equivalent culminating project (e.g., a published manuscript) and (2) is not primarily intended as
a degree for the practice of a profession.

1

Section 505, Pub. L. No. 111-358. See Attachment A.
The S&E workforce includes individuals with degrees or occupations in computer and mathematical sciences, life sciences,
physical sciences, social sciences, engineering, and health sciences.
3
See Attachment A.
4
42 U.S. Code § 1863(j)(1)
5
42 U.S. Code § 1885(a), 1885(d)
6
42 U.S. Code § 1885(d)
7
National Research Council, Committee on National Statistics. 1989. Surveying the Nation’s Scientists and Engineers: A
Data System for the 1990s. Washington: National Academy Press.
2

2017 SDR OMB Supporting Statement

Page 1

The 2017 SDR is comprised of two sample components: 1) an existing panel of doctorate recipients from the prior
survey cycle who remain less than 76 years of age and 2) a new cohort component that adds new doctorate
recipients from academic years 2014 and 2015, also less than 76 years of age. The panel portion of the SDR
provides information on the experienced stock of doctorate recipients. The new cohort sample from the two most
recent doctorate award years provides important data on the early career experiences of new doctorate recipients
with SEH degrees.
Since 2010, the SDR has included an international component of U.S.-trained doctorate recipients who received
their degrees as of 2001. The redesigned 2015 SDR cycle used the doctorate records file (DRF) to significantly
expand the SDR sample and this expanded sample allowed the international component to become representative
of all academic years dating back to 1961. As in 2015, the 2017 SDR will field a sample of members predicted to
reside either in or outside of the U.S. on the survey reference date of 1 February 2017. For example, based on the
data from the 2014 and 2015 Survey of Earned Doctorates (SED), which is the frame for the 2017 SDR new
cohort, 36% of U.S. SEH doctorates were awarded to temporary visa holders and 22% of them planned to leave
the U.S. upon graduation.8 Thus, the 2017 SDR will yield information about the educational, employment and
demographic characteristics of U.S.-trained SEH doctorate recipients living and working both in the U.S. and
abroad.
The 2015 SDR sample expansion from 47,000 to 120,000 was designed to support employment outcome
estimates by the fine fields of degree (FFOD) captured in the SED. This expansion will be maintained in 2017 and
will add 10,766 new sample members from the 2014 and 2015 SED cohorts. Originally, the SDR was designed to
produce employment outcome estimates for various analytical domains defined by broad aggregated fields of
degree. The redesigned sample approach stratifies by over 200 FFODs. The objective of the 2015 sample design
was to meet new FFOD estimation goals and to maintain the traditional (historic) domain-level estimation goals.
The details of the 2015 SDR sample redesign are found in Attachment B.
In addition, although the 2015 SDR and the 2017 SDR will align with the current FFOD taxonomy that is used in
the SED, NCSES anticipates that the next cycle, 2019 SDR, will be based on the NCSES Taxonomy of
Disciplines (TOD). The NCSES TOD will more closely align with the National Center for Education Statistics
(NCES) Classification of Instructional Programs (CIP). Shifting the current SED/SDR FFOD taxonomy over to
the new NCSES TOD will involve changes in the broad aggregations under the current FFOD taxonomy. For
example, up to 9 of the fine fields will change places under the TOD’s 3 broad fields of science, engineering, and
health; under the TOD’s 8 major fields, up to 11 fine fields will change categories. To aid in the transition to the
NCSES TOD, the 2019 SDR trend data based on the new NCSES TOD will include 2017 data showing old versus
new FFOD aggregations.

2.

USES OF INFORMATION

SDR data are used broadly in assessing the characteristics and supply of the nation’s SEH personnel resources for
educational institutions, private industry, and professional organizations, as well as federal, state, and local
governments. NSF/NCSES uses the information to prepare congressionally mandated biennial reports, such as
Women, Minorities and Persons with Disabilities in Science and Engineering and Science and Engineering
Indicators. The SDR data also have been used extensively in the policy and planning activities of NSF and the
National Institutes of Health, a collaborating agency. Other federal agencies, such as the Departments of
Commerce, Agriculture, Energy, and the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, request and make use of
the SDR data for a variety of purposes. Educational institutions often use SDR data in establishing and modifying

8

The SED gathers information yearly from all new research doctorates awarded by U.S. institutions. Detailed information
about the SED can be found at http://www.nsf.gov/statistics/srvydoctorates/.

2017 SDR OMB Supporting Statement

Page 2

scientific and technical curricula, while various private industries often use the information to develop recruitment
and remuneration policies.
Policymakers, researchers, and other data users also use combined information from both the SDR and NSCG to
answer questions about the number, employment, education, and characteristics of the S&E workforce. Because
these surveys provide nationally representative data that policymakers and researchers use to address questions on
topics such as employment of foreign-born or foreign-degreed scientists and engineers, the transition from higher
education to the workforce, the role and importance of postdocs as research personnel, diversity in both education
and employment, the implications of an aging cohort of scientists and engineers as baby boomers reach retirement
age, and information on long-term trends in the S&E workforce.
Findings from the 2017 SDR will enable NCSES to continue reporting employment patterns of recent SEH
doctorate recipients, as well as more experienced doctorate recipients in the labor market. The expanded sample
enables NCSES to produce reliable estimates of employment outcomes by the fine fields of degrees used in the
SED. The SDR data are made available through published reports, the Scientists and Engineers Statistical Data
System (SESTAT), public use data files, and licenses for restricted-use data files. The online data tool, available at
https://ncsesdata.nsf.gov/sestat/sestat.html, allows users to create customized data tabulations with a user-specified
subject area. The SDR public-use files are available for download through the NCSES data downloads web page
at https://ncsesdata.nsf.gov/datadownload/.

