Kormendi and Meguire (1988) examined TRIM2’s performance in estimating the number of households that participate in some form of welfare assistance program and the benefits they receive. These authors took two different approaches to their validation of TRIM2. The first was to randomly perturb parameters in TRIM2’s participation module, according to reasonable estimates of the variability of the estimated parameters; then they examined the resulting variability in the estimates of participation and level of benefits. The participation module of TRIM2 uses a probit model with subjectively determined intercept dummies. Kormendi and Meguire multiplied each parameter of the probit model, including the coefficients of the dummy variables, by a random variable, uniformly distributed on the interval (0.8, 1.2). They characterized this as a conservative estimate of the true variability (an assessment they leave unsupported). This was repeated 15 times, running TRIM2 based on the 1985 CPS. They computed an approximation to the coefficient of variation for several outputs, including total AFDC units and benefits, AFDC units and benefits for households with and without earnings, and AFDC units and benefits for households with dependents between 0 and 2 years of age. The investigation was limited to 15 trials because of the high cost of running the simulations.
The results of this first part of the TRIM2 validation indicated that the variability of simulated benefits was less than that of units. In nearly all cases the coefficients of variation of simulated benefits were less than 3 percent. However, the coefficients of variation of simulated units ranged from 3.6 to 18.2 percent. It should be pointed out that even in the case of units the variability of the results generally was somewhat less than the variability of the simulated parameters.
In the second method, which Kormendi and Meguire call dynamic validation, TRIM2 was used to simulate changes in welfare participation and benefits from 1979 to 1985 and from 1983 to 1985, and the results were compared with those from the 1985 CPS. The first time period spanned the enactment of the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act (OBRA) in 1981. With 1979 as a baseline, TRIM2 was used to forecast units and benefits for 1985, making use of the actual changes in the law that occurred, which included OBRA. The second time interval represented a period when no major legislation was enacted.
Sign in to access your saved publications, downloads, and email preferences.
Former MyNAP users: You'll need to reset your password on your first login to MyAcademies. Click "Forgot password" below to receive a reset link via email. Having trouble? Visit our FAQ page to contact support.
Members of the National Academy of Sciences, National Academy of Engineering, or National Academy of Medicine should log in through their respective Academy portals.
While logged on as a guest, you can download any of our free PDFs on nationalacademies.org . You will remain logged in until you close your browser.
Thank you for creating a MyAcademies account!
Enjoy free access to thousands of National Academies' publications, a 10% discount off every purchase, and build your personal library.
Enter the email address for your MyAcademies (formerly MyNAP) account to receive password reset instructions.
We sent password reset instructions to your email . Follow the link in that email to create a new password. Didn't receive it? Check your spam folder or contact us for assistance.
Your password has been reset.
Verify Your Email Address
We sent a verification link to your email. Please check your inbox (and spam folder) and follow the link to verify your email address. If you did not receive the email, you can request a new verification link below