The following HTML text is provided to enhance online
readability. Many aspects of typography translate only awkwardly to HTML.
Please use the page image
as the authoritative form to ensure accuracy.
Research and Plans for Coverage Measurement in the 2010 Census: Interim Assessment: Panel on Coverage Evaluation and Correlation Bias in the 2010 Census
differential undercount as an unlikely contingency, but what would be done in that event is deserving of greater consideration by the Census Bureau.
Finally, the Census Bureau’s current program for research on coverage measurement is not as comprehensive as might be desired. The panel has therefore slightly expanded our scope in this report by suggesting additional activities that would support component census coverage error measurement. By doing this, we hope to encourage the Census Bureau to allocate greater resources to this effort in the years remaining prior to 2010.
ORGANIZATION OF THE REPORT
Following this introduction, this report consists of three chapters. Chapter 2 defines the components of census error, describes how census errors are measured through the use of DSE and demographic analysis, and then outlines the three purposes of census coverage measurement: the measurement of census quality, census process improvement, and potential census adjustment. Chapter 3 describes and assesses the Census Bureau’s current research program on coverage evaluation. It begins by listing the limitations of the 2000 A.C.E. for measuring component census errors and describing differences between the 2010 and 2000 census plans as well as plans for the coverage evaluation program in the 2006 test census. Next it describes the major topics of the current coverage evaluation research program, including measuring components of census error, models for net coverage error, contamination due to the extension of the CFU interview, the sample design for the CCM postenumeration survey, and use of the E-StARS administrative records system in coverage measurement. Chapter 4 describes the value of integrating census process data, and person, household, and area characteristics data, with census component coverage error data. It further argues that 2000 A.C.E. data can still be used to inform the design of the coverage measurement program in 2010. Finally, the issue of user requirements for documentation and tabulation of census coverage errors in 2010 is raised.