Uses for Policy Discussion
SDR data are used in policy discussions of the executive and legislative branches of Government, the National
Science Board, NSF management, the National Academy of Sciences, professional associations, and other
private and public organizations. NSF’s Education and Human Resources Directorate uses SDR data in the
evaluation and development of programs, and other NSF research directorates use SDR to analyze SEH
employment pathways.
A few recent specific examples of the use of the SDR data and the integrated SDR and NSCG data are:
•

A chapter in the book The Science and Technology Labor Force: The Value of Doctorate Holders and
Development of Professional Careers used SDR data to describe the science and engineering labor force
in the U.S. 9;

•

The National Science Board (NSB) used combined NSCG and SDR data in its investigation to develop
national policies for the S&E workforce 10;

•

The Committee for Equal Opportunity in Science and Engineering (CEOSE), an advisory committee to
NSF and other government agencies, established under 42 U.S.C. §1885c, has been charged by the U.S.
Congress with advising NSF in assuring that all individuals are empowered and enabled to participate
fully in science, mathematics, engineering and technology. Every two years CEOSE prepares a
congressionally mandated report that makes extensive use of NSCG and SDR data to highlight key areas
of concerns relating to students, educators, and technical professionals;

•

The importance of information on the S&E workforce to inform public policy can be seen in discussions
of the NSB’s Task Group on Science, Technology, Engineering, and Math (STEM) Innovators. The task

9

L. Gokhberg et al. (eds.), The Science and Technology Labor Force, Science, Technology and Innovation Studies:
Switzerland, Springer International Publishing, 2016, pp77-119.
10
http://nsf.gov/nsb/publications/2015/nsb201510.pdf and http://www.nsf.gov/nsb/documents/2003/nsb0369/nsb0369.pdf

2017 SDR OMB Supporting Statement

Page 3

group used NSCG and SDR data to inform its deliberations about the S&E workforce and these data were
part of the final report 11;
•

Information from the SDR was presented at the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and
Development (OECD) conference in December 2012, “Understanding and improving the contribution of
doctoral graduates to innovation and the economy: Developing the statistical evidence” 12; and

•

The Educational Testing Service (ETS) and Council of Graduate Schools (CGS) used SDR and NSCG
data to examine national benchmarks for career outcomes of master’s and doctoral degree recipients by
specific field. 13

Uses by NSF/NCSES
The SDR data were used extensively in the latest versions of the congressionally mandated biennial reports
Science and Engineering Indicators, 2016 and Women, Minorities and Persons with Disabilities in Science and
Engineering, 2015. In addition, the forthcoming detailed statistical tables that will accompany the Women,
Minorities and Persons with Disabilities in Science and Engineering, 2017 Digest includes 2015 SDR data.
NSF/NCSES used the SDR data and the combined SDR and NSCG data in recent reports such as:
•

Science and Engineering State Profiles, June 2016

•

Employment Decisions of U.S. and Foreign Doctoral Graduates: A Comparative Study, December 2014

•

Unemployment among Doctoral Scientists and Engineers Remained Below the National Average in 2013,
September 2014

•

Data Tables: Survey of Doctorate Recipients, 2013, September 2014

•

Data Tables: Survey of Doctorate Recipients, 2010, May 2014

•

Unemployment among Doctoral Scientists and Engineers Increased but Remained Below the National
Average, April 2014

•

Characteristics of Scientists and Engineers in the United States: 2008, June 2013

•

Employment and Educational Characteristics of Scientists and Engineers, January 2013

•

International Mobility and Employment Characteristics among Recent Recipients of U.S. Doctorates,
October 2012

•

Racial and Ethnic Diversity among U.S.-Educated Science, Engineering, and Health Doctorate
Recipients: Methods of Reporting Diversity, January 2012

•

Academic Institutions of Minority Faculty with Science, Engineering, and Health Doctorates, October
2011

•

The End of Mandatory Retirement for Doctoral Scientists and Engineers in Postsecondary Institutions:
Retirement Patterns 10 Years Later, December 2010

All NSF/NCSES publications can be accessed on the NCSES website at http://www.nsf.gov/statistics.

11

http://www.nsf.gov/nsb/publications/2010/nsb1033.pdf
http://www.oecd.org/sti/inno/CDH%20final%20conference%20report.pdf
13
http://www.ets.org/c/19574/19089_PathwaysReptqp.pdf
12

2017 SDR OMB Supporting Statement

Page 4

Uses by Researchers and Analysts
SDR and the combined SDR and NSCG data are presented at conferences and professional meetings by NCSES
staff and survey contractor staff, such as the annual meeting of the Association for Institutional Research, the
American Association for Public Opinion Research, the American Educational Research Association, and the
Joint Statistical Meetings. Examples of these presentations are as follows:
•

NCSES, Pathways through Universities and Graduate Schools into Careers – NCSES S&E Workforce
Surveys, American Educational Research Association, April 2016.

•

Balancing Timeliness, Data Quality and Cost – by Optimizing Data Collection Strategies, Joint
Statistical Meetings, August 2014.

•

Belt and Suspenders: Evaluating the Efficacy of Sending Initial Contacts via Email Only vs. Letter-PlusEmail to Online Responders in the Survey of Doctorate Recipients, American Association for Public
Opinion Research, May 2014.

•

A “Green” Appeal: Efficacy Evaluation of Assigning Sample Members that Prefer the USPS Mail Mode
to the Online Mode in the 2013 Survey of Doctorate Recipients, American Association for Public Opinion
Research, May 2014.

•

Preparing Graduate Students for Non-Academic Careers, American Association of Physics Teachers
Meeting, January 2014.

•

OECD/UNESCO Institute for Statistics/Eurostat Careers of Doctorate Holders (CDH) Project, The
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, December 2012.

•

Integration of the National and International 2008 SDR: Bridging Effects and Expected Improvements to
the Time Series Data, Joint Statistical Meetings, August 2012.

•

Development of the Sample Design for the International Survey of Doctorate Recipients, Joint Statistical
Meetings, August 2012.

•

Migration Patterns of U.S. Trained Doctorate Holders (A Longitudinal Study), Joint Statistical Meetings,
August 2012.

