DoDYouth SSB (Part_B_RAND)

Supporting Statement Outline – Sample
NOTE: Complete Part B for Survey ICR Requests
SUPPORTING STATEMENT – PART B
B. COLLECTIONS OF INFORMATION EMPLOYING STATISTICAL METHODS
If the collection of information employs statistical methods, it should be indicated in
Item 17 of OMB Form 83-I, and the following information should be provided in this Supporting
Statement:

1. Description of the Activity
Describe the potential respondent universe and any sampling or other method used
to select respondents. Data on the number of entities covered in the collection should be
provided in tabular form for the universe as a whole and for each of the strata in the proposed
sample. Indicate the expected response rates for the collection as a whole, as well as the actual
response rates achieved during the last collection, if previously conducted.
The RAND American School Leader PANEL (ASLP) is constituted of principals
leading K-12 public schools. Research surveys are administered periodically to principals in the
ASLP. The panel was drawn using a multistage sampling approach. In the first stage, a sample of
2300 public schools were drawn at random from the Common Core of Data (CCD). (The CCD is
produced by the National Center for Education Statistics, which is operated from within the
Department of Education). RAND researchers employed multiple methods of communication
(including emails and phone calls) to recruit principals to take part in the survey panel; follow-up
efforts included drawing an additional random sample from key states so that the panel could be
representative at the national level and within some states. The total number of principals
enrolled is roughly 12,000 (across all grade levels). Expected response rate is 40-45 percent
(based on responses to past surveys given to principals).
2. Procedures for the Collection of Information
Describe any of the following if they are used in the collection of information:
a. Statistical methodologies for stratification and sample selection;
b. Estimation procedures;
c. Degree of accuracy needed for the Purpose discussed in the justification;
d. Unusual problems requiring specialized sampling procedures; and
1

e. Use of periodic or cyclical data collections to reduce respondent burden.
Please see above for a description of the development of the ASLP. The panel also
includes sample probability weights; these weights account for the probability of the school
being included in the sampling framework. Weights were calibrated against the known
population totals (the total number of principals in US public schools).
In the survey we intend to administer to the standing panel, we will invite only
those principals who serve schools which include high school grades (9-12); this will reduce the
sample from the panel’s full 12,000 participants to roughly 3,000 invitees. Based on past
responses to panels, we expect a 40-45% response rate; thus, we expect to receive roughly 1,300
responses. This number of responses will be sufficient to produce statistically valid estimates.
3. Maximization of Response Rates, Non-response, and Reliability
Discuss methods used to maximize response rates and to deal with instances of nonresponse. Describe any techniques used to ensure the accuracy and reliability of responses is
adequate for intended purposes. Additionally, if the collection is based on sampling, ensure that
the data can be generalized to the universe under study. If not, provide special justification.
One way the ASLP maximizes response rates is through maintaining regular contact
with panel participants. Additionally, panel respondents receive email reminders to complete the
survey. Finally, the sample is designed to be representative of school leaders in the United States,
and a set of weights allow responses to individual questions to be representative (and thus,
generalizable to US school leaders/principals).

4. Tests of Procedures
Describe any tests of procedures or methods to be undertaken. Testing of potential
respondents (9 or fewer) is encouraged as a means of refining proposed collections to reduce
respondent burden, as well as to improve the collection instrument utility. These tests check for
internal consistency and the effectiveness of previous similar collection activities.
This is an established survey panel; respondents have completed previous surveys.
Therefore, we do not plan to test potential respondents.

2

5. Statistical Consultation and Information Analysis
a. Provide names and telephone number of individual(s) consulted on statistical
aspects of the design.
Dr. David Grant
Co-Director, RAND American Educator Panels
Senior Social Scientist, RAND Corporation
(310) 393-0411 or dgrant@rand.org

b. Provide name and organization of person(s) who will actually collect and analyze
the collected information.
Dr. Stephani Wrabel
Policy Researcher, RAND Corporation
(703) 413-1100 or swrabel@rand.org

Dr. Jennie Wenger
Senior Economist, RAND Corporation
(310) 393-0411 or jwenger@rand.org

3