National Academies Press: OpenBook

The 2000 Census: Counting Under Adversity (2004)

Chapter:Front Matter

Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2004. The 2000 Census: Counting Under Adversity. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10907.
×

THE 2000 CENSUS

Counting Under Adversity

Panel to Review the 2000 Census

Constance F. Citro, Daniel L. Cork, and Janet L. Norwood, Editors

Committee on National Statistics

Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education

NATIONAL RESEARCH COUNCIL OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES

THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES PRESS
Washington, D.C.
www.nap.edu

Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2004. The 2000 Census: Counting Under Adversity. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10907.
×

THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES PRESS
500 Fifth Street, NW Washington, DC 20001

NOTICE: The project that is the subject of this report was approved by the Governing Board of the National Research Council, whose members are drawn from the councils of the National Academy of Sciences, the National Academy of Engineering, and the Institute of Medicine. The members of the committee responsible for the report were chosen for their special competences and with regard for appropriate balance.

The project that is the subject of this report was supported by contract no. 50-YABC-8-66010 between the National Academy of Sciences and the U.S. Census Bureau. Any opinions, findings, conclusions, or recommendations expressed in this publication are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the organizations or agencies that provided support for the project.

International Standard Book Number 0-309-09141-1 (book)

International Standard Book Number 0-309-52998-0 (PDF)

Library of Congress Control Number: 2004102206

Additional copies of this report are available from the
National Academies Press,
500 Fifth Street, NW, Washington, D.C. 20001; (202) 334-3096; Internet, http://www.nap.edu.

Copyright 2004 by the National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved. Printed in the United States of America.

Suggested citation: National Research Council (2004). The 2000 Census: Counting Under Adversity. Panel to Review the 2000 Census. Constance F. Citro, Daniel L. Cork, and Janet L. Norwood, eds. Committee on National Statistics, Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.

Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2004. The 2000 Census: Counting Under Adversity. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10907.
×

THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES

Advisers to the Nation on Science, Engineering, and Medicine

The National Academy of Sciences is a private, nonprofit, self-perpetuating society of distinguished scholars engaged in scientific and engineering research, dedicated to the furtherance of science and technology and to their use for the general welfare. Upon the authority of the charter granted to it by the Congress in 1863, the Academy has a mandate that requires it to advise the federal government on scientific and technical matters. Dr. Bruce M. Alberts is president of the National Academy of Sciences.

The National Academy of Engineering was established in 1964, under the charter of the National Academy of Sciences, as a parallel organization of outstanding engineers. It is autonomous in its administration and in the selection of its members, sharing with the National Academy of Sciences the responsibility for advising the federal government. The National Academy of Engineering also sponsors engineering programs aimed at meeting national needs, encourages education and research, and recognizes the superior achievements of engineers. Dr. Wm. A. Wulf is president of the National Academy of Engineering.

The Institute of Medicine was established in 1970 by the National Academy of Sciences to secure the services of eminent members of appropriate professions in the examination of policy matters pertaining to the health of the public. The Institute acts under the responsibility given to the National Academy of Sciences by its congressional charter to be an adviser to the federal government and, upon its own initiative, to identify issues of medical care, research, and education. Dr. Harvey V. Fineberg is president of the Institute of Medicine.

The National Research Council was organized by the National Academy of Sciences in 1916 to associate the broad community of science and technology with the Academy’s purposes of furthering knowledge and advising the federal government. Functioning in accordance with general policies determined by the Academy, the Council has become the principal operating agency of both the National Academy of Sciences and the National Academy of Engineering in providing services to the government, the public, and the scientific and engineering communities. The Council is administered jointly by both Academies and the Institute of Medicine. Dr. Bruce M. Alberts and Dr. Wm. A. Wulf are chair and vice chair, respectively, of the National Research Council.

www.national-academies.org

Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2004. The 2000 Census: Counting Under Adversity. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10907.
×

This page intentionally left blank.

Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2004. The 2000 Census: Counting Under Adversity. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10907.
×

PANEL TO REVIEW THE 2000 CENSUS

JANET L. NORWOOD (Chair),

Chevy Chase, Maryland

ROBERT M. BELL,

AT&T Labs–Research, Florham Park, New Jersey

NORMAN M. BRADBURN,

National Science Foundation, Arlington, Virginia

LAWRENCE D. BROWN,

Department of Statistics, The Wharton School, University of Pennsylvania

WILLIAM F. EDDY,

Department of Statistics, Carnegie Mellon University

ROBERT M. HAUSER,

Department of Sociology, University of Wisconsin–Madison

RODERICK J.A. LITTLE,*

School of Public Health, University of Michigan

INGRAM OLKIN,

Department of Statistics and School of Education, Stanford University

D. BRUCE PETRIE,

Canadian Institute for Health Information, Ottawa, Ontario

CONSTANCE F. CITRO, Study Director

MICHAEL L. COHEN, Senior Program Officer

DANIEL L. CORK, Program Officer

AGNES GASKIN, Senior Project Assistant

MARISA GERSTEIN, Research Assistant

SETH HAUSER, Research Associate

MICHELE VER PLOEG, Program Officer

MEYER ZITTER, Consultant

*  

Served until March 2000.

Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2004. The 2000 Census: Counting Under Adversity. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10907.
×

COMMITTEE ON NATIONAL STATISTICS 2004

JOHN E. ROLPH (Chair),

Marshall School of Business, University of Southern California

JOSEPH G. ALTONJI,

Department of Economics, Yale University

ROBERT M. BELL,

AT&T Labs–Research, Florham Park, New Jersey

LAWRENCE D. BROWN,

Department of Statistics, The Wharton School, University of Pennsylvania

ROBERT M. GROVES,

Survey Research Center, University of Michigan, and Joint Program in Survey Methodology, University of Maryland

JOHN C. HALTIWANGER,

Department of Economics, University of Maryland

PAUL W. HOLLAND,

Educational Testing Service, Princeton, New Jersey

JOEL L. HOROWITZ,

Department of Economics, Northwestern University

WILLIAM KALSBEEK,

Department of Biostatistics, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill

ARLEEN LEIBOWITZ,

School of Public Policy and Social Research, University of California, Los Angeles

VIJAYAN NAIR,

Department of Statistics and Department of Industrial and Operations Engineering, University of Michigan

DARYL PREGIBON,

Google, New York City

KENNETH PREWITT,

Department of International and Public Affairs, Columbia University

NORA CATE SCHAEFFER,

Department of Sociology, University of Wisconsin, Madison

JAMES F. HINCHMAN, Acting Director

CONSTANCE F. CITRO, Acting Chief of Staff

Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2004. The 2000 Census: Counting Under Adversity. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10907.
×

Acknowledgments

The Panel to Review the 2000 Census wishes to thank the many people who have contributed to the panel’s work and helped make possible the preparation of this final report.

We thank, first, staff of the U.S. Census Bureau who prepared a large number of evaluation reports about the census, the Accuracy and Coverage Evaluation (A.C.E.) Program, and demographic analysis, made informative presentations at panel meetings and workshops, and answered many specific questions about census procedures and evaluations. We thank particularly William Bell, Cynthia Clark, Donald Dalzell, Robert Fay, Philip Gbur, Howard Hogan, Ruth Ann Killion, Louis Kincannon, Joseph Knott, Donna Kostanich, John Long, Susan Love, Mary Mulry, J. Gregory Robinson, and Preston J. Waite. Former deputy director and acting director William Barron, former director Kenneth Prewitt, and former associate director for decennial census John Thompson also made valuable contributions to the panel’s meetings and workshops. Rajendra Singh has been very helpful as the Census Bureau’s project officer throughout the study.

We further thank the Census Bureau for arranging for panel members and staff to have access to key data files for analysis, beginning in February 2001. Such access was provided not only to the panel but also to congressional oversight groups, under procedures to safeguard confidentiality. The ability to analyze key data sets provided knowledge of census and A.C.E. procedures and evaluations that would not otherwise have been possible for the panel to obtain.

Page viii Cite
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2004. The 2000 Census: Counting Under Adversity. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10907.
×

We thank others in the professional community who participated in panel workshops: Barbara Bailar, National Opinion Research Center (retired); Stephen Fienberg, Carnegie Mellon University; David Freedman, University of California, Berkeley; Charles Jones, U.S. Census Monitoring Board, Congressional Members (retired); Graham Kalton, Westat; Jeffrey Passel, Urban Institute; Allen Schirm, Mathematica Policy Research, Inc.; Joseph Sedransk, Case Western Reserve University; Bruce Spencer, Northwestern University; Philip Stark, University of California, Berkeley; Michael Stoto, RAND; Joseph Waksberg, Westat; Martin Wells, Cornell University; Kirk Wolter, National Opinion Research Center (retired); Donald Ylvisaker, University of California, Los Angeles; and Alan Zaslavsky, Harvard Medical School.

We also thank David Harris, University of Michigan, and Joseph Salvo, New York City Department of City Planning, for major contributions to the panel’s work. David prepared an insightful paper on the measurement and definition of race and ethnicity in federal statistics and the census. Joe ably chaired a working group on the Local Update of Census Addresses (LUCA) Program commissioned by the panel to evaluate LUCA from the local government perspective.

Throughout its work, the panel benefited from discussions with congressional staff, particularly during the period when oversight authority for the census was vested by the U.S. House of Representatives in a Subcommittee on the Census of the Committee on Government Reform. In particular, we thank David McMillen and Michael Miguel for their insights. We have also benefited from interactions with staff of the U.S. General Accounting Office.

The panel is especially indebted to Constance Citro who, as senior study director, organized the work of the panel and guided its evaluation of the 2000 census. Her wide experience in census issues, her competence in statistical methods, and the clarity of her reasoning have been critical to the successful completion of our interim report and now our final report. We have benefited enormously from her talent and knowledge and feel extremely fortunate to have had her work with us.