•

Utilizing a Logistic Regression Approach for Weighting Adjustment in a Longitudinal Dataset, Joint
Statistical Meetings, August 2012.

•

Coping with Missing Data: Assessing Methods for Logically Assigning Race and Ethnicity, American
Association for Public Opinion Research, May 2012.

•

Science and Engineering Doctorate Recipients as Adjunct Faculty: New Findings from the Survey of
Doctorate Recipients, American Educational Research Association, April 2012.

•

An Investment in Goodwill or Encouraging Delays? Examining the Effects of Incentives in a Longitudinal
Study, Federal Committee on Statistical Methodology Annual Meeting, January 2012.

Since 2007, NCSES has distributed more than 3,500 copies of SDR public-use files (2003, 2006, 2008, 2010, and
2013 survey cycles), as well as over 5,100 copies of the combined SDR and NSCG data’s public-use files (19932013 survey cycles). There are currently 50 active SDR restricted-use licenses. Additional licensing requests for
the SDR are pending review and approval by NCSES. Selected citations of SDR are as follows:
•

Education and Academic Career Outcomes for Women of Color in Science and Engineering, Seeking
Solutions: Maximizing American Talent by Advancing Women of Color in Academia: A Conference
Report, forthcoming. How Big of a Problem is Analytic Error in Secondary Analyses of Survey Data?
PLoS One, 11(6): 2016.

2017 SDR OMB Supporting Statement

Page 5

•

Biomedical science postdocs: an end to the era of expansion, FASEB Journal 30 (January) 2016.

•

How Much Does It Cost to be a Scientist? Journal of Technology Transfer, 41(3): 469-505, 2016.

•

Stability and Longevity in the Publication Careers of U.S. Doctorate Recipients. PLoS One, 11(4): 2016.

•

A Decade Beyond the Doctorate: The Influence of a US Postdoctoral Appointment on Faculty Career,
Productivity, and Salary. Higher Education, 70(4): 667-687, 2015.

•

Not Equal For All: Gender And Race Differences in Salary for Doctoral Degree Recipients. Research in
Higher Education, 56(7): 645-672, 2015.

•

The Bachelor’s to Ph.D. STEM Pipeline No Longer Leaks More Women than Men: A 30-Year Analysis,
Frontiers in Psychology. 6:37. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00037.

•

University Patenting: A Comparison of 300 Leading Universities Worldwide. Journal of Technology
Transfer, 40(2): 318-345, 2015.

•

What Predicts Whether Foreign Doctorate Recipients from U.S. Institutions Stay in The United States:
Foreign Doctorate Recipients in Science and Engineering Fields from 2000 to 2010. Higher Education,
70(1): 105-126, 2015.

•

Storm Clouds on the Career Horizon for Ph.D.’s. Issues in Science and Technology, 31(4): 74-77, 2015.

•

Beyond Skills: An Integrative Approach to Doctoral Student Preparation for Diverse Careers. The
Canadian Journal of Higher Education, 44(3): 54-67, 2014.

•

Is It All Worth It? The Experiences of New PhD’s on the Job Market, 2007-2010. Cambridge: National
Bureau of Economic Research, Inc., 2014.

•

The Determinants of the Internationalization Speed of Portuguese University Spin-Offs: An Empirical
Investigation. Journal of International Entrepreneurship, 12(3): 270-308, 2014.

•

The Ones Who Got Away. Nature, 513(7516): 20-22, 2014.

•

Women in Academic Science. A Changing Landscape, Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 15(3):
75-141, 2014.

•

Interdisciplinary Research and the Early Career: The Effect of Interdisciplinary Dissertation Research
on Career Placement and Publication Productivity of Doctoral Graduates in the Sciences, Research
Policy, 42(5): 1152-1164, June 2013.

•

Comparing Research Productivity across Disciplines and Career Stages, Journal of Comparative Policy
Analysis, 15(2): 141-163, April 2013.

•

Increasing the Visibility of Women of Color in Academic Science and Engineering: Professional Society
Data. New Directions for Higher Education, 2013(163): 7-21, 2013.

•

Contributions of Foreign-Born Faculty to Doctoral Education and Research. New Directions for Higher
Education, 2013(163): 89-98, 2013.

•

Beyond Anecdotes: A Quantitative Examination of Black Women in Academe. The Review of Black
Political Economy, July 2012.

•

Disparities in Publication Patterns by Gender, Race and Ethnicity Based on a Survey of a Random
Sample of Authors. Scientometrics, 2012 (November): 1-20.

•

Education and Career Outcomes for Women of Color in Academia, National Academies’ Conference
Seeking Solutions: Maximizing American Talent by Advancing Women of Color in Academia, 2012.

2017 SDR OMB Supporting Statement

Page 6

3.

CONSIDERATION OF USING IMPROVED TECHNOLOGY

The 2017 SDR will collect data using three modes:
1. Self-administered online (or web) surveys (including access from mobile devices);
2. Paper self-administered questionnaires (mail); and
3. Computer-assisted telephone interviews (CATI).
Prior to the 2003 survey cycle, SDR data were collected by first mailing paper questionnaires to sample members,
then following up with nonrespondents by telephone. In the 2003 SDR, the tri-mode data collection effort that
included mail, CATI, and web was tested and has been fully implemented in all of the rounds since then (2006,
2008, 2010, 2013, and 2015) and the 2017 survey cycle will continue this protocol.
In addition, participation via an online survey has increased steadily since the 2006 cycle, increasing from 47% in
2006 to 81% in 2015. Of the respondents who answered the 2015 survey question regarding future mode
preference, 83% indicated a preference for the online survey. Analysis indicates that the online mode results in
higher response rates, as well as more complete survey and contacting data, than the mail questionnaire mode.
For returning sample members, the 2017 SDR will honor mode preferences reported in the 2015 SDR but also
emphasize the efficiency of completing the survey via the web. Based on the 2015 SDR, we anticipate that
approximately half of the new cohort will be started in the online survey mode. Similar to the 2015 survey cycle,
over 81% of the 2017 survey responses are expected to be completed in the online mode. As in 2015, the 2017
online survey will be configured for use on mobile devices (e.g., smartphones and tablets) to ensure that the
respondent experience is optimized regardless of the screen size or browser used to access the survey.
The 2017 data collection effort will continue the use of a comprehensive case management system (CMS) to track
data captured across the three modes (web, mail, CATI) with additional features added to the system. The
additional features support an adaptive design data collection strategy for quickly prioritizing cases and realtime response rate calculations particularly by the location of the residency of sample members. Optical
scanning will be used to capture mail questionnaires after keying and these images will be stored in a database for
archival purposes.

