Proceedings, Second Workshop Panel to Review the 2000 Census (2001) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:
Proceedings
Proceedings
Pages 1-123
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... ...
We have listened to the Census Bureau describe its plans. We visited census offices during the dress rehearsal and visited several of the processing centers.
|
From page 2... ...
We have eight participants who are sitting toward the front here, who will be participants: Barbara Bailar from NORC [National Opinion Research Centeri; Stephen Fienberg from Carnegie Mellon; David Freedman, University of California at Berkeley; Bruce Spencer, from Northwestern; Philip Stark, University of California at Berkeley; Marty Wells from Cornell; Don Ylvisaker, University of California at Los Angeles; and Alan ZasTavsky, from Harvard. We have some other invited guests as well, whom I would like to introduce: Lynne Billard, from the University of Georgia; Hermann Habermann, from the United Nations; Charlie Tones; Ben King, who is chairman of the Committee on National Statistics Pane} on 2010; ~ Mary MuIry; John Rolph, from the University of Southern California, also chair of the Committee on National Statistics; and Kirk WoTter, from NORC.
|
From page 3... ...
Third, of course, and by far the most important issue as far as we are concerned because it is, fortunately, factbased—are the serious (differences of opinion and viewpoint about whether DSE will actually improve census coverage and counts. Let note just talk about each of those very briefly.
|
From page 4... ...
It is not the task of this meeting. Nevertheless, I think this meeting ought to be aware of the fact that anything that we can do to make it clear that this is a debate about a technical issue, that it is fact-based, that there are reasonable differences of viewpoint about whether DSE will improve the census coverage, and that it has nothing to do with anybody's partisan affiliations or interests the more that the statistical community can make that statement, the better it is for all of us.
|
From page 5... ...
That is why we are so pleased by the day-and-a-half, as we turn to that. The issues of, obviously, correlation bias and heterogeneity assumptions and the fifth cell and the "wily trout" and all those kinds of issues, are extremely important, to see how wide the (lifferences of viewpoint are within the statistical community.
|
From page 6... ...
We have delivered well over 90 percent of the materials to the local governn~ents. They have until, basically, Census Day, April 1, to give us any new housing units that have been built.
|
From page 7... ...
Let me first say that both of these concepts are very important in the uses of census data. I think a Tot of attention has been focused on distributive accuracy, but not very much on numeric accuracy.
|
From page 8... ...
— O— ———cat DR. NORWOOD: Let me just say that we will save the discussion part for after Howard is finished, but if the panel or any of the invited guests have particular questions or if they want to get a little bit more information for understanding purposes, please raise your hand or speak up.
|
From page 9... ...
. After you take the clual-systems estimate, you can then decompose it into the four cells that it is capable of measuring, plus sort of a fifth group here, which I have kind of defined as measurement error, matching error, balancing error, missing-data error all the other components.
|
From page 10... ...
The sample we took was about 2 million "housing units in a sample of] block clusters, because it was designee]
|
From page 11... ...
This has two components, one of which we tested in the dress rehearsal but is new sincel 990. We use the telephone to interview some of the housing units from the A.C.E.
|
From page 12... ...
It is called "the rest of the census," the really hard work of going out and interviewing, not a sample of 300,000, but the universe of something like 120 million housing units. At this point, we have what the census has enumerated.
|
From page 13... ...
I have mentioned the initial housing unit matching and the subsampling method for the E-sample identification, the automates! CAPI instrument for the A.C.E.
|
From page 14... ...
The other aspect is sort of geographical correctness. We do not say you are correct only if you are enumerated in the housing unit where you shouic!
|
From page 15... ...
So the geographic correctness, then, is a more complex issue this time than it was last time. It is, first, that you are counted where you should have been counted, where your residence was, but the area includes the block, the block cluster, and mis-geocoded housing units in the surrounding block.
|
From page 16... ...
That brings us to sort of the DSE model, as applied operationally. The things we have to maintain in doing this are operational independence, consistent reporting, accurate matching, and homogeneity within post-strata.
|
From page 17... ...
