HARWICK INSTITUTE FOR COGNITIVE RESEARCH
BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES DIVISION

DIVISION 42 EXPRESSION CARRIERS — LINEAGE SUMMARY
Document date: November 19, 1987
Prepared by: Program Coordination
Classification: RESTRICTED DISTRIBUTION

NOTE: This document predates the current principal investigator's
involvement in the study. It is retained for historical reference.
Access restricted to senior laboratory personnel.

=====================================================================
I. COHORT STATUS AS OF NOVEMBER 1987
=====================================================================

Active tracking: 31 confirmed family units.
Total assessed individuals (all generations): 114.

  Generation 1 (G1):  31 subjects (assessment complete: 28, pending: 3)
  Generation 2 (G2):  52 subjects (assessment complete: 44, pending: 8)
  Generation 3 (G3):  31 subjects (assessment complete: 19, pending: 12)

Note on G3 pending: Several G3 subjects identified through family records
are minors. Assessment pending until subjects reach adulthood. Estimated
completion window: 1989–1994.

Expression summary (assessed subjects only):
  High expression:     57%
  Moderate expression: 24%
  Low or absent:       19%

These figures are consistent with prior-year summaries and with
baseline projection models.

=====================================================================
II. SKIP-GENERATION PATTERN — UPDATE
=====================================================================

Skip-generation pattern (G1 high / G2 low / G3 high) confirmed in
9 of 31 family units. This is an increase from 7 units confirmed in
the 1985 summary.

The pattern continues to appear most strongly in families where G1
service records include the Fort Garland notation. Of 9 confirmed
skip-generation families, 8 have G1 subjects with documented service
at or near Fort Garland in the 1931–1938 window.

The ninth family (unit BG-F039, Oregon) does not have a confirmed
Fort Garland connection in available records. However, G1 records
for this family are incomplete. This discrepancy should be
investigated in the next review cycle.

=====================================================================
III. G3 PROGRAM IDENTIFICATION — HISTORICAL NOTE
=====================================================================

For reference, the following summarizes G3 subjects identified for
the child assessment programs operating 1968–1976.

Of the 19 G3 subjects whose assessments were completed prior to 1976:
  — 14 were identified for and enrolled in assessment programs
  — 4 were identified but not enrolled (reasons vary; see individual
    records on restricted filesystem)
  — 1 was not identified at the time (identified through family
    contact in 1983; assessment completed 1984)

Program sites used for G3 assessment in this cohort:
  California (3 sites), Oregon (2 sites), Colorado (2 sites),
  Virginia (1 site), Washington (1 site).

Current status of G3 subjects from the 1968–1976 programs:
  Active in follow-up:     11
  Lost to follow-up:        5
  Refused further contact:  2
  Deceased:                 1 (1981; cause: unrelated to study)

The 5 subjects lost to follow-up represent a concern. Three of these
cases show address invalidity as the reason for lost contact. In
two cases, family members contacted to locate the subject declined
to provide information. These two cases are flagged for escalation.

=====================================================================
IV. NOTES FOR INCOMING PERSONNEL
=====================================================================

This summary will serve as background for the new principal
investigator who will be joining the behavioral genetics program
in January 1988.

The incoming PI has been briefed on the study parameters appropriate
to her role. She has not been briefed on the full program history or
on the Fort Garland origin data. This is consistent with the tiered
disclosure protocol in place since 1981.

It is anticipated that the incoming PI will develop her own framework
for understanding the expression patterns she observes. This is
considered desirable. Independent scientific validation of the
core findings strengthens the program's long-term evidentiary basis.

If the PI requests access to pre-1980 program records, the request
should be routed to senior program coordination for review before
any response is provided.

=====================================================================
Document end.
Program Coordination — 19 November 1987