4.

EFFORTS TO IDENTIFY DUPLICATION

Some overlap exists between the SDR and NCSES’s Early Career Doctorates Survey (ECDS) (OMB Control #
3145-0235) in their target population and content. Regarding target population overlap, the ECDS has a 2-stage
sampling design and builds its frame by obtaining employee lists from U.S. academic institutions, Federally
Funded Research and Development Centers, and NIH Intramural Research Programs. These lists target
individuals who received their first doctorate within the last ten years, in any field, in the U.S. or abroad. In
contrast, the SDR excludes doctorate holders who only earned professional doctorates, non-S&E doctorates, or
S&E doctorates from institutions outside the United States. Overall, an estimated 140,000 doctorates in the 2015
SDR target population (~ 15%) were represented among the population of U.S.-trained early career doctorates
who are in the ECDS target population. As a result, approximately 4% (n=263) of the 2015 Pilot ECDS sample
members were also sampled for the 2015 SDR.
Regarding content overlap, the ECDS collects substantially more information about respondent work experiences,
especially about postdoc experiences, professional activities and achievements, funding, work-life balance, and
future career plans. Thus, the ECDS is unique in providing a comprehensive survey and comparison of U.S.trained and non-U.S. trained early career doctorates employed in U.S. academic and federal government research
sectors. In contrast, the SDR is unique in representing employment, work activities, and years of experience

2017 SDR OMB Supporting Statement

Page 7

among all U.S.-trained SEH doctorate recipients up to age 76 regardless of where they currently reside or work,
including those working outside of academe and those residing outside of the U.S. The SDR represents U.S.
doctorate recipients working full or part time in all employment sectors throughout their career including those
who are not working due to retirement or other reasons.
Because the ECDS collects substantially more information than the SDR, the 2017 ECDS will attempt to
contact all sample members, even those identified as having been in the 2017 SDR. Given the tripling of the
ECDS sample for the 2017 survey compared to the Pilot ECDS sample size, we expect the sample overlap
between the 2017 ECDS and the 2017 SDR to be approximately 900 cases (4% of the ECDS sample and 0.7%
of the SDR sample). NCSES staff will work together with the survey contractors to identify sample members
selected for both surveys. The 2017 ECDS sample members identified as having been in the 2017 SDR will
receive a letter from the NSF prior to the start of ECDS data collection. The letter will clarify they are being asked
to participate in two NCSES surveys, SDR and ECDS, and request their participation in both.
Overlap also exists between the SDR and the NCSES’s NSCG in their target population and in survey content.
The NSCG and the SDR both capture estimates of the roughly 1 million U.S-trained SEH doctorates; however,
the NSCG also covers an estimated 165,000 foreign-trained SEH doctorates residing in the United States.
Unlike the NSCG, the SDR collects detailed information from U.S. trained SEH doctorate recipients working in
post-secondary academic institutions including their academic position, faculty rank, tenure status, and reasons
for taking a postdoc, if in a postdoctoral position. The NSCG collects information on veteran status, attainment
of certifications and licenses, financial support for education, and community college enrollment, none of
which are collected in the SDR.
Based on the 2015 SDR sample, approximately 300 individuals may be selected for both the 2017 NSCG and
the 2017 SDR. Due to the content differences between the surveys, the relatively small number of expected
duplicates, and the operational challenges of the deduplication process, NCSES will not de-duplicate
individuals selected for participation in both the SDR and NSCG.

5.

EFFORTS TO MINIMIZE BURDEN ON SMALL BUSINESS

Not applicable. The SDR collects information from individuals only.

6.

CONSEQUENCES OF LESS FREQUENT DATA COLLECTION

Conducting the SDR on a less frequent basis would prohibit NSF/NCSES from meeting its congressional
mandate to produce a report that contains an accurate accounting and comparison, by sex, race, and ethnic
group and by discipline, of the participation of women and men in scientific and engineering occupations. The
SDR data are central to the analysis presented in a pair of congressionally mandated reports - Science and
Engineering Indicators and Women, Minorities, and Persons with Disabilities in Science and Engineering.
Since these reports are published on a biennial schedule, they rely on the availability of updated data on the
science and engineering workforce every two years. The impact of not being able to meet this congressional
mandate is that government, business, industry, and universities would have less recent data to use as a basis
for formulating the nation’s science and engineering policies.
A less frequent data collection would also impact SDR data quality. Follow-up surveys every two years enable
analyses of changes in the S&E workforce when individuals move in and out of S&E occupations over both
business and life cycles. To ensure the availability of current national S&E workforce data, the SDR has been
coordinated with the NSCG on a biennial basis since 1993. The degradation of either component jeopardizes the
integrity and value of these combined surveys to provide comprehensive information on the S&E workforce.

2017 SDR OMB Supporting Statement

Page 8

Conducting the survey less frequently would make it more difficult and costly to locate sampled persons given
the mobility of the doctorate population. The impact is likely to be a higher attrition rate, higher potential for
nonresponse bias, and less reliable cross-sectional and longitudinal estimates.

7.

SPECIAL CIRCUMSTANCES

Not applicable. This data collection does not require any one of the reporting requirements listed.

8.