The panel was assisted by a very able staff. Daniel Cork played a major role for the panel in conducting analyses of data files from the A.C.E., analyzing 1990 and 2000 census data on mail return rates,

Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2004. The 2000 Census: Counting Under Adversity. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10907.
×

drafting text for the report, developing informative graphs of key results, and preparing the report for release. His hard work and contributions, achieved under tight time pressures, were extraordinary. Andrew White, former director of the Committee on National Statistics, served as study director for the panel from November 1998 through March 2000. He was assisted by Michael Cohen, who organized three panel workshops and contributed to the panel’s work throughout, particularly to the text on issues of evaluation and imputation methods. Meyer Zitter contributed to the panel’s assessments of demographic analysis and the procedures for developing the Master Address File. He also specified and analyzed tables of comparable 1990 and 2000 census item imputation rates for the long-form sample. Michele Ver Ploeg and Marisa Gerstein assisted in data analysis, as did Zhanyun Zhao, University of Pennsylvania. Seth Hauser, now with the U.S. State Department, assisted in the analysis of item imputation rates and drafted text on the measurement of race and ethnicity. Heather Koball, now with the National Center for Children in Poverty at Columbia University, prepared background material for the panel on race and ethnicity and organized and assessed trips for the panel and staff to observe census and A.C.E. operations in January–June 2000. Carrie Muntean, now with the U.S. Foreign Service, prepared background material for the panel on the development of the 1990 and 2000 census address lists and provided invaluable support to the panel’s commissioned working group on the LUCA Program. Joshua Dick, Jamie Casey, and Agnes Gaskin provided valuable project assistance to the panel, particularly in making arrangements for the panel’s workshops. Christine McShane, senior editor of the reports office of the Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education, made important contributions to the report through her fine technical editing. To all we are grateful.

This report has been reviewed in draft form by individuals chosen for their diverse perspectives and technical expertise, in accordance with procedures approved by the Report Review Committee of the National Research Council (NRC). The purpose of this independent review is to provide candid and critical comments that will assist the institution in making the published report as sound as possible and to ensure that the report meets institutional standards for objectivity, evidence, and responsiveness to the study charge.

Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2004. The 2000 Census: Counting Under Adversity. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10907.
×

The review comments and draft manuscript remain confidential to protect the integrity of the deliberative process.

We thank the following individuals for their participation in the review of this report: Vincent P. Barabba, Chairman, Market Insight Corporation and the Internet Home Alliance, Palo Alto, CA; Joseph B. Kadane, Department of Statistics, Carnegie Mellon University; Kenneth Prewitt, Department of International and Public Affairs, Columbia University; Bruce D. Spencer, Department of Statistics, Northwestern University; Michael A. Stoto, Center for Domestic and International Health Security, RAND, Arlington, VA; James Trussell, Office of Population Research, Princeton University; Donald Ylvisaker, Department of Statistics, University of California, Los Angeles; and Alan M. Zaslavsky, Department of Health Care Policy, Harvard Medical School.

Although the reviewers listed above provided many constructive comments and suggestions, they were not asked to endorse the conclusions or recommendations, nor did they see the final draft of the report before its release. The review of the report was overseen by John C. Bailar III, Professor Emeritus, Department of Health Studies, The University of Chicago. Appointed by the National Research Council, he was responsible for making certain that an independent examination of the report was carried out in accordance with institutional procedures and that all review comments were carefully considered. Responsibility for the final content of this report rests entirely with the authoring panel and the institution.

Janet L. Norwood, Chair

Panel to Review the 2000 Census

Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2004. The 2000 Census: Counting Under Adversity. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10907.
×
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2004. The 2000 Census: Counting Under Adversity. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10907.
×
   

2–C  Other Uses of Basic Census Data

 

55

   

2–D  Uses of Additional Data from the Long Form

 

59

   

2–D.1  Federal Government Uses of Long-Form-Sample Data

 

61

   

2–D.2  State and Local Government Uses of Long-Form-Sample Data

 

65

   

2–D.3  Private-Sector Uses of Long-Form-Sample Data

 

66

   

2–D.4  Research Uses of Long-Form-Sample Data

 

67

3

 

The Road to 2000

 

71

   

3–A  The 1990 Experience

 

72

   

3–A.1  Major Operations

 

72

   

3–A.2  Major Problems

 

75

   

3–B  Research and Development Toward 2000

 

77

   

3–B.1  Address List Research: Development of the Master Address File

 

78

   

3–B.2  Questionnaire and Mailing Package Research

 

80

   

3–B.3  Nonresponse Follow-up Research

 

82

   

3–B.4  Coverage Evaluation and Adjustment Research

 

84

   

3–B.5  Efficacy of Research

 

85

   

3–C  Determining the 2000 Design

 

86

   

3–C.1  1991 to 1996

 

86

   

3–C.2  Original Design for 2000

 

87

   

3–C.3  1996 to 1998: Two Dress Rehearsals

 

88

   

3–C.4  1999: Supreme Court Decision

 

91

   

3–C.5  The 2000 Census Design

 

92

   

3–D  Findings and Recommendations

 

92

4

 

Assessment of 2000 Census Operations

 

97

   

4–A  Two Major Operational Achievements

 

98

   

4–A.1  Maintaining Public Cooperation

 

98

   

4–A.2  Controlled Timing and Execution

 

103

   

4–B  Major Contributors to Public Response

 

104

   

4–B.1  Redesigned Questionnaire and Mailing Package

 

105

   

4–B.2  Paid Advertising and Expanded Outreach

 

107

Page xiii Cite
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2004. The 2000 Census: Counting Under Adversity. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10907.
×
   

