the quality of the MAF and the contribution (of both good and erroneous addresses) of the Local Update of Census Addresses Program and other sources;
sources of addresses of people deleted from and reinstated in the census;
reasons for larger numbers of people requiring imputation to complete their census records, such as possible problems with follow-up operations; and
evaluations of the computerized routines used for imputation.
In addition, as soon as practicable, the important demographic and socioeconomic information collected in the census long form (sent to a one-sixth sample of households) should be evaluated.
The A.C.E. operations and results were analyzed extensively by the Census Bureau prior to March 2001, but those studies left important unanswered questions, such as about the quality of the matching. The Bureau is completing additional studies that will be released in mid-October. Further research that should be conducted on the A.C.E. includes evaluation of the population strata used for estimation and sensitivity analysis of the components of the process (e.g., matching, treatment of people who moved between Census Day and the A.C.E. interview day) to help establish error bounds for the dual-systems estimates.
The Census Bureau is conducting additional evaluations of components of demographic analysis for release in mid-October. Further work is needed—particularly to improve estimates of immigration and emigration—if the results of demographic analysis are to be useful for census coverage evaluation. We urge the Bureau to increase its resources for demographic analysis. It should lead a research effort by appropriate federal agencies and outside experts to develop improved methods and sources of data for estimating legal and illegal immigrants in surveys and administrative records as input to demographic analysis and for other uses.