FEDERAL REGISTER ANNOUNCEMENT AND CONSULTATIONS OUTSIDE THE
AGENCY

Federal Register Announcement
In response to the Federal Register Notice for the SDR that appeared on September 19, 2016 (See Attachment
C), one public comment was received by the closing date of November 18, 2016. The comment was in support
of renewing the SDR and “releasing the survey data in a more timely and predictable manner.” NCSES
acknowledged receipt and thanked the person for their comment.
In response to the Federal Register Notice for the SDR that appeared on April 12th, 2017, seven public
comments were received by the closing date of May 12th. One comment was from an anonymous individual
requesting that we include foreign-trained doctorates in the SDR to fully examine this highly trained segment
of our workforce. The Executive Director of the American Educational Research Association (AERA)
commented positively on the expansion of the survey and urges that education research be included as a fine
field of study in the SDR frame. However, concern was expressed over the large reduction in carrying forward
the 2013 sample that failed to include 31,000 of its 47,000 sampled cases. The remaining comments also
addressed this concern about the sample design implemented in 2015 and carried forward in the 2017 cycle.
Those comments were submitted by Dr. Ginther from the University of Kansas, Dr. Kahn from Boston
University, Dr. Shauman from the University of California-Davis, Dr. Weinberg from Ohio State University,
and Dr. Weinberger from the University of California-Santa Barbara. The concerns were related to their
ongoing longitudinal studies of SEH doctorates in the academic sector about academic career pathways for
women and underrepresented minorities. No mention of research outside of this sector was expressed in these
comments.
We acknowledge the concerns raised by the comments regarding the use of SDR data for longitudinal research
to examine academic pathways. The motivation for the SDR sample design change is to produce reliable crosssectional estimates of employment outcomes at the fine field of study level and the benefits resulting from this
change include a refreshed sample that provides a richer source of data and greater opportunities to address
longitudinal research interests moving forward, albeit gradually. NCSES’s current efforts focus on developing
an efficient, effective, and sustainable longitudinal design for the SDR.
The process we use to define the eligible SDR fine fields is motivated by a congressional mandate to provide an
accurate accounting of individuals in the science and engineering workforce. NCSES’s definition of the science
and engineering workforce includes individuals educated in science, engineering, or health fields and does not
include individuals educated in education fields such as education research.

Consultations Outside the Agency
Evaluation of the NCSES Effort to Measure the S&E Workforce Population. The National Research
Council’s Committee on National Statistics (CNSTAT), at the request of NCSES, has convened an expert panel to
review, assess, and provide guidance on NCSES’s effort to measure the U.S. S&E workforce population. Given
the evolving data needs of NCSES stakeholders, NCSES would like to develop a framework for measuring the

2017 SDR OMB Supporting Statement

Page 9

S&E workforce that will enable the flexibility to examine emerging issues related to this unique population while
allowing for stability in the estimation of trend data. This framework would provide direction for numerous
survey design issues related to measuring the S&E workforce population including content, data sources, survey
methodology, data collection, processing, integration, dissemination, and outreach.
At the end of its review, the panel will issue a report with findings, recommendations, and priorities for improving
the relevance, accuracy, timeliness, and cost-effectiveness of approaches to providing measures the S&E
workforce for the next decade and beyond. This report is expected to provide the details, direction, and guidance
necessary for NCSES to develop a robust and flexible framework for measuring the S&E workforce over the
coming decades.
The CNSTAT Panel Members are as follows:
Rita Colwell (co-chair)
University of Maryland and Johns Hopkins University

Maresi Nerad
University of Washington

James House (co-chair)
University of Michigan

Randy Olsen
Ohio State University

Jennifer Sue Bond
Council on Competitiveness

Willie Pearson
Georgia Institute of Technology

Geoff Davis
Verily

Keith Rust
Westat

Don Dillman
Washington State University

Nora Cate Schaeffer
University of Wisconsin

Richard Freeman
Harvard University

James Wagner
University of Michigan

Jack Gambino
Statistics Canada

Yu Xie
Princeton University

Meetings and Workshops on Redesign Activities. Since 2013, a series of Human Resources Expert Panel
(HREP) meetings and workshops have been held on various issues related to sample design and survey
methodology for the NCSES demographic workforce surveys (SDR, ECDS and NSCG). HREP advises NCSES
on priorities and strategies for ongoing activities to improve the relevance of current and future statistics produced
by NCSES’s Human Resources Statistics (HRS) program. HREP members are broadly representative of
stakeholders with an interest in S&E human resources, such as:
•

Current data users, including NCSES restricted-use data licensees

•

Potential data users

•

Policy makers from various levels of government

•

Professional organizations and foundations, such as the American Institute of Physics (AIP), Council of
Graduate Schools (CGS), and the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS)

•

Research organizations that use human resources data such as the National Bureau for Economic
Research (NBER) and the National Academy of Sciences (NAS)

•

Current respondents to the surveys/projects conducted by HRS

2017 SDR OMB Supporting Statement

Page 10

•

Large and small institutions of higher education, including both public and private institutions

•

Industry representatives

•

Human resources professionals

For the 2015 SDR and NSCG survey rounds:
•

Two HREP meetings were held in August 2013 and January 2014 with the following goals:


To enrich the HRS understanding of how the education and careers of the S&E workforce
traditionally come together and are evolving; and



To identify salient characteristics of the evolving S&E education/career pathways that can be
addressed or incorporated into HRS surveys.