4–B.3  Mail Response: Summary of Findings and Recommendations

 

113

   

4–C  Major Contributors to Timeliness

 

115

   

4–C.1  Contracting for Operations

 

115

   

4–C.2  Improved Data Capture Technology

 

115

   

4–C.3  Aggressive Recruitment of Enumerators and Implementation of Follow-Up

 

120

   

4–C.4  Timeliness: Summary of Findings

 

124

   

4–D  Timeliness versus Completeness: Greater Reliance on Computers to Treat Missing Data

 

125

   

4–D.1  Strategy

 

125

   

4–D.2  Evaluation

 

126

   

4–D.3  Reliance on Imputation: Summary of Findings and Recommendations

 

133

   

4–E  Master Address File Development: Flawed Execution

 

134

   

4–E.1  Strategy and Implementation

 

134

   

4–E.2  Overall Assessment of MAF Development

 

138

   

4–E.3  Variable Participation in LUCA

 

142

   

4–E.4  2000 MAF Development: Summary of Findings

 

146

   

4–E.5  2010 MAF Development: Recommendation

 

147

   

4–F  Group Quarters Enumeration

 

151

   

4–F.1  Strategy

 

151

   

4–F.2  Implementation Problems

 

152

   

4–F.3  Group Quarters: Summary of Findings and Recommendations

 

155

5

 

Coverage Evaluation: Methods and Background

 

157

   

5–A  Dual-Systems Estimation with the A.C.E.

 

159

   

5–B  Demographic Analysis

 

164

   

5–C  Coverage Evaluation and Adjustment in 1990

 

166

   

5–C.1  Preparing for 1990

 

166

   

5–C.2  PES Design and Operations

 

166

   

5–C.3  July 1991 Adjustment Decision

 

168

   

5–C.4  December 1992 Adjustment Decision

 

169

   

5–C.5  1993–1996 Court Decisions

 

169

   

5–D  Coverage Evaluation and Adjustment in 2000

 

170

   

5–D.1  A.C.E. Design and Operations

 

171

   

5–D.2  March 2001 Adjustment Decision

 

174

Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2004. The 2000 Census: Counting Under Adversity. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10907.
×
   

5–D.3  October 2001 Adjustment Decision

 

179

6

 

The 2000 Coverage Evaluation Program

 

185

   

6–A  Original A.C.E. Design and Operations

 

186

   

6–A.1  Basic Design

 

187

   

6–A.2  Conduct and Timing

 

190

   

6–A.3  Defining the P-Sample: Treatment of Movers

 

190

   

6–A.4  Defining the E-Sample: Exclusion of “Insufficient Information” Cases

 

192

   

6–A.5  Household Noninterviews in the P-Sample

 

193

   

6–A.6  Missing and Unresolved Data in the P-Sample and E-Sample

 

195

   

6–A.7  Accuracy of Household Residence Information

 

199

   

6–A.8  Quality of Matching

 

202

   

6–A.9  Targeted Extended Search

 

204

   

6–A.10  Poststratification

 

206

   

6–A.11  Original A.C.E.: Summary of Findings

 

208

   

6–B  A.C.E. Revision II Estimation Data, Methods, and Results

 

209

   

6–B.1  Reestimation of Erroneous Census Enumerations

 

209

   

6–B.2  Reestimation of Census Omissions

 

217

   

6–B.3  New Models for Missing Data

 

221

   

6–B.4  Refined Poststratification

 

222

   

6–B.5  Adjustment for Correlation Bias

 

223

   

6–B.6  Putting It All Together: The A.C.E. Revision II Estimates

 

226

   

6–B.7  Assessment of Error in the A.C.E. Revision II Estimates

 

232

   

6–C  Factors in Coverage

 

235

   

6–C.1  Whole-Person Imputations

 

235

   

6–C.2  Duplicate Census Enumerations

 

240

   

6–D  What Can We Conclude About Coverage Error in 2000?

 

243

   

6–D.1  A.C.E. Revision II Estimation and Documentation

 

244

   

6–D.2  Comparability with the 1990 PES

 

245

   

6–D.3  Net Coverage Error in 2000, Nation and Poststrata

 

247

Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2004. The 2000 Census: Counting Under Adversity. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10907.
×
   

6–D.4  Coverage Error in 2000, Subnational Areas

 

248

   

6–D.5  Coverage Error in 2000, Group Quarters

 

252

   

6–D.6  Gross Coverage Errors

 

252

   

6–D.7  Comparison with Demographic Analysis

 

253

   

6–D.8  March 2003 Decision Not to Adjust Base for Postcensal Estimates

 

254

   

6–D.9  Revision II Coverage Evaluation Findings

 

258

   

6–E  Recommendations for Coverage Evaluation in 2010

 

261

   

6–E.1  An Improved Accuracy and Coverage Evaluation Program

 

261

   

6–E.2  Improved Demographic Analysis for 2010

 

266

   

6–E.3  Time for Evaluation and Possible Adjustment

 

266

7

 

Assessment of Basic and Long-Form-Sample Data

 

269

   

7–A  Available Quality Measures

 

271

   

7–A.1  Imputation Rates

 

271

   

7–A.2  Consistency Measures

 

272

   

