Click for next page ( 120


The National Academies | 500 Fifth St. N.W. | Washington, D.C. 20001
Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Terms of Use and Privacy Statement



Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.

OCR for page 119
Bibliography Alexander, C. H. 2002. A discussion of the quality of estimates from the American Community Survey for small population groups. Draft prepared for discussion at the fall 2002 Census Advisory Committee Meetings, Washington, DC. Bailar, B. A. 2000. Census testing. In Encyclopedia of the U.S. Census, M. l. An- clerson, ect., Pp. 62-66. Washington, DC: CQ Press. Barrett, D. F., M. Beaghen, D. Smith, en cl l. Burcham 2001. ESCAP 11: Census 2000 Housing Unit Coverage Stodgy. Execu- tive Steering Committee for A.C.E. Policy IT Supporting Report 17. Washington, DC: U.S. Census Bureau. Bennett, C. E. and D. H. Griffin 2002. Race and Hispanic origin clata: A comparison of results from the Census 2000 Supplementary Survey anc! Census 2000. Paper pre- parect for the August 2002 Joint Statistical Meetings, New York City, NY Burcham, J. L. 2002. Block Canvassing Operation. Census 2000 Evaluation F.5. Washington, DC: U.S. Census Bureau. 119

OCR for page 119
120 PLANNING THE 2010 CENSUS Bureau of the Census 1964. Evaluation and Research Program of the U.S. Censuses of Popu- lation and Housing, 1960: Accuracy of Data on Population Character- istics As Measured by CPS-Census Match. ER 60-5. Washington, DC: U.S. Bureau of the Census. Bureau of the Census 1970. Evaluation and Research Program of the U.S. Censuses of Popu- lation and Housing, 1960: Record Check Study of Accuracy of Income Reporting. ER 60-8. Washington, DC: U.S. Bureau of the Census. Bureau of the Census 1975a. 1970 Census of Population and Housing Evaluation and Re- search Program: Accuracy of Data for Selected Housing Characteristics as Measured by Reinterviews. PHC (E) -10. Washington, DC: U.S. Bu- reau of the Census. Bureau of the Census 1975b. 1970 Census of Population and Housing Evaluation and Re- search Program: Accuracy of Data for Selected Population Characteris- ticsAs Measured by the 1970 CPS-Census Match. PHC(E)-11. Wash- ington, DC: U.S. Bureau of the Census. Carbaugh, L. ~ en cl R. ~ Marx 1990. The TIGER system: A Census Bureau innovation serving data analysts. Government Information Quarterly, 7:285-306. Centech Group, Inc. 2002a. Census 2000 Operational Flow Baseline Report Volume 1: Executive Package. Version 1.2 (Final). Arlington, VA: Centech Group, Inc. Prepared for the U.S. Census Bureau. Centech Group, Inc. 2002b. Census 2000 Operational Flow Baseline Report Volume 2: Detailed Package. Version 1.3 (Final). Arlington, VA: Centech Group, Inc. Prepared for the U.S. Census Bureau. Centech Group, Inc. 2002c. Logical Architecture Re-engineering Exercise. Version 1.1 (Draft). Arlington, VA: Centech Group, Inc. Prepared for the U.S. Census Bureau.

OCR for page 119
BIBLIOGRAPHY 121 Franz, L. M. 2002. 2010 reengineering. Presentation to the Panel on Research on Future Census Methods, September 13, 2002, Washington, DC. Hirschfelct, D. 2000. Aciciress list development. In Encyclopedia of the U.S. Census, M. l. Anderson, ect., Pp. 6-13. Washington, DC: CQ Press. Liaclis, J. S. 2000. GPS TIGER Accuracy Analysis Tools (GLOAT) Evaluation and Test Results. Washington, DC: U.S. Census Bureau. Available: http://www.census.gov/geo/mocl/gtaat2000.pclf f6/1/031. Love, S. 2002. Methodological issues in local area application of the American Community Survey. Presentation prepared for the August 2002 loins statistical Meetings, New York Citv. NY Lowenthal, T. A. , , 2003a. American Community Survey start woulc! be clelayoc! fur- ther uncler presiclent's budget proposal for 2004. Census News Brief posted to http://www.census2000.org, February 10. Lowenthal, T. A. 2003b. President Bush sends FY04 budget to Congress; Census Bu- reau woulct scale back test plans uncler proposed functing levels. Cen- sus News Brief posted to http://www.census2000.org, February 4. Marx, R. ~ 1986. The TIGER system: Automating the geographic structure of the United States census. Government Publications Review, 13:68- 78. Nash, F. F. 2000. Overview of the Duplicate Housing Unit Operations. Washing- ton, DC: U.S. Census Bureau. National Research Council 1995. Modernizing the U.S. Census. Panel on Census Requirements in the Year 2000 anct Beyond, Barry Ecimonston anct Charles Schultze,

