opment of the Master Address File; failure to plan effectively for the use of administrative records in enumerating group quarters residents; errors in assigning group quarters to the correct geographic areas; and poorly controlled tracking and case management for group quarters. In addition, there was no program to evaluate the completeness of population coverage in group quarters.

Enumeration procedures for group quarters residents need re-thinking and redesign from top to bottom if the 2010 census is to improve on the poor performance in 2000. Questionnaire content and design also need to be rethought to obtain higher quality data (see Section 7-D), including the possibility of asking residents for alternate addresses to facilitate unduplication (e.g., home addresses for college students and prisoners). Given the increase in population of people in some types of group quarters and the lack of other data sources for group quarters residents, improvement in the enumeration of group quarters should be a high-priority goal for the 2010 census. Tracking systems should be built into the enumeration not only to facilitate a high-quality operation but also to support subsequent evaluation.

Recommendation 4.4: The Census Bureau must thoroughly evaluate and completely redesign the processes related to group quarters populations for the 2010 census, adapting the design as needed for different types of group quarters. This effort should include consideration of clearer definitions for group quarters, redesign of questionnaires and data content as appropriate, and improvement of the address listing, enumeration, and coverage evaluation processes for group quarters.

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