7–A.3  Sample Loss and Variability (Long Form)

 

272

   

7–B  Quality of Basic Demographic Characteristics

 

273

   

7–B.1  Imputation Rates for Complete-Count Basic Items

 

273

   

7–B.2  Missing Data Patterns for Basic Items

 

276

   

7–B.3  Consistency of Responses to Basic Items

 

277

   

7–B.4  Basic Item Imputation and Inconsistency Rates: Summary of Findings

 

280

   

7–C  Quality of Basic and Additional Long-Form Data

 

281

   

7–C.1  Imputation Rates for Basic Items in the Long-Form Sample

 

281

   

7–C.2  Imputation Rates for Additional Long-Form Items

 

282

   

7–C.3  Missing Data Patterns for Additional Items

 

286

   

7–C.4  Consistency of Responses to Long-Form Items

 

288

   

7–C.5  Weighting and Variance Estimation

 

291

   

7–C.6  Long-Form-Sample Data Quality: Summary of Findings and Recommendations

 

294

   

7–D  Quality of Group Quarters Data

 

297

Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2004. The 2000 Census: Counting Under Adversity. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10907.
×
Page xvii Cite
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2004. The 2000 Census: Counting Under Adversity. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10907.
×
   

C  Census Operations

 

379

   

C.1  Master Address File

 

380

   

C.1.a  Initial Development

 

380

   

C.1.b  Local Review

 

381

   

C.1.c  Further Development of MAF

 

384

   

C.1.d  Internal Checks for Duplicates

 

384

   

C.1.e  Comparison: Address List Development in 1990

 

386

   

C.2  Questionnaire Delivery and Mail Return

 

387

   

C.2.a  Redesign of Mailings and Materials to Boost Response

 

390

   

C.2.b  Multiple Response Modes

 

391

   

C.2.c  Comparison: 1990 Questionnaire Delivery and Return

 

392

   

C.3  Field Follow-Up

 

392

   

C.3.a  Nonresponse Follow-Up

 

393

   

C.3.b  Coverage Improvement Follow-Up

 

395

   

C.3.c  Comparison: 1990 Field Follow-Up and Coverage Improvement

 

397

   

C.3.d  Summary: 1990 and 2000

 

400

   

C.4  Outreach Efforts

 

401

   

C.5  Data Processing

 

402

   

C.5.a  Data Capture

 

403

   

C.5.b  Coverage Edit and Telephone Follow-Up

 

403

   

C.5.c  Unduplication of Households and People

 

404

   

C.5.d  Editing and Imputation

 

405

   

C.5.e  Other Data Processing

 

406

   

C.5.f  Comparison: 1990 Data Processing

 

406

   

D  Completeness of Census Returns

 

409

   

D.1  Coverage Completeness: 1990

 

409

   

D.2  Coverage Completeness: 2000

 

410

   

D.2.a  Within-Household Omissions and Erroneous Enumerations by Type of Return

 

410

   

D.2.b  Omissions and Erroneous Enumerations by Mail Return Rate Deciles

 

411

   

D.2.c  Erroneous Enumerations by Domain and Tenure

 

414

Page xviii Cite
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2004. The 2000 Census: Counting Under Adversity. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10907.
×
   

E  A.C.E. Operations

 

417

   

E.1  Sampling, Address Listing, and Housing Unit Match

 

417

   

E.1.a  First-Stage Sampling and Address Listing of Block Clusters

 

418

   

E.1.b  Sample Reduction for Medium and Large Block Clusters

 

419

   

E.1.c  Sample Reduction for Small Block Clusters

 

419

   

E.1.d  Initial Housing Unit Match

 

419

   

E.1.e  Last Step in Sampling: Reduce Housing Units in Large Block Clusters

 

419

   

E.2  P-Sample Interviewing

 

420

   

E.3  Initial Matching and Targeted Extended Search

 

422

   

E.3.a  E-Sample and P-Sample Matching Within Block Cluster

 

423

   

E.3.b  Targeted Extended Search

 

424

   

E.4  Field Follow-Up and Final Matching

 

425

   

E.5  Weighting and Imputation

 

426

   

E.6  Poststrata Estimation

 

428

   

F  Methods for Treating Missing Data

 

433

   

F.1  Overview

 

433

   

F.1.a  Mechanisms for Nonresponse

 

436

   

F.1.b  Implementation Considerations

 

438

   

F.2  Outline of the Current Methodology

 

440

   

F.3  Problems with the Current Methodology

 

442

   

F.4  New Approaches to Imputation and Their Advantages

 

444

   

F.5  New Approaches to Variance Estimation and Their Advantages

 

449

   

F.6  Suggestions for Work for the American Community Survey and the 2010 Census

 

452

   

G  2000 Census Basic (Complete-Count) Data Processing

 

455

   

G.1  Data Capture and Coverage Edit

 

456

   

G.2  Item Imputation and Editing

 

457

   

G.2.a  Imputation Methodology

 

457

   

G.2.b  Example of Edit and Imputation Specifications: Housing Tenure

 

459

   

G.3  Person Imputation

 

462

Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2004. The 2000 Census: Counting Under Adversity. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10907.
×
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2004. The 2000 Census: Counting Under Adversity. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10907.
×

List of Figures

8.1

 