OCR for page 119
122 PLANNING THE 2010 CENSUS ecis., Committee on National Statistics. Washington, DC: National Academy Press. National Research Council 1996. Continued Review of the Tax Systems Modernization of the Internal Revenue Service: Final Report. Committee on Continucc! Review of the Tax Systems Modernization of the Internal Revenue Service, Computer Science anc! Telecommunications Board. Wash- ington, DC: National Academy Press. National Research Council 1999. Measuring a Changing Nation: Modern Methods for the 2000 Census. Panel on Alternative Census Methodologies, Michael L. Co- hen, Andrew A. White, en cl Keith F. Rust, eels., Committee on Na- tional Statistics. Washington, DC: National Academy Press. National Research Council 2000. Designing the 2010 Census: First Interim Report. Panel on Re- search on Future Census Methods, Michael L. Cohen anct Benjamin F. King, ecis., Committee on National Statistics. Washington, DC: National Academy Press. National Research Council 2001a. The 2000 Census: Interim Assessment. Panel to Review the 2000 Census, Constance F. Citro, Daniel L. Cork, anc! Janet L. Nor- wooct, ects., Committee on National Statistics. Washington, DC: Na- tional Academy Press. National Research Council 2001b. The American Community Survey: Report of a Work- shop. Committee on National Statistics. Washington, DC: National Academy Press. National Research Council 2001c. Letter to William G. Barron, acting director, U.S. Census Bureau. Dated February 15. Panel on Research on Future Census Methocls, Committee on National Statistics. Washington, DC: Na- tional Academy Press. O'Gracly, K. 2000. A DOQ Test Project: Collecting Data to Improve TIGER.

OCR for page 119
BIBLIOGRAPHY Washington, DC: U.S. Census Bureau. census.gov/geo/mocl/esri paper.pclf t6/1/03 | . 123 Available: http://www. O'Gracly, K. and L. Goclwin 2000. The Positional Accuracy of MAF/TIGER. Washington, DC: U.S. Census Bureau. Available: http://www.census.gov/geo/mocI/ positional accuracy.pclf ~6/1/033. O'Hara, C. and D. Caterinicchia 2001. Census' hunt for accuracy. Federal Computer Week, P. 10. Owens, K. L. 2002. Evaluation of the Local Update of Census Addresses 99 (LUCA 999. Census 2000 Evaluation F.6. Washington, DC: U.S. Census Bu- reau. Rosenson, P. 2001. Automated Updating of TIGER from Locally Developed Geospatial Data Bases. Geography Division Report (unpublishecl). Washington, DC: U.S. Census Bureau. Ruhnke, M. C. 2002. The Address Listing Operation and Its Impact on the Master Address File. Census 2000 Evaluation F.2. Washington, DC: U.S. Census Bureau. Salvo,l.~.anclA.P.Lobo 2002. The American Community Survey: Quality of response by mocle of data collection in the Bronx test site. Paper prepared for the August 2002 Toint Statistical Meeting New York City, NY. c, ~ c,, Tenebaum, M. 2002. Assessment of Field Verification. Census 2000 Evaluation H.2. Washington, DC: U.S. Census Bureau. Thibaucleau, ~ 2002. Model Explicit Item Imputation for Demographic Categories for Census 2000. Research Report RR-99-02. Washington, DC: U.S. Census Bureau.

