Counting the People in 1980: AN APPRAISAL OF CENSUS PLANS (1978)

Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

Countingthe People in 1980: AN APPRAISAL OF CENSUS PLANS , Panel on Decennial Census Plans Committee on National Statistics . Assembly of Behavioral and Social Sciences .. ,National Research Council NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES Washington, D.C. 1978 NAS-NAE NOV2 0 1978 LIBRARY 

,{ JI j-1 .i 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 C<>nlllittee responsible for the report were chosen for their special competences and with regard for appropriate balance. This report has been reviewed by a group other than the authors according to procedures approved by a Report Review Committee consisting of members of the National Academy of Sciences. the National Academy of Engineering. and the Institute of Medicine. International standard Book Number 0-309-02797-7 Library of Congress Catalog Card Number 78-70863 Available from Office of Publications National Academy of sciences 2101 Constitution Avenue. N.W. Washington. o.c. 20418 Printed in the united states of America 

PANELON DECENNIALCENSUSPLANS NATHANKEYFITZ (Chairman). Department of sociology and Demography. Harvard University PATRICIA c. BECKER. Department for Planning. City of Detroit CHARLESF. CANNELL.Institute for Social Research. University of Michigan WAYNEA. DANIELSON.school of Communication. University of Texas WALTERE. DUFFETT. The Conference Board in Canada (retired) LEOBARDO F. ESTRADA, SChool of Architecture and Urban Planning, University of california LESTER R. FRANKEL, Audits & Surveys, Inc •• New York CHARLESB. KEELY. Center for Policy studies of the Population Council. New York HYLANLEWIS. Department of Sociology. Graduate Center. City University of New York DWAINEMARVICK.Department of Political science. University of california JAMES N. ~RGAN. Institute for social Research. University of Michigan PRISCILLA C. REINING. Office of International science. American Association for the Advancement of Science. Washington. D.c. T. JAMESTRUSSELL. Office of Population Research. Princeton University EDDIE N. WILLIAMS, Joint Center for Political Studies. Washington. D.c. LENOREE. BIXBY. staff Officer BAROIDGOLDSTEIN. staff Officer JESSICA A. KAPLAN. Research Assistant iii 

COMMITTEEON NATIONALSTATISTICS CONRADTAEUBER(Chairman), Associate Director, Center for Population Research, Georgetown University MORRISH. DEGROOT(Associate Chairman), Department of Statistics, Carnegie-Mellon University DAVIDR. BRILLINGER, Department of statistics, University of California, Berkeley STEPHENE. FIENBERG, Department of Applied Statistics, University of Minnesota CLIFFORDG. HILDRETH, center for Economic Research, University of Minnesota J. S'IUARTHUNTER, school of Engineering and Applied science, Princeton University NATHANKEYFITZ, Center for Population Studies, Harvard tmiversity BOWARD LEVENE, Department of Mathematical Statistics, Columbia University NANCYR. MANN,Department of Operations Research, George Washington University PAUL MEIER, Department of Statistics, University of Chicago GEX>FFREY H. MOORE,Vice President for Research, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc., New York INGRAMOLKIN, Department of Statistics, stanford University EDWARD R. TUFTE, Department of Political Science, Yale University iv 

CONTENTS Preface vii 1. '!be Problem of the Undercount 1 2. Follow-Up to America•s uncounted People 20 3. Plans for the 1980 Census 30 Procedures to Improve Completeness of Coverage Census Staffing Problems and Issues The Public Information and Community Relations Programs The Questionnaire and Its Effect on Response Race and Ethnic origin Household Composition "• Plans for Local Review and Procedures for Handling Contested Counts 86 s. Feasibility of Adjusting Local Census Counts and Population Estimates 91 6. Evaluation of the 1980 Census and Steps to Improve Future Censuses 116 7. Conclusions and Recommendations 126 Appendices A. Tables of Underenumeration Rates by State and Estimates of the Distribution of $1 Billion by Various Methods 135 B. Facsimiles of Questionnaires and Instruction Sheets for 1978 Census of the Richmond. Virginia, Area 1"1 c. Table of Residence Rules for Enumerators and Editors 168 D. selected Bibliography 172 E. Biographical Sketches of Panel Members and staff 178 V 



PREFACE The census count of the population has never been complete. and public concern about incompeteness is increasing. The census is relied on more heavily than ever for mtters in which incompleteness is not easily tolerated--specifically. the distribution of revenue sharing and other federal funds. At the same time, improved statistical techniques permit the Census Bureau to estimate incompleteness with greater accuracy than in the past. Thus. concern about the census springs. ironically, on one hand. from the highly professional work of the census Bureau and, on the other hand. from the extraordinary confidence in the Census Bureau that is implicit in the way Congress mandates the distribution of large amounts of federal funds. The growth of grant programs with population-based formulas, including federal revenue sharing, and the principle of •one-man, one- vote• have put fresh emphasis on the accuracy of the counts for states and for the smallest political entities. The Census Bureau has attempted to improve its procedures and to strengthen its relations with minority groups in an effort to reduce underenumeration. Despite these improvements, however, at present no way of sharply reducing or entirely eliminating the undercount is known. concern about the undercount issue has led to a number of legislative proposals. Although the objectives of the proposed legislation address the relevant issues, serious defects in some specific proposals have been pointed out by diverse groups--the Census Bureau, professional statisticians, demographers and other social scientists. and organizations of federal data users representing a wide spectrum of interests. This brief sumnary describes the background for the request of the Secretary of Commerce to the Committee on National Statistics of the National Research Council (NRC) to undertaken an independent evaluation of the technical and procedural designs for the 1980 census. In 1969, the National Academy of Sciences had established the Advisory Committee on Problems of Census Enumeration to conduct a study for the Census Bureau on ways to improve the completeness and accuracy of information collected in the decennial censuses and in intercensal household surwys conducted by the BUJ:eau and other government agencies. The report of that conmittee, Alperica•s Uncounted People. was published in 1972. A review of its reconmendations and how they have been implemented is included in this report. In response to the secretary's request, under the supervision of the Co11111itteeon National Statistics, a 1fl-member Panel on Decennial Census Plans was established in December 1977. The Panel was composed of individuals knowledgeable about statistics, communications, demography. sociology, economics, and anthropology and experienced in the conduct of large-scale surveys as well as in city planning. (Biographical sketches of all Panel members appear in Appendix E.) vii 