Race and Hispanic Origin Questions, 1990 Census

 

314

8.2

 

Race and Hispanic Origin Questions, 2000 Census

 

315

8.3

 

Imputation Rates for Hispanic Origin by Population (County Level)

 

318

8.4

 

Imputation Rates for Race by Population (County Level)

 

319

8.5

 

Imputation Rates for Hispanic Origin in Census Tracts of Selected Counties

 

320

8.6

 

Imputation Rates for Race in Census Tracts of Selected Counties

 

321

H.1

 

Imputation/Assignment Rates for Housing Items, 2000 and 1990 Census, Persons Receiving the Long Form (weighted)

 

494

Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2004. The 2000 Census: Counting Under Adversity. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10907.
×

List of Tables

2.1

 

Number and Approximate Average Population Size of State Senate and House Districts, by State, 2000

 

56

3.1

 

Decennial Census Costs, Total and Per Housing Unit, 1970–2000 (in constant fiscal year 2000 dollars)

 

94

4.1

 

People Requiring Imputation of All Basic Characteristics by Type of Imputation, 2000, 1990, and 1980 Censuses

 

129

4.2

 

Original and Actual Timelines for the Local Update of Census Addresses (LUCA) Program

 

136

4.3

 

Additions to and Deletions from the 2000 MAF from Major Census Operations in 2000

 

139

4.4

 

Participation of Local Governments in the 2000 Local Update of Census Addresses (LUCA) Program

 

143

5.1

 

Alternative Estimates of the Population and the Percentage Net Undercount, April 2000 (Original March 2001 A.C.E., Base DA, Alternate DA)

 

177

5.2

 

Alternative Survey-Based Estimates of Percentage Net Undercount of the Population, April 2000 (Original A.C.E. and Preliminary Revised A.C.E.) and April 1990 (Revised PES) (standard error percents in parentheses)

 

182

5.3

 

Alternative Demographic Analysis Estimates of Percentage Net Undercount of the Population, April 2000 (Base, Alternate, and Revised DA) and April 1990 (Base and Revised DA)

 

183

6.1

 

Missing Data Rates for Characteristics, 2000 A.C.E. and 1990 PES P-Sample and E-Sample (weighted)

 

196

Page xxii Cite
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2004. The 2000 Census: Counting Under Adversity. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10907.
×

6.2

 

Percentage of 2000 A.C.E. P-Sample People with Imputed Characteristics, by Proxy Interview and Mover Status (weighted)

 

196

6.3

 

Data Sources and Evaluations Used in A.C.E. Revision II

 

210

6.4

 

Sex Ratios (Men per 100 Women) from the Census, Demographic Analysis (DA), Accuracy and Coverage Evaluation (A.C.E.) Revision II, and Post-Enumeration Survey (PES), 1990 and 2000

 

225

6.5

 

Correct Enumeration Rates Estimated from the E-Sample (percents), 2000 A.C.E. and 1990 PES, by Race/Ethnicity Domain and Housing Tenure (weighted)

 

227

6.6

 

Match Rates and Census Inclusion Rates Estimated from the P-Sample (percents), 2000 A.C.E. and 1990 PES, by Race/Ethnicity Domain and Housing Tenure (weighted)

 

228

6.7

 

Estimated Net Undercount Rates for Major Groups (percents), Original 2000 A.C.E. (March 2001), Revision II A.C.E. (March 2003), and 1990 PES (standard error percents in parentheses)

 

229

6.8

 

Components of Change from the Original A.C.E. Net Undercount Rate to the Revision II Net Undercount Rate for Selected Race/Ethnicity Domains

 

233

6.9

 

Percentage Distribution of People Requiring Imputation and Reinstated Records in the 2000 Census, and Percentage Distribution of Total People with Insufficient Information in 1990, by Race/Ethnicity Domain and Housing Tenure and by Age/Sex Categories

 

238

6.10

 

Percent Duplicate Enumerations in 2000 Census by Type for Race/Ethnicity Domains and Age/Sex Groups from the Further Study of Person Duplication

 

242

6.11

 

Estimated Net Undercount Rates (percents), Original 2000 A.C.E. (March 2001), Revised Demographic Analysis (October 2001), and A.C.E. Revision II (March 2003) by Race, Sex, and Age

 

255

7.1

 

Basic Item Imputation Rates, 2000 and 1990 Complete-Count Census, by Type of Form and Race/Ethnicity, Household Population

 

274

7.2

 

Percentage of Household Members Reporting Basic Items, 2000 Census, 2000 A.C.E. E-Sample and Independent P-Sample (weighted)

 

278

7.3

 

Basic Item Imputation Rates, 2000 and 1990 Census Long-Form Sample, Census 2000 Supplementary Survey, and 2000 P-Sample, by Type of Rate and Form, Household Population (weighted)

 

283

Page xxiii Cite
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2004. The 2000 Census: Counting Under Adversity. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10907.
×

7.4

 

Imputation/Assignment Rates for Selected Long-Form Items, 2000 and 1990 Census Long-Form Samples, by Type of Response, Household Population (weighted)

 

285

7.5

 

Imputation Rates for Selected Long-Form Items, 2000 Long-Form Sample and Census 2000 Supplemental Survey, by Type of Response, Household Population (weighted)