Of course, we will be reviewing our results by stratum and poststratum, and comparing that to what we expected. We will have the demographic projections from the previous census, together with demographic analysis tDAi, to give us sort of an independent reading of what the total population might be.
|
From page 18... ...
Of what we found in the surrounding block, most of those were because the housing unit had been mis-geocoded. That is the component we will be picking up.
|
From page 19... ...
You are also changing some census records that you thought were incorrectly enumerated, but now you are giving a looser definition of what you mean by "correctly enumerated," changing those to correctly enumerated. At least as a first-order approximation, those are balanced.
|
From page 20... ...
The question is, what is the best way to measure the undercount of those who move? In 1990and, as a matter of fact, in 1980 we went to the housing units in July and we said, "Who is living here now?
|
From page 21... ...
is not really providing an adjustment for the group quarters population. But the college students who leave their dormitories at the end of school, which would typically be Tune so they are in a possible P-sample housing unit after that point would be inmovers.
|
From page 22... ...
DR. HOGAN: We tried that in dress rehearsal.
|
From page 23... ...
To me, inmovers and outmovers are, by and large, the same people. At least in the way I conceive of it, we are not substituting inmovers for outmovers; we are measuring the number of movers by asking about the number of inmovers, and we are measuring the coverage rate of movers by trying to match the number of outmovers.
|
From page 24... ...
The concept throughout the P-sample is that the P-sample should be a sample of everybody who resided in housing units as of census reference date. That is the concept that we are trying to apply.
|
From page 25... ...
We do not have it here. On the evaluations, we did an evaluation by trying to trace the outmovers in dress rehearsal.
|
From page 26... ...
You have a list of members of the family, for example, and you have the ages of the kids wrong and you have the names of the kids wrong. If that is treated as true information and then you try to match against the census information, then you get more non-matches, and that goes into the match rate.
|
From page 27... ...
If someone has two addresses, for example to take an easy example it really, in some sense, does not matter which of those two addresses, at least as a first order of approximation, we assume is the correct one, as Tong as we consistently apply our rules in defining the number of correct enumerations and the proportion of people who are correctly enumerated. As long as we say this person should have been counted in Florida, if we apply it consistently and count him as correctly matched only if he was counted in Florida, and erroneously enumerated if he was counted anywhere else, then the model works, in that we are matching to the right universe.
|
From page 28... ...
lust having said that it is correct based on what you believe in April does not necessarily mean I am going to get consistent reporting. We accept proxies, and where they believe you lived may not be where you believed you lived.
|
From page 29... ...
That is different. The first is really a gross omissions rate; the second is the net rate, including the erroneous enumerations, and indeed the traditional census adjustments.
|
From page 30... ...
First, we have seven race/origin groups: American Indians living on reservations being one group, a separate group, which is why we get seven; American Indians and Alaska Natives not living on reservations, including those living on tribal or trust lands, but not formally recognized reservations; Asian; Hawaiian and Pacific Islander; Hispanic; non-Hispanic black; and non-Hispanic white and other races. Then we have seven age/sex groups.
|
From page 31... ...
The type of enumeration area in this discussion really breaks into two parts, the part of the census done mailout/mailback and everything else. Everything else includes list/enumerate, where we simply show up at the door, list the housing unit, and count it right then; update/leave, where the census interviewer has a questionnaire, goes out, and updates the address and leaves the questionnaire to be mailed back; and there are a bunch of other little things left over.
|
From page 32... ...
It came down to a judgment of how we thought 2000 was most likely to come out. One big change from 1990—and I think a very good change is the mail return rate.
|
From page 33... ...
I hope I do not make too many mistakes. First, we said that American Indians who live on the reservation or any other tribal or federally recognized Indian area and who mark American Indian as whatever one race, one of two races, American Indian and Hispanic if someone lived on a reservation and marked American Indian, we said that person has the cultural, the tribal, the community affiliations that make him[/her]
|
From page 34... ...
