Appendix H - COR 702 Procedures in Gathering Tax Data (June 1966) Master Cards We began by having all of the I.D.'s, names and addresses keypunched by the Department of Taxation. For parents, these "master" cards were punched from the yellow paper books that had been prepared from the students' original questionnaires and were used in doing the 1964 follow-up on educational and occupational achievement. Thus, the parent master card has the 1957 address. For male and female students, their I.D.'s, names and addresses were punched from the post-card replies received from their parents in the 1964 follow-up study. If the parents did not respond, we punched the student's master card from the yellow books (which had the student's 1957 address). The parent master cards were duplicated twice. The original blue masters were placed in file storage. The duplicates were used in pulling tax files: (a) one was left in the tax files to indicate that the individual's file was checked out to us, (b) the other was brought with the individual's tax returns to our staff who verified that the file was the correct one. The same procedure was used for the male students. No tax data were gathered for female students. The tax returns were sent to the tax data processing department on Wilson Street, where they were (a) separated into parent and student groups on the basis of the color-coded master cards which accompanied the returns, and (b) sorted into the proper sequence of years (1960-57 for parents, and 1963-57 for male students) for keypunching. The social security numbers and adjusted gross income data to be punched were also circled by these clerical workers. They also added together the total exemptions claimed by both spouses and coded it on the margin for punching. The individual's master card was placed in front of each individual's tax files, and an additional check was made to verify that we had the correct file. Detail Cards Prior to punching a group of files, the master cards were merged with blank cards. Thus, the I.D.'s (cols. 1-7) were automatically duplicated from the master cards into the "detail" cards. For the parents, tax information, number of exemptions, and social security numbers were punched in card number 2 for the years 1960 to 1957 ---the four year period in which their child was most likely to have been in college. If no information was available for any of these years from tax returns and if information was available for prior years (1954-1956) or later years (1961-1964), this information was punched in cards 3 and 4 (if needed) with the particular year identified by a two column field, i.e., 1955 was punched 55 in the designated field. In some cases where information was not available from tax returns, information on "net taxable" income (not adjusted gross income) was available from the tax roll books. This information was punched in card 7. For male students, tax information, number of exemptions, and social security numbers were punched in card "2" for the years 1963, 1962, 1961, and 1960 and in card "3" for 1959, 1958, 1957. If no information was available, that field was skipped. If a more complete name or a more recent address was found on the tax return for either a parent or a male student, a new master card was punched (and the previous master card which was with the tax return was discarded --however, the original (blue) master cards which had been put in file storage were not changed). This means that (1) the male student's 1957 address is always available for his parent's master card, (2) his 1964 address is available on his own original master card (blue) if his parents responded to the follow-up questionnaire (if they did not respond, his own original master card was punched with his parent's 1957 address), and (3) if a different 1964 address was available from his tax return, it was punched and is in the set with the income cards. In order to be certain that no parent or student was overlooked in the search for tax data, every case for which income information was missing was accounted for with a "9" card with a code in column 79 explaining the reason for the missing information, e.g., some returns were unavailable because they were in use. Tax Tape The original master cards for all of the parents and all of the male and female students were put on magnetic tape at 556 BPI blocked 50 by Commerce Data processing. The sets of parent detail cards (consisting of another master card and a "2" card, or "3" or "4" or a "7" or "9" cards) were also put on tape and sorted so that a completed set should consist of: PARENT MASTER 1 card (Original master card) PARENT MASTER 1 card (Tax detail set) 2 or 3 or 4 or 7 or 9 card (Tax detail set) Student Master 1 card (Original master card) Student Master 1 card (Tax detail set) 2 and 3 or 7 or 9 cards (Tax detail set) a set of usually 7 cards, or at most, 8 cards. This tape was edited using an update program written by George Lonelillo, SSRI, which permitted dropping of incorrect cards and adding corrected cards. Occupational Data In a seperate coding and punching operation, all of the students and parent cards were coded with a three digit occupation code. The following information was punched: social security number, name, and occupation code. For parents, occupation was coded using the oldest tax return available which listed their occupation (1957). At the outset of this operation, Vimal P. Shah and Janet Wagner went to the Wisconsin Tax Department, where approximately 1,000 tax returns were coded for occupation in a preliminary test sample. This was done not only to familiarize the supervisors with the full content of the code book, but, more importantly, to see what problems arose most frequently in coding and to arrive at some consistent decisions in these cases. It was decided, for example, that those who did not specifically designate themselves as "laborers" when working in a factory should be given the appropriate code for "operatives and kindred workers (n.e.c.)"---"284" ---rather than "415" ("laborers--manufacturing; durable goods"), "489" ("Laborers---non-manufacturing industries"), or "499" ("Laborers---All other industries (including not reported)"). In other words, a slightly higher N.O.R.C. score was attributed to the subject than the general term "factory worker" would ordinarily denote, on the assumption that most factory employees do operate a machine of some kind. This was also consistent with a similar coding decision made in the summer of 1962, when the original questionnaire were used for gathering occupational aspiration data. Similarly, in this preliminary session, it was decided that coders would take into account the name of the business firm or factory when it's function or product was known and, on occasion, also the salary of the individual when it might be helpful in determining whether the job was of professional caliber, white collar, or some other. Finally, a number of seperate occupational categories were set up at this time to take into account those who did not fit into the original classifications laid down in the Socio-Economic Index. These new categories were: 500 Student 501 Unemployed, Retired 502 Military--Commissioned Officers (Lt., Captain, Ensign etc.) 503 Military--Non-commissioned Officers (Sgt., Petty Officer) 504 Military--Other enlisted men (Pvt., Seaman, Cpl., Specialists, etc.) 505 Peace Corps 506 Airline Stewardess 507 Housewife 000 Unmarried: Deceased or divorced parent--or unmarried student For the next two weeks, during the actual coding operations, from 6 to 18 individuals (mainly tax department employees) were involved in the project. The 1957 tax return was used for determining parent's occupation in most cases, unless none were available for that year. In that case, the next earliest return since 1957 (e.g., 1958, 1959, etc.) was taken. For male students, on the other hand, the latest return (i.e., 1964, 1963, etc.) contained the information sought. In every instance (except, of course, the unmarrieds), both husband and wife were coded either with an appropriate occupation number or "499" (occupation not reported"). The "000" designation was reserved for those whose marriage partner was deceased or divorced, or for students who were still unmarried. The actual coding operation took place with coders seated in a square around several tables that had been pushed together to form one large work surface. The two supervisors were at either end and two other, more experienced coders at the sides to provide more convenient access to someone who could help solve any major problems that arose. In addition, those who had questions about a specific occupation or case were encouraged to vocalize these problems. It was hoped that by doing so, both accuracy and consistency would be increased since the decision arrived at would be the consensus of all, any objections or further questions would be considered and acted upon at the time, and later cases of a like nature would receive a similar code. To further ensure accuracy, coders were told to read the entire occupational code before beginning in order to familiarize themselves with its basic format and some of the more obscure categories. The supervisors themselves made a random check of each beginning new coder's work until such time as they felt it was no longer necessary. In the case of two incompetent coders, their work was completely redone. The coding was completed in two weeks, and the cards were punched by tax department employees.