 

287

7.6

 

Index of Inconsistency for Selected Long-Form-Sample Items, 2000 and 1990 Content Reinterview Surveys (weighted)

 

290

7.7

 

Whole-Household Nonresponse in the 2000 and 1990 Census Long-Form Samples

 

292

7.8

 

Whole-Person Nonresponse in the 2000 Long-Form Sample, by Race of Reference Person

 

293

7.9

 

Imputation/Assignment Rates for Selected Person Items, 2000 and 1990 Census Long-Form Samples, by Type of Residence, Group Quarters Population (weighted)

 

298

8.1

 

Census Race Categories, 1850–2000

 

306

A.1

 

Meetings of the Panel to Review the 2000 Census

 

356

A.2

 

Site Visits to Regional and Local Census Offices, 2000

 

357

A.3

 

Additional Site Visits to Accuracy and Coverage Evaluation Offices, 2000

 

358

D.1

 

Composition of 2000 Census Households, as Measured in the Original A.C.E. E-Sample, by Enumeration Status, Mail and Enumerator Returns, and Housing Tenure (weighted)

 

412

D.2

 

Rates of P-Sample Omissions, E-Sample Erroneous Enumerations, and P-Sample and E-Sample Unresolved Cases in the Original 2000 A.C.E., by Mail Return Rate Decile of Census Tract (weighted)

 

413

D.3

 

Rates of E-Sample Erroneous Enumerations and Unresolved Cases, in Mailout/Mailback and Update/Leave Types of Enumeration Area (TEA), by Mail or Enumerator Return, Race/Ethnicity Domain, and Housing Tenure, Original 2000 A.C.E. (weighted)

 

416

E.1

 

Distribution of the 2000 A.C.E. P-Sample Block Clusters, Households, and People, by Sampling Stratum (unweighted)

 

421

E.2

 

Distribution of Initial, Intermediate, and Final Weights, 2000 A.C.E. P-Sample and E-Sample

 

427

E.3

 

Poststrata in the Original 2000 A.C.E., 64 Major Groups

 

430

G.1

 

Percent Whole-Person Imputations (Type 1) by Age and Domain/Tenure Category, Household Members, 2000 (Percent)

 

464

Page xxiv Cite
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2004. The 2000 Census: Counting Under Adversity. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10907.
×

G.2

 

Distribution of People Requiring Whole-Household Imputation by Type of Imputation, by Race/Ethnicity Domain and Housing Tenure, 2000 Census

 

467

H.1

 

Imputation/Assignment Rates for Selected Population and Housing Items, 2000 and 1990 Census Long-Form Sample, Household Members, by Type of Response: Household Respondent (Self) vs. Enumerator-Filled (Enum) (weighted)

 

480

H.2

 

Imputation Rates for Selected Population and Housing Items, 2000 Census Long-Form Sample, Household Members, by Race and Hispanic Origin of Household Reference Person (weighted)

 

481

H.3

 

Imputation Rates for Selected Population and Housing Items, 2000 Census Long-Form Sample, Household Members, 10% Worst Census Tracts, by Race and Hispanic Origin of Reference Person (weighted)

 

482

H.4

 

Imputation Rates for Selected Population and Housing Items, 2000 Census Long-Form Sample, Household Members, by Geographic Aggregations (weighted)

 

483

H.5

 

Imputation Rates for Selected Population and Housing Items, 2000 Census Long-Form Sample, Household Members, Worst 10% Census Tracts, by Geographic Aggregations (weighted)

 

484

H.6

 

Imputation Rates for Population Items, 2000 and 1990 Census Long-Form Sample, Household Members (weighted)

 

485

H.7

 

Imputation Rates for Housing Items, 2000 and 1990 Census Long-Form Sample, Household Members (weighted)

 

486

H.8

 

Imputation/Assignment Rates (percents) for Selected Population Items for Group Quarters Residents, 2000 and 1990 Long-Form Samples, by Type of Group Quarters (weighted)

 

487

Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2004. The 2000 Census: Counting Under Adversity. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10907.
×

List of Boxes

2.1

 

Selected 2000 Census Data Products

 

34

2.2

 

Utah v. Evans: Legal Challenges to 2000 Census

 

40

2.3

 

Congressional Redistricting Cases on Population Equality, 1990s

 

48

2.4

 

Congressional Redistricting Cases on Population Equality, 2000s

 

49

2.5

 

State Legislative Redistricting Cases on Population Equality, 1990s

 

50

2.6

 

State Legislative Redistricting Cases on Population Equality, 2000s

 

51

2.7

 

Voting Rights Act Redistricting Cases, 2000s

 

54

3.1

 

Department of Commerce v. U.S. House of Representatives: Sampling in the 2000 Census

 

90

4.1

 

Mail Response and Return Rates

 

100

4.2

 

Imputation Types for Basic (Complete-Count) Characteristics

 

128

4.3

 

Defining Participation in the Local Update of Census Addresses (LUCA) Program

 

144

6.1

 

Alternative Treatment of Duplicate Census Enumerations, Two Examples

 

201

C.1

 

Basic Steps to Develop the Master Address File Prior to Census Day, 2000 and 1990

 