Based on what we could infer from our tests, based on what we could infer from dress rehearsal, we decided that, with essentially the exception of the American Indians, anyone who marks Hispanic is Hispanic. If you mark Hispanic and five other races, you are still Hispanic.
|
From page 35... ...
What mail return rate are you going to use? There are different ways to measure.
|
From page 36... ...
MR. WAITE: The return rate would not include in the denominator housing units that did not exist or "undeliverable as addressed" addresses.
|
From page 37... ...
tOne of] the two groups that I think we are most worried about having sufficient sample size for are the American Indians who are not on the reservation American Indians and Alaska natives on other tribal and trust territories and other places they are diffuse.
|
From page 38... ...
I would just observe that I understand the first one, similar capture probabilities, because you want to minimize correlation bias. The similar net undercount you are using because you are requiring that the same post-stratification be used for adjusting for undercoverage as for erroneous enumerations.
|
From page 39... ...
DR. HOGAN: We ran the post-strata, as best we coup simulate, on 1990, and then we summed up synthetic estimates for the 357, as domain, for the states, for congressional districts, and the group of 16 largest cities.
|
From page 40... ...
I do not know how that is addressed in just choosing. DR.FREEDMAN:Iwould like, actually, to return a little bit to the question of movers.
|
From page 41... ...
Let me sort of agree with you, but disagree with your wording on the combining of racial groups into post-strata. The fact is, we have very little knowledge about the particular characteristics of people who might mark white and American Indian, or white, Asian, and American Indian, or whatever else.
|
From page 42... ...
One is to get better counts. But the second is to correct what we now know and have measured over a number of years to be a disparity in the net undercount, at a variety of levels, which manifests itself by racial categories, even if it is not something that we attribute directly to race.
|
From page 43... ...
We have that. In dress rehearsal, we had a small study that attempted to take cases that would have gone into the early telephoning and hold them out and put them in the personal interviewing, to try to compare the two.
|
From page 44... ...
It is single-famiTy housing units, not multi, with good house number/street names, that mailed back their census questionnaire and included a telephone number when they mailed it back. So it is not a big universe.
|
From page 45... ...
I guess I am asking a more general question: if we forget about adjustment and we forget about the localization of this, but we want to Took at the country as a whole, how do we use the categories of race to determine that? What I thought I heard you saying—and I am not arguing your basic points about the localization of it do you think that those data can be used, at least at the national level, to compare where we are, in demographic analysis?
|
From page 46... ...
But apart from that, what I thought Larry was saying, and Steve a little bit, too, is that, regardless of whether you do the telephone or not, there is a kind of correlation between when you get to somebody because of just the difficulty of locating him, finding him at hence and getting him to respond, and so forth— such that the people you get to later are, (a) more likely to have moved, and (b)
|
From page 47... ...
We go out and do a bunch of follow-ups, and eventually we do imputation from a missing data moclel. If that missing data mode]
|
From page 48... ...
Comparing the levels of missing data, at least on that important variable, that we will have in 2000 to 1990, they will probably be higher, because, as I said, it is easier to get an interview for who is here now. So we suspect that the level of whole household missing data, at least with respect to who is living here on Census Day, might be higher in 2000 than it was in 1990.
|
From page 49... ...
Let me explain that to those who are not complete aficionados here. We have the situation that is fairly important in how we design the PES, the A.C.E., where we have the same housing units in sample on the P-sample side [and the E-sample sided.
|
From page 50... ...
It gives note great pleasure a rare moment here- I am going to stick up for the Bureau. I am very happy they gave up that logistic regression model and have moved to what they are doing now.
|
From page 51... ...
I saw no evaluation of what would have happened with the 1990 data if there had been cells instead of the modeling. Also in the evaluation that I looked at with the dress rehearsal, it was a 1 percent difference, at most, on each post-stratum.
|
From page 52... ...
