<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<codeBook version="1.2.2" ID="GEO_2007_MCC-SJR_v01_M" xml-lang="en" xmlns="http://www.icpsr.umich.edu/DDI" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xsi:schemaLocation="http://www.icpsr.umich.edu/DDI http://www.icpsr.umich.edu/DDI/Version1-2-2.xsd">
<docDscr>
  <citation>
    <titlStmt>
      <IDNo>DDI_GEO_2007_MCC-SJR_v01_M</IDNo>
    </titlStmt>
    <prodStmt>
      <producer abbr="MCC" affiliation="" role="Metadata Producer">Millennium Challenge Corporation</producer>
      <prodDate date="2014-06-18">2014-06-18</prodDate>
      <software version="v5">NADA</software>
    </prodStmt>
    <verStmt>
      <version>Version 1.0 (June 2014)
Version 2.0 (April 2015). Edited version based on Version 01 (DDI-MCC-GEO-GORBI-NORC-2013-v01) that was done by Millennium Challenge Corporation.</version>
    </verStmt>
  </citation>
</docDscr>
<stdyDscr>
  <citation>
    <titlStmt>
      <titl>Samtskhe-Javakheti Roads 2007-2012</titl>
      <subTitl/>
      <altTitl>MCC-SJR 2007-12</altTitl>
      <parTitl/>
      <IDNo>GEO_2007_MCC-SJR_v01_M</IDNo>
    </titlStmt>
    <rspStmt>
      <AuthEnty affiliation="University of Chicago">National Opinion Research Center (NORC)</AuthEnty>
    </rspStmt>
    <prodStmt>
      <copyright/>
      <software version="5.0" date="2021-12-26">NADA</software>
      <fundAg abbr="MCC" role="">Millennium Challenge Corporation</fundAg>
      <grantNo/>
    </prodStmt>
    <distStmt>
      <contact affiliation="Millennium Challenge Corporation" URI="" email="impact-eval@mcc.gov">Monitoring &amp; Evaluation Division</contact>
      <depDate date=""/>
      <distDate date=""/>
    </distStmt>
    <serStmt>
      <serName>Independent Impact Evaluation</serName>
      <serInfo/>
    </serStmt>
    <verStmt>
      <version date="">Anonymized dataset for public distribution</version>
      <verResp/>
      <notes/>
    </verStmt>
    <biblCit format=""/>
    <notes/>
  </citation>
  <stdyInfo>
    <studyBudget/>
    <subject>
    </subject>
    <abstract>The evaluation uses three methodologies to rigorously evaluate the causal impact of the program on outcomes. The first is a difference-in-difference methodology, whereby the project roads are matched to a set of similar comparison roads where no intervention has taken place. These comparison roads are chosen from a number of potential candidates using a propensity score matching technique. The difference-in-difference analysis thus compares traffic counts as well as socioeconomic outcomes for residents of communities located near the project roads to those of residents of communities located near the comparison roads. Secondly, the evaluation incorporates a continuous treatment approach. Project impact is modeled in a dose-response framework, so that communities nearer the project roads are assumed to experience greater impacts than those more distant. Finally, the evaluation estimates a matched difference-indifference model, using propensity score matching to improve the comparability between the treatment and comparison groups. Combining these three approaches allows for results from each to be compared in order to ensure a robust set of findings that is not dependent on the assumptions of one particular modeling approach.</abstract>
    <sumDscr>
      <collDate date="2007" event="start" cycle="Baseline"/>
      <collDate date="2007" event="end" cycle="Baseline"/>
      <collDate date="2010" event="start" cycle="Round 2"/>
      <collDate date="2010" event="end" cycle="Round 2"/>
      <collDate date="2012" event="start" cycle="Round 3"/>
      <collDate date="2012" event="end" cycle="Round 3"/>
      <nation abbr="GEO">Georgia</nation>
      <geogCover>The Samtskhe-Javakheti region</geogCover>
      <geogUnit/>
      <anlyUnit>Individuals, households</anlyUnit>
      <universe>To collect the data, enumerators travelled to each settlement and worked with local authorities to identify a small group of individuals who were identified as knowledgeable about conditions in the settlement.</universe>
      <dataKind>Sample survey data [ssd]</dataKind>
    </sumDscr>
    <!-- qualityStatement - ddi2.5 - complex type
     
     This structure consists of two parts, standardsCompliance and otherQualityStatements. 
     In standardsCompliance list all specific standards complied with during the execution of this 
     study. Note the standard name and producer and how the study complied with the standard. 
     Enter any additional quality statements in otherQualityStatements.
     