382

C.2

 

Types of Enumeration Areas (TEAs)

 

388

F.1

 

Model-Based versus Model-Free Treatments for Imputation

 

446

F.2

 

EM Algorithm

 

448

Page xxvi Cite
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2004. The 2000 Census: Counting Under Adversity. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10907.
×

G.1

 

Simple Illustration of 2000 Census Hot Deck Imputation Process for a Single Cell of an Imputation Matrix

 

460

Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2004. The 2000 Census: Counting Under Adversity. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10907.
×
PageR1
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2004. The 2000 Census: Counting Under Adversity. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10907.
×
PageR2
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2004. The 2000 Census: Counting Under Adversity. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10907.
×
PageR3
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2004. The 2000 Census: Counting Under Adversity. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10907.
×
PageR4
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2004. The 2000 Census: Counting Under Adversity. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10907.
×
PageR5
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2004. The 2000 Census: Counting Under Adversity. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10907.
×
PageR6
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2004. The 2000 Census: Counting Under Adversity. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10907.
×
PageR7
Page viii Cite
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2004. The 2000 Census: Counting Under Adversity. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10907.
×
PageR8
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2004. The 2000 Census: Counting Under Adversity. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10907.
×
PageR9
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2004. The 2000 Census: Counting Under Adversity. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10907.
×
PageR10
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2004. The 2000 Census: Counting Under Adversity. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10907.
×
PageR11
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2004. The 2000 Census: Counting Under Adversity. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10907.
×
PageR12
Page xiii Cite
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2004. The 2000 Census: Counting Under Adversity. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10907.
×
PageR13
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2004. The 2000 Census: Counting Under Adversity. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10907.
×
PageR14
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2004. The 2000 Census: Counting Under Adversity. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10907.
×
PageR15
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2004. The 2000 Census: Counting Under Adversity. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10907.
×
PageR16
Page xvii Cite
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2004. The 2000 Census: Counting Under Adversity. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10907.
×
PageR17
Page xviii Cite
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2004. The 2000 Census: Counting Under Adversity. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10907.
×
PageR18
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2004. The 2000 Census: Counting Under Adversity. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10907.
×
PageR19
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2004. The 2000 Census: Counting Under Adversity. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10907.
×
PageR20
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2004. The 2000 Census: Counting Under Adversity. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10907.
×
PageR21
Page xxii Cite
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2004. The 2000 Census: Counting Under Adversity. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10907.
×
PageR22
Page xxiii Cite
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2004. The 2000 Census: Counting Under Adversity. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10907.
×
PageR23
Page xxiv Cite
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2004. The 2000 Census: Counting Under Adversity. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10907.
×
PageR24
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2004. The 2000 Census: Counting Under Adversity. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10907.
×
PageR25
Page xxvi Cite
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2004. The 2000 Census: Counting Under Adversity. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10907.
×
PageR26
Next: Executive Summary »
The 2000 Census: Counting Under Adversity Get This Book
×
Buy Hardback | $80.00 Buy Ebook | $64.99
MyNAP members save 10% online.
Login or Register to save!
Download Free PDF

The decennial census was the federal government’s largest and most complex peacetime operation. This report of a panel of the National Research Council’s Committee on National Statistics comprehensively reviews the conduct of the 2000 census and the quality of the resulting data. The panel’s findings cover the planning process for 2000, which was marked by an atmosphere of intense controversy about the proposed role of statistical techniques in the census enumeration and possible adjustment for errors in counting the population. The report addresses the success and problems of major innovations in census operations, the completeness of population coverage in 2000, and the quality of both the basic demographic data collected from all census respondents and the detailed socioeconomic data collected from the census long-form sample (about one-sixth of the population). The panel draws comparisons with the 1990 experience and recommends improvements in the planning process and design for 2010. The 2000 Census: Counting Under Adversity will be an invaluable resource for users of the 2000 data and for policymakers and census planners. It provides a trove of information about the issues that have fueled debate about the census process and about the operations and quality of the nation’s twenty-second decennial enumeration.

  1. ×

    Welcome to OpenBook!

    You're looking at OpenBook, NAP.edu's online reading room since 1999. Based on feedback from you, our users, we've made some improvements that make it easier than ever to read thousands of publications on our website.

    Do you want to take a quick tour of the OpenBook's features?

    No Thanks Take a Tour »
  2. ×

    Show this book's table of contents, where you can jump to any chapter by name.

    « Back Next »
  3. ×

    ...or use these buttons to go back to the previous chapter or skip to the next one.

    « Back Next »
  4. ×

    Jump up to the previous page or down to the next one. Also, you can type in a page number and press Enter to go directly to that page in the book.

    « Back Next »
  5. ×

    Switch between the Original Pages, where you can read the report as it appeared in print, and Text Pages for the web version, where you can highlight and search the text.

    « Back Next »
  6. ×

    To search the entire text of this book, type in your search term here and press Enter.

    « Back Next »
  7. ×

    Share a link to this book page on your preferred social network or via email.

    « Back Next »
  8. ×

    View our suggested citation for this chapter.

    « Back Next »
  9. ×

    Ready to take your reading offline? Click here to buy this book in print or download it as a free PDF, if available.

    « Back Next »
Stay Connected!