Once, Only Once, and in the Right Place Residence Rules in the Decennial Census (2006) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:
Executive Summary
Executive Summary
Pages 1-12
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 1... ...
As it began reworking the residence rules for the 2010 census, the Census Bureau requested that the National Academies' Committee on National Statistics (CNSTAT) convene this Panel on Residence Rules in the Decennial Census, charged to: examine census residence rule issues and make recommendations for re search and testing to develop the most important residence rules for the 1
|
From page 2... ...
Though the concept inherits from a long tradition of practice dating to the 1790 census act, active census law and regulation do not define the residence standard for the decennial census (de jure or de facto) , nor do they define what constitutes "usual residence." Accordingly, census rules and procedures for defining residence are prime candidates for periodic review, such as we provide in this report.
|
From page 3... ...
Under the normal census calendar, the mass mailout of census questionnaires begins in mid-March; this early mailout is essential, given the operational complexity of the census and statutorily fixed deadlines for the release of selected census results. However, the problem lies in encouraging rapid return of census questionnaires, possibly before the Census Day reference date.
|
From page 4... ...
Questions, Not Instructions The 2000 and other recent censuses put the onus of interpreting and applying residence concepts on respondents, using limited instructional text and lists of specific groups of people to include or exclude to try to lead respondents to follow the Census Bureau's unwritten concept of residence. The 2000 census form was more visually attractive and easier to follow than its instruction-heavy 1990 counterpart, but it still forced respondents to adhere to instructions that they may not have bothered to read or could not easily understand, absorb a complex concept on the basis of limited information, and accept interpretations of residence they may not share.
|
From page 5... ...
The principal addition that is needed is a question that asks whether each person has any other residence. Foreign censuses have found ways to collect auxiliary address information with an economy of space, and the Bureau's own valuable work in matching the complete set of 2000 census results against itself (using probability models based on name and date of birth)
|
From page 6... ...
We endorse the recommendations of previous CNSTAT panels that the Census Bureau's efforts to continually update the MAF are vitally important and need careful planning. The Bureau must find ways to solicit and use input from local and tribal authorities in updating and correcting the MAF on a regular basis, with particular attention to obtaining information on unusual housing stock (such as multiple housing units inside family homes, leased hotel or motel quarters)
|
From page 7... ...
was particularly rushed and not given ample consideration. We strongly urge that participants in 2010 census local geographic partnership programs should be allowed to review address listings for group quarters in their jurisdictions, not just the household population listings.
|
From page 8... ...
The Census Bureau should also develop a spreadsheet-type ledger form that reflects the reality that some "responses" will have to be obtained from facility administrative records or a central "gatekeeper." People in Prisons A particular issue involving the group quarters/nonhousehold population that has drawn considerable attention in the buildup to the 2010 census is whether prisoners should be counted at the prison location or at some other place. A provision in the Census Bureau's 2006 appropriations required it to provide Congress with a report on the feasibility of counting prisoners at a "permanent home of record." Major growth in the prison population, accompanied by expansion in the number of correctional facilities maintained by the federal government and the states, has prompted challenges to the Census Bureau's "usual residence" standard regarding the counting of the incarcerated population.
|
From page 9... ...
Even with enhanced efforts to facilitate direct interviews in prisons, it is only realistic to assume that a major share of the prison population in 2010 will have to be counted using administrative and prison records. Hence, any prospect for counting prisoners at locations other than the prison depends vitally on the com pleteness, consistency, and accessibility of records maintained by indi vidual prisons or by state and federal departments of corrections.
|
From page 10... ...
to reach conclusions about the effectiveness of changes in census enumeration procedures. As a consequence many important questions about the effectiveness of residence rules do not get addressed effectively.
|
From page 11... ...
Specifically, the ACS uses a "two-month rule" or "current residence" concept that is akin to a de facto standard, while the decennial census "usual residence" standard is a de jure type. The nature and extent of interpretation problems that may arise due to these discrepant standards is vital to evaluating both.
|
From page 12... ...
Focus on duplication is important; however, Census Bureau research on living situations that do not easily fit census residence rules should strive to gather data on the sources of omissions in the census, as well as sources of duplication. In addition, a comprehensive assessment of the components of gross coverage error (both undercount and overcount)
|
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.