DR. STARK: I know this is not a straw poll, but I am also relieved that we are away from the logistic regression model.
|
From page 53... ...
The highest undercount we measured in 1990 was among rural Hispanics. I would think that many of these unreachable people are living among rural Hispanics.
|
From page 54... ...
DR. HOGAN: I think, even with its flaws, even with its errors, the proposed census adjustment, the original census adjustment, was more accurate nun~erically and distributionally than the unadjusted census.
|
From page 55... ...
cautioned that artificial population analysis was inconclusive about whether the homogeneity assumption held." "The fourth cell in the DSE is an estimate of the number of people missed in both the PES and census. Both the committee and the panel of exerts were very concerned about the negative values in the fourth cell.
|
From page 56... ...
With things like missing data, where we still have to completely specify and test our model, it is going to be a little bit further. It is like any other census process.
|
From page 57... ...
HOGAN: We can make Pat available or other background and more detailed documents available. We certainly have exactly what we did in dress rehearsal, which I do not think we are changing very much.
|
From page 58... ...
The missing data in the census, whether it is in the A.C.E. block or not, go through the regular census edit and imputation process, which is documented and we can share with you.
|
From page 59... ...
We do not think these will result we have no reason, based on the dress rehearsal, to think they would result in many false matches coming out of the computer processing. So we are pretty comfortable on that.
|
From page 60... ...
Because we have identified our blocks, for the whole universe, the listing universe, we know which blocks and surrounding blocks are in our A.C.E. universe.
|
From page 61... ...
Finally, one of the key evaluations that you will be doing as you go forward is to compare demographic analysis estimates versus PES estimates. In light of the introduction of multiple races, how are the demographic analysis estimates being assembled?
|
From page 62... ...
But when you compare census data for other races, Asians and American Indians, a classification error occurs, and we really cannot produce meaningful estimates. The estimates, as Howard knows, we produce from demographic analysis are for black and all other races combined.
|
From page 63... ...
Therefore, in order to get a handle on the various magnitudes that are involved here, to see what things like correlation bias and measurement error might be, I think it would be advantageous to look at 1990 and see if we can learn from that as we plan for the future. So it is my thought that, by taking a brief Took at 1990, we might learn something that would be relevant in thinking about 2000.
|
From page 64... ...
But the demographic analysis would have added 4.7 million people to the census of 1990. You can now estimate correlation bias as 3.0 million.
|
From page 65... ...
The arguments I have presented here are due largely to Ken Wachter and Leo Breiman. I have been more interested in things like the smoothing model, loss function analysis, synthetic adjustment, missing data.
|
From page 66... ...
Transparency The re-interview of the housing unit and the people matching and dual-systems estimation yield an estimate of the total population.
|
From page 67... ...
That is, for each of these block clusters, we combined the number of persons found in both, the number of persons in the PES and not in the census, and the number in the census and not in the PES, and formed an estimate for that block of the total population. We call that a direct dual-systems estimate, as opposed to a dual-systems estimate based on synthetic estimation.
|
From page 68... ...
The second recommendation I wanted you to consider was to include an estimate of a nonsampling error introduced by synthetic estimation with other nonsampling error estimates in your loss function analysis. I know you do not plan to do a Toss function analysis before you publish the data, but, as a part of your evaluation process, I think you could do that.
|
From page 69... ...
Generally speaking, what you Took at is, there were 169 block clusters that had population. I find the correlation between the undercount and the adjustment to be about 0.038.
|
From page 70... ...
Unfortunately, without the weights, it is really difficult, because at the smaller levels, the tract level and the county level, which is what I was looking at primarily, you do not have all that many block clusters, and therefore all that many people. I did a version of that at the county level by simply cropping out all of the counties that had only one block cluster.
|
From page 71... ...
Therefore, everybody should understand that what are in the data file that were analyzed are not the numbers that were used to create the synthetic estimates. Those aggregate people up by demographic groups.
|
From page 72... ...