     -->
    <qualityStatement>
      <standardsCompliance>
        <standard>
          <standardName/>
          <producer/>
        </standard>
        <complianceDescription/>
      </standardsCompliance>
      <otherQualityStatement/>
    </qualityStatement>
    <notes/>
    <!-- exPostEvaluation ddi2.5
      Use this section to describe evaluation procedures not address in data evaluation processes. 
      These may include issues such as timing of the study, sequencing issues, cost/budget issues, 
      relevance, instituional or legal arrangments etc. of the study. 
      
      The completionDate attribute holds the date the evaluation was completed. 
      The type attribute is an optional type to identify the type of evaluation with or without 
      the use of a controlled vocabulary.
    -->
    <exPostEvaluation completionDate="" type="">
      <evaluationProcess/>
      <outcomes/>
    </exPostEvaluation>
  </stdyInfo>
  <method>
    <dataColl>
      <timeMeth/>
      <dataCollector abbr="NORC" affiliation="University of Chicago">National Opinion Research Center</dataCollector>
      <!-- collectorTraining - DDI2.5
        
        Collector Training

        Describes the training provided to data collectors including internviewer training, process testing, 
        compliance with standards etc. This is repeatable for language and to capture different aspects of the 
        training process. The type attribute allows specification of the type of training being described.
        
        -->
      <collectorTraining type=""/>
      <frequenc/>
      <sampProc>The sample for the first round used the 2002 Census to identify a sampling frame of 732 settlements around either the project or comparison roads, of which 690 were surveyed. The sample size was increased for the second and third rounds, which conducted surveys in all settlements that met at least one of the following criteria: settlements along the SJ Road; settlements along comparison roads where traffic counts are conducted; settlements included in the Integrated Household Survey (IHHS) that the evaluation uses to evaluate household-level outcomes, and any other village that was included in the baseline. The second and third rounds each included 960 settlements.

Our approach to selecting the comparison roads uses the technique of Propensity Score Matching (PSM) to identify eight comparison road segments to be included in the analysis. The comparison roads were selected from an inventory of 117 road segments for which data on a variety of characteristics was available from RDMED, the Georgian government roads agency. Our application of PSM in this case is to estimate a logistic regression model of the probability that a road is part of the treatment group as a function of observable characteristics. We then calculate the predicted probability (or propensity score) that a road segment is part of the treatment group for each of the eight treatment roads and 117 potential comparison roads using these estimated regression coefficients. Finally, each of the eight treatment roads is matched to a single comparison road for which the propensity score is the closest in value from among the 117 potential comparison roads.</sampProc>
      <sampleFrame>
        <sampleFrameName/>
        <custodian/>
        <universe/>
        <frameUnit isPrimary="">
          <unitType numberOfUnits=""/>
        </frameUnit>
        <updateProcedure/>
      </sampleFrame>
      <deviat/>
      <collMode/>
      <resInstru/>
      <!-- instrumentDevelopment - DDI2.5             
        Describe any development work on the data collection instrument. Type attribute allows for the optional use of a defined development type with or without use of a controlled vocabulary.
        -->
      <instrumentDevelopment type=""/>
      <collSitu>The final round of IHHS data that was available for the evaluation was collected less than one year after the completion of construction.</collSitu>
      <actMin>Miranda Berishvili, Giorgi Giorgadze, Sophia Chiburdanize, and Dea Tsartsidze</actMin>
      <ConOps/>
      <weight/>
      <cleanOps/>
    </dataColl>
    <notes/>
    <anlyInfo>
      <respRate/>
      <EstSmpErr/>
      <dataAppr/>
    </anlyInfo>
    <stdyClas/>
    <dataProcessing type=""/>
    <codingInstructions relatedProcesses="" type="">
      <txt/>
      <command formalLanguage=""/>
    </codingInstructions>
  </method>
  <dataAccs>
    <setAvail>
      <accsPlac URI="http://data.mcc.gov/evaluations/index.php/catalog/98">Millennium Challenge Corporation</accsPlac>
      <origArch>Millennium Challenge Corporation
http://data.mcc.gov/evaluations/index.php/catalog/98
Cost: None</origArch>
      <avlStatus/>
      <collSize/>
      <complete/>
      <fileQnty/>
      <notes/>
    </setAvail>
    <useStmt>
      <restrctn/>
      <citReq>National Opinion Research Center.  Samtskhe-Javakheti Roads Activity Impact Evaluation Final Report. 2013.</citReq>
      <deposReq/>
      <conditions/>
      <disclaimer/>
    </useStmt>
    <notes/>
  </dataAccs>
  <notes/>
</stdyDscr>
<dataDscr>
</dataDscr></codeBook>
