THE ARTS
CHILD POLICY
CIVIL JUSTICE
EDUCATION
ENERGY AND ENVIRONMENT
This PDF document was made available from www.rand.org as a public
service of the RAND Corporation.
Jump down to document6
HEALTH AND HEALTH CARE
INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS
NATIONAL SECURITY
POPULATION AND AGING
PUBLIC SAFETY
SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY
SUBSTANCE ABUSE
The RAND Corporation is a nonprofit research
organization providing objective analysis and effective
solutions that address the challenges facing the public
and private sectors around the world.
TERRORISM AND
HOMELAND SECURITY
TRANSPORTATION AND
INFRASTRUCTURE
WORKFORCE AND WORKPLACE
Support RAND
Purchase this document
Browse Books & Publications
Make a charitable contribution
For More Information
Visit RAND at www.rand.org
Explore the RAND National Defense Research Institute
View document details
Limited Electronic Distribution Rights
This document and trademark(s) contained herein are protected by law as indicated in a notice appearing later in
this work. This electronic representation of RAND intellectual property is provided for non-commercial use only.
Unauthorized posting of RAND PDFs to a non-RAND Web site is prohibited. RAND PDFs are protected under
copyright law. Permission is required from RAND to reproduce, or reuse in another form, any of our research
documents for commercial use. For information on reprint and linking permissions, please see RAND Permissions.
This product is part of the RAND Corporation technical report series. Reports may
include research findings on a specific topic that is limited in scope; present discussions of the methodology employed in research; provide literature reviews, survey
instruments, modeling exercises, guidelines for practitioners and research professionals, and supporting documentation; or deliver preliminary findings. All RAND
reports undergo rigorous peer review to ensure that they meet high standards for research quality and objectivity.
Data for DoD Manpower
Policy Analysis
Jacob Alex Klerman
Prepared for the Office of the Secretary of Defense
Approved for public release; distribution unlimited
NATIONAL DEFENSE RESEARCH INSTITUTE
The research described in this report was prepared for the Office of the Secretary of Defense
(OSD). The research was conducted in the RAND National Defense Research Institute,
a federally funded research and development center sponsored by the OSD, the Joint
Staff, the Unified Combatant Commands, the Department of the Navy, the Marine
Corps, the defense agencies, and the defense Intelligence Community under Contract
W74V8H-06-C-0002.
Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data is available for this publication.
ISBN 978-0-8330-4208-8
The RAND Corporation is a nonprofit research organization providing objective analysis
and effective solutions that address the challenges facing the public and private sectors
around the world. RAND’s publications do not necessarily reflect the opinions of its research
clients and sponsors.
R® is a registered trademark.
© Copyright 2009 RAND Corporation
All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced in any form by any electronic or
mechanical means (including photocopying, recording, or information storage and retrieval)
without permission in writing from RAND.
Published 2009 by the RAND Corporation
1776 Main Street, P.O. Box 2138, Santa Monica, CA 90407-2138
1200 South Hayes Street, Arlington, VA 22202-5050
4570 Fifth Avenue, Suite 600, Pittsburgh, PA 15213-2665
RAND URL: http://www.rand.org
To order RAND documents or to obtain additional information, contact
Distribution Services: Telephone: (310) 451-7002;
Fax: (310) 451-6915; Email: order@rand.org
Summary
To allow analyses of its personnel practices, DoD maintains a multi-mode data collection
effort. That effort includes both historical administrative data files and DoD surveys of military personnel. In addition, military manpower analyses make some use of civilian crosssectional and longitudinal data.
This report considers this data collection effort as a system. For data users, it provides a
high-level discussion of data strategies to support a variety of analytic goals. For data funders,
it considers how the current system might or might not be expanded.
Beyond serving as a tutorial for analysts, the document has two main themes. The first
theme concerns emerging, but currently underutilized, data-matching strategies. These strategies involving matching the core DoD administrative data files to (1) civilian administrative
data (e.g., Social Security Administration earnings data); (2) DoD survey data; and (3) civilian
survey data. Such data-matching initiatives raise important human subjects issues, but these
issues can be addressed through interagency cooperation and appropriate research protocols.
Recent experience suggests that the potential payoffs in better analysis for DoD—and therefore better policy—are large.
The second theme considers expanding the data collection effort. Specifically, DoD has
been approached about participating in a National Longitudinal Survey of Youth for 2010
(NLS-Y2010) and about starting a military panel survey. Both of these efforts would be very
expensive and, despite the expense, would have relatively small samples. With respect to an
NLS-Y2010, if one is implemented, it will likely provide the data necessary for most military
manpower analyses whether DoD participates or not. In addition, any such survey is likely to
include so few people in the military as to be of minimal use in military manpower analyses.
Thus, the incremental contribution of another wave does not seem to justify a large DoD
financial contribution.
With respect to a DoD panel survey effort, this report concludes that the standard arguments for the utility of longitudinal surveys are incomplete. Many of the analytic advantages
of longitudinal data can be achieved by analysis of repeated cross-sectional data. In addition,
many of the research designs that such data could support can instead be supported—at lower
cost and with larger samples—by creative matching of cross-sectional surveys and administrative data. Thus, funding for a DoD panel survey effort appears to lack a compelling research
question that cannot be addressed by data matching.
xi