'lhe Panel was given four charges: 1. To examine decennial census improvement plans. In addition to considering proposed field procedures, to review strategies for increasing community participation, the anticipated impact of selected questions on response rates, and other matters related to public cooperation with the census. 2. To review proposed procedures for handling contested counts. 3. To investigate the feasibility of adjusting census counts, and subsequent population esti•tes, for underenumeration, and assess the implications of such procedures. 4. To consider plans to evaluate the 1980 census and recoamend steps to improve planning for subsequent censuses. In order that Panel recommendations might influence the 1980 census, the evaluation was to be completed in six months. '!be Panel interpreted its terms of referenc~ fairly strictly. some tangential matters do have the same effect as the undercount--for instance, the accuracy of reporting of income in the census, which affects the distribution of federal funds among geographic areas. Our time was limited and we did not try to deal with these other matters. 'lhe full Panel held three meetings--in January. February, and April, 1978. In addition. several groups of Panel members met separately to work on particular issues. All Panel members participated in the writing of the report, either by individually drafting a section or by preparing a draft in cooperation with others. The staff also wrote parts of the report and made a cohesive whole out of these disparate sections. '!bus, this report represents the Panel's consensus, with creative input and active participation by all. Contact was established with two congressional subcommitteees overseeing the census: the Bouse subcommittee on Census and Population and the Senate Subcommittee on Energy, Nuclear Proliferation, and Federal services. Staff from these subcommittees provided the Panel with copies of recent congressional hearings that were useful in suamarizing public opinion, the viewpoints of coamunity groups, and the positions of state and local governments about different aspects of the undercount problem. 'l'fO Panel members, who are also members of the Census Bureau's advisory committees for the 1980 census on the black and on the Spanish-origin populations, respectively, have been able to convey to the Panel the concerns of those groups. The chairman and chairman- elect of the Asian and Pacific Americans advisory committee met with the staff to present the views and concerns of that group. In the time available, the Panel could not make a thorough study of all the difficult issues involved in the taking of a census. It is our hope. however, that this review by an outside group with expertise in a variety of fields related to the conduct of a census has been able to bring an independent viewpoint to the examination of selected issues. we have tried to focus on realistic options for dealing with the undercount. We hope the questions raised and recommendations suggested will be helpful to the Department of Commerce and the census Bureau as they proceed with plans for the iq:,ortant task of conducting the 1980 census. 'lhe Panel has studied the actions that the Census Bureau proposes to take, and, in the report that follows. we coamend some, cri.ticize some, and add specific recommendations of our own. some of these last might be incorporated in the remaining dress rehearsals, some in the 1980 census, some not until the censuses of 1985 and 1990. The Panel has been aided by the cooperation of the staff of the· Census Bureau. Key personnel spoke to the entire Panel at the first viii 

meeting. detailing results of the pretest censuses and outlining plans for the upcoming census. Panel members and staff visited the Census Bureau and studied the extensive documentation that was made available to us. 'l'he Panel recognizes and appreciates the time and effort given by Manuel D. Plotkin. director. and the staff of the Census Bureau to ensure that Panel members were kept fully informed. In particular. we wish to thank sherry Courtland. assistant chief. program and policy development office. our liaison with the Census Bureau. and David L. Kaplan. assistant director for demographic censuses: they wi~lingly answered our questions (or directed us to those who could) and freely shared their expertise. '!he Panel•s work and this report bear the marks of the Committee on National statistics at many points. Committee members read and reread our drafts and offered much useful advice: Margaret E. Martin. executive director of the Conmittee when our work began. provided invaluable guidance to the Panel; Edwin D. Goldfield. present executive director. was generous with advice; and the Committee•s entire support staff helped in many ways throughout the preparation of the report. This report also benefited from coaaents by several members of the Assembly of Behavioral and social Sciences and several outside experts. who gave generously of their time to serve as reviewers. and from the editorial skill of Eugenia Grohman. executive associate/editor. Assembly of Behavioral and Social sciences. Finally. the Panel staff--Lenore E. Bixby. Harold Goldstein. and Jessica A. Kaplan--had the responsibility of coordinating project activities and the difficult task of synthesizing numerous sections into one report. If our finished report has merit. it is largely due to their technical competence and editorial skill. Nathan Keyfitz. Olairman Panel on Decennial Census Plans ix