What is the implication of that? It turns out that if you sort the data according to match being bigger than census count one group where you do that and another one where you Took at the blocks where it is bigger than this adjusted version, and then the resiclual you get three very different pictures about how direct dual-systems estimation matches against synthetic estimation, with match rates and coherence differences of 10, 20 percent radically different stuff.
|
From page 73... ...
I clo not know what is left after you do that, because we only had a little bit of time to do the analysis. I began by noting that the census real way of cloing this, through synthetic estimation, actually aggregates up to post-strata by using demographic characteristics.
|
From page 74... ...
First of all, synthetic estimation was never intended to be able to predict what is going on in extremely small areas. Taking it down to the most extreme level, we could do a synthetic estimate for my house.
|
From page 75... ...
So in this case, if we think, not of trying to predict individual blocks, but predicting the kinds of things that we actually deal with in uses of census data which are typically political divisions or congressional districts, legislative districts, things like this, which are much more aggregated—a Tot of this random variation at the individual block level, which is reducing the correlation in the plots that Don was showing us, gets averaged out. There is lack of homogeneity in the post-strata, and there is also lack of homogeneity in the coverage of the original census, the same lack of homogeneity.
|
From page 76... ...
and the 1990 PES are not true sort of negates what we have been sitting through a lot of today. Looking at the post-stratification variables, the fact that the mail return rate at the tract level will come in is probably going to sharpen that up considerably.
|
From page 77... ...
If you think about two other sets of population estimates produced by the Census Bureau, not for Census Day, but postcensal estimates (where you estimate change since the last census, but still current, or a retrospective) and population forecasts (where you are forecasting the future)
|
From page 78... ...
I guess what gives me the most difficulty with regard to the problems of synthetic estimation, when applied here, from the perspective of a Monitoring Board person looking at the process unfolding, is the use to which the data are put. That presents the greatest difficulty not just a theoretical exercise about the numbers.
|
From page 79... ...
DR. FIENBERG: All the analysis from 1990 showed that at state levels and at high levels of geography within state, there is no tradeoff, in the sense that both distributive accuracy and numerical accuracy can be improved by use of the synthetic adjusted counts.
|
From page 80... ...
DR. ZASLAVS KY: I was panicking a little bit about what I was going to say, because I do not have any slides, like David.
|
From page 81... ...
My substantive point and it is really just one big point is to emphasize to the Census Bureau the need for evaluation. In 1990, all of us who care about the census, mainly the Bureau I did not do this work, except a little bit- were forced by the fact that there was this very specific timeline for a decision to create something that at least looked like it was an attempt to address all possible sources of error through evaluations.
|
From page 82... ...
I do not know if advertising would motivate people to add children who might not otherwise add children, so I guess I cannot point to that. I do not know of anything specific, except for the fact that the questionnaire is a little bit easier for people to understand, and the questionnaire for the interviewers is a little bit easier.
|
From page 83... ...
PROCEEDINGS, SECOND WORKSHOP 83 opportunity to write on the first page of the questionnaire the number of people in your family, and you will list the individuals in the census. If you should get tired of listing people and send in a form with four people even though you had written five on the front, you will get a friendly call from the census giving you one more chance to 'fess up to that child that you have forgotten.
|
From page 84... ...
I spent a good bit of time after dinner last night thinking about what we had accomplished or not accomplished yesterday. What I would like to do is to exercise my prerogative as chairman this morning to change the agenda a little bit.
|
From page 85... ...
This panel has discussed this a little bit, but not really very much, because we really need help. The question that I would like to put out to you is, how do we Took at these two issues together?
|
From page 86... ...
It seems to me that one of the things is that you do get an early reading from demographic analysis. But this time I would be very loath to say, on the basis of that, that the coverage was going to be what it should, because I think there is a Tot of fear about overcounting in this census.
|
From page 87... ...
was; how do you know how accurate the dual-systems estimator is? I do not have an answer for that right now, but I think people need to clo a Tot of thinking about what indicators of quality there are, operational things like missing data rates, what information you will have about matching errors, what diagnostic information you will have.
|
From page 88... ...
