Reengineering the 2010 Census Risks and Challenges (2004) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:
III The Census Bureau's Research and Research Design
III The Census Bureau's Research and Research Design
8 Evaluations
Pages 205-224
The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.
From page 205... ...
Part Ill The Census Bureau's Research and Research Design
|
From page 208... ...
In Section 8-A, we outline major challenges that we perceive in defining evaluation studies for the 2010 census and, more broadly, redefining the research and evaluation program of the Census Bureau. In Section 8-B, we describe the Master Trace Sample, an evaluation too]
|
From page 209... ...
of the evaluation studies released to date. Too often, the evaluations do not clearly answer the needs of relevant audiences, which include 2000 census data users who are interested in data quality issues that bear on their analyses and Census Bureau staff and others who are concerned with the lessons from the 2000 experience that can inform 2010 planning.
|
From page 210... ...
In our first interim report (National Research Council, 2000a:28-29) , we recommended that the Census Bureau "develop a detailed plan for each evaluation study on how to analyze the data collected and how to use the results in decision making." Specifically, we suggested that these plans "include detailed information on how the data will be analyzed, how the results obtained will inform decisions about the 2010 census design, and what resources, in terms of data collection costs and staff expertise, are required." We continue to believe that a strong connection between a research base and operational decisions is vital.
|
From page 211... ...
the decision to limit the number of persons who can respond on the basic census return form from 7 to 6 in 2000, which served the need to shorten the form but may have had unintended consequences for the reporting of large households. As it designs its research and evaluation program for 2010, the Census Bureau should work to bridge the gap between research and operations in the census process; evaluations should be forward-Iooking and designed to inform and satisfy specific planning objectives.
|
From page 212... ...
to meet the needs of users and census planners and set evaluation priorities accor~lingly; 2. design and document data collection and processing systems so that information can be readily extracted to support timely, useful evaluation studies; 3.
|
From page 213... ...
Just as it is likely that canvassing for addresses in selected areas may be effective relative to a blanket block canvass, so too is it likely that the accuracy of the count of special hard-to-count populations may be improved by tailoring questionnaires and enumeration methodologies to reach them. Accordingly, we recommend: Recommendation 8.2: A major focus of the Census Bureau's ongoing research and evaluation program must be opportunities for targeting and efficiencytailoring approaches to key population groups anti areas rather than pursuing a "one-size-fits-all" approach.
|
From page 214... ...
9.14: Recommendation 8.3: The Census Bureau must mine and fully exploit data resources currently available in order to build a research base for the 20 ~ 0 census and to further evaluate the 2000 census. These resources include: · microtlata from the 2000 Accuracy anti Coverage Evaluation anti its related Person Duplication Studies; · extracts from the Master Atl~lress File; · the Local Census Office Profile dataset;i ~ Created as part of the 2000 census evaluations program, the Local Census Office Profile (Imel, 2003)
|
From page 215... ...
6.3) "that the Census Bureau keep machine-readable records on the follow-up history of individual households in the upcoming pretests, and for a sample of areas in the 1990 census, so that information for detailed analysis of the cost and error structures of conducting census follow-up operations on a sample basis will be available." Three years later, the idea had developed into a fuller proposal; in a brief report evaluating the projects for the REX (research, evaluation, and experimentation)
|
From page 216... ...
For various reasons among them the overwhelming task of preparing for dual-systems estimation and subsequent coverage evaluation the Bureau did not put the master trace sample idea into practice in 1990. But the concept of maintaining, pulling together, and analyzing detailed records of field operations took root.
|
From page 217... ...
217 National Research Council (1999) continues with additional suggestions for data sources for inclusion in the Master Trace Sample, including measures of interviewer quality, results of unduplication programs, and information from the then-planned Integrated Coverage Measurement (later replaced by the Accuracy and Coverage Evaluation, or ACE, Program)
|
From page 218... ...
was briefed on Census Bureau plans to implement a Master Trace Sample based on the 2000 census, including the proposed contents of the database and its intended uses. At that briefing, the issue of potential research questions about which the pane]
|
From page 219... ...
Consisting of only eight text pages, the report confirmed the structural requirements and related questions noted at the March briefing. According to the report, "the MTS database links micro-level data from various stages of the Census 2000 project such as address frame development, data collection, data capture, data processing, and enumeration contact records" (Hill and Machowski, 2003:44.
|
From page 220... ...
Among its limitations, the Master Trace Sample report notes that the database does not have Census 2000 person or housing unit coverage data from ACE; it excludes special places and group quarters; it does not include "the various Local Update of Census Addresses (LUCA) files or the bulk of the MAE extract files used to update the DMAF" (Hill and Machowski, 2003:64.
|
From page 221... ...
These studies should be prioritized and then contluctetl as resources permit. Recommendation 8.5: The Master Trace Sample from the 2000 census should be expantletl to include data from group quarters enumeration, the Accuracy anti Coverage Evaluation, anti the Local Update of Census Addresses Program.
|
From page 222... ...
Recommendation 8.6: The Census Bureau should explore ways to allow the broader research community to perform analyses using the 2000 Master Trace Sample, subject to confi`lentiality limitations. Our final recommendation is as follows: Recommendation 8.7: The Census Bureau should carry out its future development in this area of tracing all aspects of census operations with the ultimate aim of creating a Master Trace System, ~leveloping a capacity for real-time evaluation by linking census operational databases as currently Lone by the Mas
|
From page 223... ...
Such a system should be seriously pursued by the Census Bureau, whether or not it can be attained by 2010 (or even by 2020~.
|
Key Terms
This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
More
information on Chapter Skim is available.