HREP Members attending the August 2013 and January 2014 Workshops were as follows:
Nathan Bell
Associate Director, Education Research & Policy
American Educational Research Association

Brian Hartz
Vice President of Client Services
TORQworks

Roman Czujko
Director, Statistical Research Center
American Institute of Physics

Beverly Karplus Hartline
Vice Chancellor for Research and Graduate Studies
Montana Tech

Ronni Denes
President and Executive Director
New Jersey SEEDS

Cheryl Leggon
Associate Professor, School of Public Policy
Georgia Institute of Technology

Catherine Didion
Senior Program Officer
National Academy of Engineering
Director, Committee on Women in S&E
National Academies

Sharon Levin
Professor of Economics
University of Missouri, St. Louis

Earnestine Psalmonds Easter
Program Director, Division of Graduate Education
National Science Foundation
Cary Funk
Senior Researcher
Pew Research Center
Donna Ginther
Professor of Economics
University of Kansas

•

Duncan McBride
Program Director, Division of Undergrad Ed.
National Science Foundation
Catherine Millett
Research Scientist
Educational Testing Service
Cathee Johnson Phillips
Executive Director
National Postdoctoral Association
George Wimberly
Director, Professional Development/Social Justice
American Educational Research Association

A third HREP meeting was held in June 2014. The objectives of this meeting were to become better informed
about:

2017 SDR OMB Supporting Statement

Page 11



Research questions and policy issues concerning job mobility, occupational change, and career
pathways that currently engage researchers and policymakers, particularly as these questions and
issues relate to the S&E workforce;



How survey data are used to study the research questions and policy issues, and the limitations of
these data;



Best practices for collecting occupational history data in the context of longitudinal study designs;



To identify other important characteristics of occupational history that can be incorporated into
HRS surveys.

HREP Members attending the June 2014 Workshop were as follows:
Jake Bartolone
Senior Research Scientist
National Opinion Research Center

Albert Sumell
Associate Professor of Economics
Youngstown State University

Kirk Doran
Assistant Professor of Economics
University of Notre Dame

Omari Swinton
Assistant Professor of Economics
Howard University

Donna Ginther
Professor of Economics
University of Kansas

John Bound
Professor of Economics
University of Michigan

Shulamit Kahn
Associate Professor of Public Policy & Law
Boston University

Charlie Brown
Professor of Economics
University of Michigan

Morris Kleiner
Professor of Public Affairs/Industrial Relations
University of Minnesota

Pamela Herd
Professor of Public Affairs and Sociology
University of Wisconsin-Madison

Iourii Manovskii
Associate Professor of Economics
University of Pennsylvania

Sheila Kirby
Senior Fellow
National Opinion Research Center

Erika McEntarfer
Supervisory Economist
U.S. Census Bureau

Cheryl Leggon
Associate Professor, School of Public Policy
Georgia Institute of Technology

Donna Rothstein
Research Economist
Bureau of Labor Statistics

Audrey Light
Professor of Economics
Ohio State University

Hal Salzman
Professor of Planning and Public Policy
Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey

Mike Pergamit
Senior Fellow
Urban Institute

Marc Scott
Associate Professor of Applied Statistics
New York University

Jeff Strohl
Senior Research Fellow
Georgetown University

John Skrentny
Professor of Sociology
University of California at San Diego

Josh Trapani
Director of Policy Analysis
Association of American Universities

2017 SDR OMB Supporting Statement

Page 12

•

A fourth (ad hoc) HREP of Sampling Statisticians was held in December 2014. The objectives of this meeting
were:


To discuss sample redesign options for fielding a 2015 cycle of the SDR that is based on the SED fine fields
of degree (FFOD) as the sampling strata.



To determine which sampling design approach is optimal to implement and meet the new estimation goals
for employment outcomes of doctorates in the FFODs.

The Statistical Experts attending the December 2014 meeting were as follows:
Rachel Harter
Senior Research Statistician
RTI
Frauke Kreuter
Professor in the Joint Program in Survey Methodology (JPSM)
The University of Maryland, USA, and
Professor of Statistics
Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität, Germany
Michael Larsen
Associate Professor in the Department of Statistics and Biostatistics Center
George Washington University
Jill Montaquila
Associate Research Professor in JPSM
The University of Maryland, and
Associate Director of the Statistical Staff and Senior Statistician
Westat

For the 2017 SDR survey round:
•

A fifth HREP meeting was held in October 2016. The objectives of this meeting were:


To introduce the 2015 SDR sample redesign which increased the sample to 120,000 and stratified the
population by the fine field of degree (FFOD) defined by the Survey of Earned Doctorates (SED) for
purposes of reporting;



Discuss the 2015 and 2017 redesign goals and methods;



Discuss the 2015 SDR data collection and estimation results; and



To obtain feedback on the 2015 redesign challenges including:
o

Doctoral fine field dynamics and estimation goals for subsequent cycles,

o

Maintaining the SDR sample size and its completion rates, and

o

Building and maintaining longitudinal cohorts.

2017 SDR OMB Supporting Statement

Page 13

HREP Members attending the October 2016 Workshop were as follows:
F. Jay Breidt
Professor of Statistics
Colorado State University

Thomas Krenzke
Associate Director of Statistical Staff
Westat

Patrick J. Cantwell
Chief, Decennial Statistical Studies Division
U.S. Census Bureau

Cheryl Leggon
Associate Professor, School of Public Policy
Georgia Institute of Technology

Kimberlee Eberle-Sudré
Senior Policy Analyst
Association of American Universities

Jean Opsomer
Department Chair, Statistics
Colorado State University

Donna Ginther
Director of Center for Science Technology &
Economic Policy
University of Kansas

Ed Robinson
Mathematical Statistician
Bureau of Labor Statistics

Rachel Harter
Senior Research Statistician
RTI International
Donsig Jang
Vice President and Director, Center for Excellence in
Survey Research
NORC at the University of Chicago

Adam Safir
Chief, Division of Consumer Expenditure
Surveys
Bureau of Labor Statistics
Michael Sinclair
Senior Fellow
Mathematica Policy Research Inc.

Survey Design and Methodology Consultations. Over the past two years, NCSES staff engaged in outreach and
collaboration efforts with the Census Bureau, NCES, and other agencies on various areas of survey design. Below
are some examples of NCSES’s outreach and collaboration efforts related to adaptive design.
•

To address the increasing nonresponse trends for governmental surveys, NCSES funded research to
examine contact strategies for the NCSES surveys with principal investigators for this research from the
University of Nebraska - Lincoln.