It seems to note, if they are never used at the block level, focusing the conclusions and the discussion on the block level as the end is the wrong focus. I think we need to Took at that issue as well: what is used, for what purpose?
|
From page 89... ...
data. There are basically two assumptions that are central: the zero-correlation bias assumption (which is secondary from my point of view, because even if it is violated, you are still going in the right direction by doing an adjustment)
|
From page 90... ...
When you talk about the response rate, if it is the response rate to the census Bailout, if that is what you are tallying about, I do not know what that implies for accuracy. If it is a low response rate, it means it costs more, but I do not know what it means in terms of accuracy.
|
From page 91... ...
If the housing unit match finds a Tot of duplication, you know that there are a lot of extra forms being mailed out. If there is a Tot of undercoverage of housing units, that would tell you a little bit about what to expect.
|
From page 92... ...
They are Tables 2 and 3, showing that the geocoding errors are extremely concentrated—there are fewer than 700 block clusters with problems whereas the household non-matches are spread out substantially more. Sixty percent of the block clusters contain household nonmatches.
|
From page 93... ...
Secondly, there was a very complete set of evaluation studies that were done. I am concerned that if a comparably complete set of evaluation studies are not done this time around, then if the decision to adjust is made and an adjustment is released, we will never have the tools to evaluate whether the adjustment improved or decreased the accuracy.
|
From page 94... ...
You can talk about blocks. You can talk about individual housing units.
|
From page 95... ...
Some of the things, of which I think yesterday there was some more pressure on than is usual in cases, perhaps pay more attention to, actually, the measurement error in the PES, really demonstrating that that is reduced sufficiently to offset the measurement errors in the census. The other one is appeal to some third standards, which is demographic analysis— a third element that I think I have heard here.
|
From page 96... ...
It does create an awkward problem. I remember, for the 1996 census, standing in front of the national news TV cameras trying to clearly say why our population estimates, which we had just released, showed that the country had finally gotten to flu million population, and we were releasing the latest census results that showed 29 million.
|
From page 97... ...
Let me try to follow up a little bit on what Janet just said. It seems to me that the Census Bureau has three tasks, from listening to this: one, to provide the best possible set of numbers; two, to be perceived by reasonable people, who may disagree, that they have done a professional job in doing that; and three, to bullet-proof as much as possible against people who are unreasonable.
|
From page 98... ...
So I do think that the mail return rates are going to be a good indicator of whether you are going to have cooperation. It does not matter if you go out knocking on doors in those areas.
|
From page 99... ...
There are fundamental assumptions of the method, like the synthetic assumption, which essentially is assuming that response rate is a function of which post-stratum you are in, regardless of geography, except to the extent that the post-strata label geography. There is correlation bias, fifth cell, whatever you want to call that.
|
From page 100... ...
I simply want to remind you and I will again before we are done that it is not net census error that the comparison for errors should be to, but to gross error. If you add the omissions and erroneous enumerations together, then the fraction of errors that occurred in the PES relative to that total is relatively small.
|
From page 101... ...
If I understand correctly, there still is going to be a search in neighboring blocks, despite the fact that the housing units have been matched previously at the individual level.
|
From page 102... ...
We would get, in a sense, different results in a PES-B context compared to PES-A, because movers often provide only an approximate indication of their Census Day address under PES-B. In 1990, there was a real need to make an extended search just because of imprecise addresses.
|
From page 103... ...
The formulas that everybody has worked from are formulas for counts. I think implicitly there has always been an expectation that if you actually improved counts a Tot and made the data better, you would probably do better for distributive accuracy.
|
From page 104... ...
It has been mentioned that one other way of getting count accuracy and also share accuracy would be to take the shares from the census and upweight them across the board to match demographic analysis. That is a different scheme.
|
From page 105... ...