OCR for page 119
124 U.S. Census Bureau PLANNING THE 2010 CENSUS 2000. System Architecture, Version 2.0. U.S. Census Bureau, Washing- ton, DC. U.S. Census Bureau 2001. TIGER Documentation v. 7.0. Geography Division, U.S. Cen- sus Bureau, Washington, DC. U.S. Census Bureau 2002a. Census 2000 Testing, Experimentation, and Evaluation Pro- gram. Washington, DC: U.S. Census Bureau. May 2002 Update. Available: http://www.census.gov/precl/www/summary-report.pclf t6/1/033. U.S. Census Bureau . 2002b. Meeting 21st Century Demographic Data Needs- Implementing the American Community Survey: May 2002; Report 2: Demonstrating Survey Quality. Washington. DC: U.S. Census ~ 1 1 1 1 / / c, , Bureau. Available: http://www.census.gov/acs/www/Downloacts/ ReportO2.pclf t6/1/033. U.S. Census Bureau 2003a. American Community Survey Operations Plan, Release 1: March 2003. Washington, DC: U.S. Census Bureau. Avail- able: http://www.census.gov/acs/www/Downloacis/OpsPlanfinal. pelf ~6/1/033. U.S. Census Bureau 2003b. Census 2000 Testing, Experimentation, and Evaluation Pro- gram Summary Documentation: Program Modify cations since May 2002. Washington, DC: U.S. Census Bureau. Available: http: //www.census.gov/precI/www/Mocis5 02.pcif t6/1/031. U.S. Census Bureau, Geography Division 1999. The Census Breams Master Address File (MAE): Census 2000 Address List Basics. Washington, DC: U.S. Census Bureau. Available: http://www.census.gov/geo/moct/maf basics.pcif ~6/1/03] . U.S. Census Bureau, Geography Division 2000. The Global Positioning Systems Test Project: A Report of the

OCR for page 119
BIBLIOGRAPHY 125 Newberry County, South Carolina Field Test. Washington, DC: U.S. Census Bureau. Available: http://www.census.cov/ceo/mocI/ gps test.pclf ~6/1/033. - -A -' ~ ,~~ ~ ~ - - ~ U.S. Census Bureau, Mobile Computing Device Working Group 2002. Map Display Usability Test Gloucester County, Washington, DC: U.S. Census Bureau. U.S. Census Bureau, Public Information Office Virginia. 2002. On the roac! to Census 2010: Georgia, Illinois anc! New York areas selectee! as test sites. Press release, October 3. U.S. Census Bureau, Public Information Office 2003a. Census Bureau to test changes in questionnaire, new response technology. Press release, January 15. U.S. Census Bureau, Public Information Office 2003b. U.S. Census Bureau to count Americans in France, Kuwait anct Mexico. Press release, January 16. U.S. Department of Commerce, Office of Inspector General 2000. Bureau of the Census: PAMS/ADAMS Should ProvideAde- q?~ate Support for the Decennial Census, but Software Practices Need Improvement. OSE-11684. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Commerce. U.S. Department of Commerce, Office of Inspector General 2002. Improving O?~rMeas?~reofAmerica: What Census 2000 Can Teach Us in Planning for 2010. OIG-14431. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Commerce. U.S. General Accounting Office 2002a. The American Community Survey: Accuracy and Timeliness Issues. GAO-02-956R. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office. U.S. General Accounting Office 2002b. Legal Authority for American Community Survey. Letter Re- port B-289852. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.

OCR for page 119
126 Waite, P. J. PLANNING THE 2010 CENSUS 2002. 2010 census reengineering. Presentation to the Panel on Re- search on Future Census Methods, September 13,2002, Washington, DC. Working Group on LUCA 2001. Assessment of the 2000 Census LUCA Program. Washington, DC: Committee on National Statistics. Zajac, K. J. 2002. List/Enumerate. Census 2000 Evaluation F.13. Washington, DC: U.S. Census Bureau. Zaslavsky, A. M. anct A. L. Schirm 1998. Interactions between the American Community Survey es- timates anct federal functing formulae: A look ahead. In American Community Survey Workshop Technical Papers. Washington, DC: Committee on National Statistics, National Research Council. Zaslavsky, A. M. and A. L. Schirm 2002. Interactions between survey estimates anct federal functing for- mulas. fournal of Official Statistics, 18(3):371-392.