•

NCSES, Census Bureau, and NCES staff:

•



attended meetings of the Adaptive Design Interagency Working Group established by the OMB
Office of Statistical and Science Policy in 2014.



participated in a topic-contributed session on adaptive design at the 2015 Federal Committee on
Statistical Methodology (FCSM) research conference in December 2015.



participated in a topic-contributed panel at the 2015 AAPOR annual conference in May 2015. The
panel topic was “Innovation in Federal Surveys – Opportunities, Progress, and Challenges.”

Ongoing collaboration between NCSES and the Census Bureau on adaptive design led to NCES
requesting that Census Bureau and NCSES staff present a seminar at NCES focused on data quality and
adaptive design. This outreach has led to NCES's adoption of data monitoring metrics with an eye
towards future adaptive design research and experimentation opportunities.

2017 SDR OMB Supporting Statement

Page 14

9. PAYMENT OR GIFTS TO RESPONDENTS
Incentives for the SDR began during the 2003 cycle, and have continued for all subsequent cycles. Described
below are the NSF/NCSES plans to offer both early and late-stage incentives.
Non-U.S. residing sample members will not be sent the early or late-stage incentive offer even if they are
otherwise eligible. Additionally, sample members determined to work for the National Science Foundation will be
excluded from the incentive offer.

Proposed Plan for the 2017 SDR
Early-Stage Incentive. The early-stage incentive will target two types of sample members: 1) those who have
only responded after being incentivized in prior rounds and 2) new cohort sample members who are recent
graduates (earning their degree in 2014 or 2015).
Early incentives will be offered to each sample component as described below:
1. Sample members who have historically only responded after receiving an incentive will be offered a
monetary incentive in the first contact to encourage a faster response and to reduce the costs associated
with follow-up contacts. The rationale for this approach is based on the 2013 and 2015 SDR. An
examination of the 2013 response of sample members who consistently only participated after receiving
an incentive in the past survey cycles shows 69.7% completed the 2013 survey after receiving a late-stage
request for survey participation with an incentive offer, while only 37.6% completed at this stage without
an incentive. In 2015, all sample members who only responded previously after receiving an incentive
were sent an incentive with their first survey request. Of the cases from this group, 81.5% completed the
2015 survey.
Four subgroups of the 2015 panel will be eligible for an early incentive offer in the 2017 SDR:
i. Sample members who were in both the 2013 and 2015 rounds and who participated in 2013 with an
incentive, but did not participate in 2015 when they did not receive an incentive.
ii. Sample members who were in both the 2013 and 2015 rounds and who participated in 2013 with an
incentive, but did not participate in 2015 until they received a late-stage incentive.
iii. Sample members who were in both the 2013 and 2015 rounds and who participated in 2015, being
assigned in 2015 to the group receiving the early incentive (based on their participation and
incentive history).
iv. Sample members that were part of the 2015 expansion sample cohort and only participated in the
2015 after receiving an incentive.
2. For the new cohort sample members, incentive experiments conducted in 2006 and 2008 indicate that
offering a prepaid incentive in the second contact is a cost-effective way of encouraging survey response,
and analysis in 2010 indicated the monetary incentive had a positive effect on response. In the 2015 cycle,
new cohort sample members in the U.S. were offered an incentive with the second request for survey
participation. This resulted in 57.0% of the new cohort sample receiving the incentive offer. Of these
early incentivized new cohort cases, 85.8% completed the survey. Furthermore, preliminary review of
check cashing behavior shows that only half of those sent the incentive accepted it. Given the efficacy of
the 2015 SDR new cohort incentive strategy, the proposal for the 2017 SDR is to offer a monetary
incentive to the new cohort members in the second contact (i.e., those that do not respond to the initial
contact).

2017 SDR OMB Supporting Statement

Page 15

Late-Stage Incentive. The overall strategy for the late-stage incentive is to ensure that all sample members
who remain nonrespondents midway through the field period will have a probability of receiving a monetary
incentive. In the plan used for the 2008 through 2015 SDR, a higher probability of selection for the incentive
was given to more challenging cases in key analytic domains with relatively lower response rates. This strategy
was designed to improve the accuracy of survey estimates, and ideally, mitigate nonresponse bias.
Preliminary 2015 SDR results show that late-stage eligible cases offered the incentive achieved a survey response
rate of 56.5% versus 51.5% for late-stage incentive eligible cases not offered the incentive. Although this higher
yield was not substantial, it achieved the goal of increasing the response rate among the more challenging cases
in key analytic domains with relatively lower response rates in this late stage of data collection. Based on these
results and findings from past cycles, we propose to continue this strategy for the 2017 cycle.
To allocate limited resources for the monetary incentive to late-stage survey nonrespondents most effectively,
NSF/NCSES will conduct an analysis of the characteristics of the remaining nonrespondents using a logistic
regression model and/or Mahalanobis distance measure. This analysis will help to determine which types of
sample members should receive additional incentive to mitigate response bias of those residing in the U.S. The
cases with lowest response propensity or those that contribute the most towards mitigating bias will be selected
for the incentive (See section B.5 for further details on the adaptive design goals and monitoring metrics). The
volume of late-stage response cases to be incentivized will be determined based on the available budget.
Also, during the late-stage data collection phase, any nonrespondents selected for an early-stage incentive but
were not sent their incentive because of locating or mailing address problems, will be issued or reoffered the
incentive. Nonrespondents who were successfully sent the incentive during the early-stage phase will receive a
non-incentivized late-stage treatment.

Incentive Costs
According to this plan, a $30 prepaid incentive would be offered for the 2017 SDR, as was done for the 2008
through 2015 SDR. The total cost of incentives in the 2015 SDR was $260,000. In 2017, it is expected to cost
$266,000. The complete incentive plan for 2017 is in section B3.4.

10.