The question is something like this: if you make shares your ultimate goaland the only background I have on this is a very Tong document issued by the Commerce Department (not by statisticians, but by others) some time ago if you make it your ultimate goal, does that not mean that if you find a way to measure a group, like American Indians, with absolute precision, but if that count is not distributed proportionally across all geopolitical jurisdictions, you would then walk away from that improvement, if you make shares your ultimate goal?
|
From page 106... ...
Therefore, we are going to fix that address file, and we are going to allow them to add their addresses right after April 1. That is a population group that, because of construction of housing and the address list, we feared we would miss.
|
From page 107... ...
Everybody agrees that it is there for blacks, it is there for Hispanics, and it is there, to a lesser (and somewhat more problematic) extent, for Asian Americans and American Indians.
|
From page 108... ...
It is a little bit oblique to the shares-versus-counts thing. But I wonder if anybody has any thoughts about the relationship between counting and adjustment in the census and, say, the use of census accounts, adjusted or not, and small-area intercensal population estimates
|
From page 109... ...
I have not heard anything in all of these discussions about any sources of data, except this broad, global demographic analysis, other than the census itself and the A.C.E. I wonder, for example, whether there are useful ways to think, in terms of the goals, about the difference between small-area estimation between censuses and the use of population estimates from the previous census.
|
From page 110... ...
So I am really hoping that there are careful evaluation studies of the accuracy of the OCR, and that some sample of the forms in which no errors were flagged are rekeyed, or perhaps if there is some error that is flagged on a form, the whole form is rekeyed something, to somehow get a handle on the size of that.
|
From page 111... ...
I noticed in the dress rehearsal that a lot of people did not choose multiple race, but there was not that much publicity, either, in the dress rehearsal. I think it would help a Tot if we knew what the situation really was.
|
From page 112... ...
about sex ratios from demographic analysis. We can also Took at demographic analysis numbers.
|
From page 113... ...
I know you are getting them by tracts, but if you get them for those blocks, you would have what the geocoding error was going to be and some idea about the duplicate housing units and so on. Then, if you had the return rate for those blocks- if there is a lot of duplication, you could have return rates that are higher than the number of housing units listed by both operations.
|
From page 114... ...
If we think that the interest out there is so low that the mail return rate is going to drop off anyhow, maybe there will not be a problem with these potential duplicate counts. But I think it is a little naive on my part to hope that.
|
From page 115... ...
The author is sitting down below. P-16/Part 2 really then carried that and asked questions of numerical and distributive accuracy.
|
From page 116... ...
They go from Wisconsin and PennsyIvania to California and Arizona, respectively in fact, if you Took at the order in which they go. Then he told you that if you took the computer error correction into account and used the CAPE post-stratification, which, as John told us, was for a totally different purpose, and took those numbers in random, only one seat changed that is, the seat that went from Wisconsin to California.
|
From page 117... ...
Demographic analysis is not the quick fix. Howard Hogan gave us some of the reasons.
|
From page 118... ...
94 file 1 Hispanic and 70 American Indians. In other settings, when I would say that, the people from the Census Bureau would hide uncler their chairs, because that appears to violate virtually every reporting rule that relates to confidentiality.
|
From page 119... ...
The American Indian count problem is really much, much more about social recognition than shares, I promise you. The census measured about 500,000 American Indians in 1900.
|
From page 120... ...
We have pretty well finished our work on the non-city-styTe addresses. That is a 20-million-household address file, based on the non-city-style areas.
|
From page 121... ...
We deliberately sweated, because we ran into some things in our South Carolina dress rehearsal site, as most of you know, where we had to ask ourselves the question of whether the census was so bad—or whether the A.C.E. was bad or the PES was bac3—as lay Waite put it so well, did we have a problem with the camera or a problem with the thing being photographed?
|
From page 122... ...
What if we get a low response rate on the A.C.E.
|
From page 123... ...
I want to thank everyone who has been here and all the people who have worked so hard. I especially want to thank Howard and his staff for all the hard work and for being on the hot seat for so long.
|
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.