ASSURANCE OF CONFIDENTIALITY

NCSES and its contractors are fully committed to protecting the confidentiality of all survey respondents. SDR
data will be collected under the authority of America COMPETES Reauthorization Act of 2010, the
Confidential Information Protection and Statistical Efficiency Act (CIPSEA) of 2002, and the Federal
Cybersecurity Enhancement Act of 2015. Cover letters and survey questionnaires to each selected respondent
will advise them that the information they provide is confidential (see Attachment D – Draft 2017 SDR
Questionnaire and Attachment E – Draft 2017 SDR Survey Mailing Materials). The same notice of
confidentiality will be used in the introduction to the CATI interview and will be displayed prior to the start of
the survey in the online instrument. In addition, the CATI interviewers will inform the respondents of the
voluntary nature of their response and that the data will be used for statistical purposes only.
Standard data collection procedures incorporate numerous safeguards for protecting the data and must conform to
a detailed security plan approved by NCSES. While collecting SDR data, the information that could identify a
sample member is separated from data about that person. Each sample member is assigned a unique identifier, and
this identifier is used to store identifying information (such as name, address, etc.) in a separate, secure database
apart from the survey response database. SDR contractors and NCSES staff receive annual CIPSEA training to
reinforce their legal obligations to protect the privacy and confidentiality of the SDR data; staff must sign data use
agreements annually to acknowledge this legal obligation.

2017 SDR OMB Supporting Statement

Page 16

Completed SDR hard copy questionnaires and other contact materials will be housed in a secure storage room at
the contractor’s production facility. Only authorized staff – and only when necessary for data collection activities
– will have access to hard copy materials from the SDR file room. The contractor’s electronic systems will be on
a secure local area network (LAN), and all contractor systems for storage of electronic survey data will be secure
by design and will be protected by passwords available only to authorized study staff.
The contractor will implement systems to make certain that data collected via the online questionnaire are secure.
First, access to the online instrument will be allowed only with a valid Personal Identification Number (PIN) and
password correctly entered in combination. Second, data will be transmitted by the Secure Sockets Layer (SSL)
protocol that employs powerful encryption during transmission through the Internet. If a respondent keeps an
online survey open without any activity, the online server will close the connection after a short period of
inactivity, both preserving the data up to the break-off point and preventing unauthorized persons from
completing the questionnaire. The online survey system will place authentication information and response data
on physically separate servers, a strategy that provides an extra layer of security to protect response data. Both
development and production servers will be backed up nightly as required by the contractor’s disaster recovery
plan.
NCSES and its contractors will analyze and make available SDR tabulations only in aggregate form and will take
all measures necessary to assure that the identity of individuals or organizations will not be disclosed in either its
statistical tabulations or in the SDR public-use micro-data files.

11.

JUSTIFICATION FOR SENSITIVE QUESTIONS

No questions of a sensitive nature are asked in this data collection.

12.

ESTIMATE OF RESPONDENT BURDEN

A statistical sample of 124,580 persons, identified as having a doctorate in an SEH field from a U.S. academic
institution will be selected for the 2017 SDR. This sample will include approximately 110,000 individuals residing
in the U.S. and 15,000 residing abroad. The amount of time to complete the questionnaire may vary depending on
an individual’s circumstances; however, on average it will take approximately 25 minutes to complete the survey.
Assuming a 75% response rate (93,435 respondents), the total burden for the 2017 SDR is estimated to be 38,932
hours.
The total cost to respondents for the 38,932 burden hours is estimated to be $1,871,851. This is based on an
estimated median annual salary of $100,000 per full-time employed SDR respondent from the 2015 SDR data.
Assuming a 40-hour workweek over 52-weeks of employment, this annual salary corresponds to an hourly rate of
$48.08.

13.

COST BURDEN TO RESPONDENTS

Not applicable. This survey will not require respondents to purchase equipment, software, or to contract out
services.

14.

COST BURDEN TO THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT

The total estimated cost to the Government for the 2017 SDR is approximately $12.6 million, which includes
survey cycle costs, and NCSES staff costs to provide oversight and coordination with the NSCG for analytic
purposes. The estimate for survey cycle costs is approximately $12.0 million, which is based on sample size;
length of questionnaire; CATI and online data collection technology; administrative, overhead, design, printing,
2017 SDR OMB Supporting Statement

Page 17

mail and telephone data collection costs; incentive payments; critical items data retrieval; data keying and editing;
data quality control; imputation for missing item responses; weighting and estimating sampling error; file
preparation and delivery; preparation of documentation and final reports; analysis, and tabulations. The NCSES
staff costs are estimated at $562,500 (based on $150,000 annual salary of 1.5 FTE for 2.5 years).

15.

REASON FOR CHANGE IN BURDEN

The increase in burden expected in 2017 is a result of the slight increase in the number of sample members
(increase of 4,580). Questionnaire length and survey response rate are both expected to remain unchanged.

16.

SCHEDULE FOR INFORMATION COLLECTION AND PUBLICATION

There are no plans to use any complex analytical techniques in NCSES publications using these data. Normally,
SDR data are presented as cross-tabulations of the data in reports and other data releases. The time schedule for
2017 data collection and publication is currently estimated as follows:

17.

Data Collection (Mail, CATI, online)

June 2017 – January 2018

Coding and Data Editing

July 2017 – May 2018

Final Edited/Weighted/Imputed Data File

June 2018

SDR InfoBrief

Fall 2018

SDR Detailed Statistical Tables

Fall 2018

SDR Public Use File

Fall 2018

DISPLAY OF OMB EXPIRATION DATE

The OMB Expiration Date will be displayed on the 2017 SDR questionnaire; in the online survey version, it will
be included on the informed consent page of the online survey and available in a help screen accessible at any
point in the online survey; in the telephone interview, it will be read to sample members during the introductory
informed consent.

18.

EXCEPTION TO THE CERTIFICATION STATEMENT

Not Applicable.

2017 SDR OMB Supporting Statement

Page 18