2010 Census
Key Enumeration Activities Are Moving Forward, but Information Technology Systems Remain a Concern Gao ID: GAO-10-430T February 23, 2010In March 2008, GAO designated the 2010 Census a high-risk area in part because of information technology (IT) shortcomings and uncertainty over the ultimate cost of the census, now estimated at around $15 billion. The U.S. Census Bureau (Bureau) has since made improvements to various IT systems and taken other steps to mitigate the risks of a successful census. However, last year, GAO noted that a number of challenges and uncertainties remained, and much work remained to be completed under very tight time frames. As requested, this testimony provides an update on the Bureau's readiness for an effective headcount, covering (1) the status of key IT systems; (2) steps the Bureau has taken to revise its cost estimates; and (3) the extent to which critical enumeration activities, particularly those aimed at hard-to-count populations, are on track. The testimony is based on previously issued and ongoing GAO work.
Overall, the Bureau's readiness for a successful headcount is mixed. On the one hand, ongoing performance issues are affecting key IT systems, especially a workflow management system essential for the Bureau's field operations and a payroll processing system that will be used to pay more than 1 million temporary workers. Indeed, an important performance test the Bureau held in December 2009 revealed significant performance issues with each system. Bureau officials stated that many of these issues were resolved in further testing; however, others remain unresolved, and new defects were identified. The Bureau is going to great lengths to address these issues. However, little time remains before the systems need to become fully operational. In addition, the Bureau revised its cost estimate from $2.7 billion to $2.3 billion for nonresponse follow-up, the largest and most costly field operation where census workers follow up in person with nonresponding households. However, the Bureau's analyses of cost are not complete. According to the Bureau, it continues to reexamine the cost of two other nonresponse follow-up related operations. On the other hand, the rollout of key enumeration activities is generally on track, and the Bureau has taken action to address some previously identified problems. For example, the Bureau has taken several steps to reduce the number of unreadable fingerprint cards of temporary workers, a problem that plagued an earlier field operation. Among other actions, the Bureau plans to digitally capture a third and fourth set of fingerprints if the first two sets cannot be read for background security checks. The Bureau has also developed new procedures for counting those living in group quarters, such as dormitories and prisons. For example, the Bureau is using a single address list containing both group quarters and housing units, rather than separate lists as in the 2000 Census, to reduce the chance of double counting. The Bureau's 2010 Census communications campaign is also more robust than the one used in the 2000 Census. Key differences from the 2000 campaign include increased partnership staffing, targeted paid advertising based on market and attitudinal research, and a contingency fund to address unexpected events. To increase participation rates, the Bureau plans to mail a second, replacement questionnaire to census tracts that had low or moderate response rates in the 2000 Census. To help ensure a complete count of areas along the Gulf Coast, the Bureau plans to hand deliver an estimated 1.2 million census forms in areas devastated by hurricanes Katrina, Rita, and Ike. This effort will help ensure that households--even those that were not on the Bureau's address list but appear inhabitable--will be included in the census. Moving forward, it will be important for the Bureau to quickly identify the problems affecting key IT systems and test solutions. Further, given the complexity of the census and the likelihood that other glitches might arise, it will be important for the Bureau to stay on schedule, monitor operations, and have plans and personnel in place to quickly address operational issues.
GAO-10-430T, 2010 Census: Key Enumeration Activities Are Moving Forward, but Information Technology Systems Remain a Concern
This is the accessible text file for GAO report number GAO-10-430T
entitled '2010 Census: Key Enumeration Activities Are Moving Forward,
but Information Technology Systems Remain a Concern' which was
released on February 23, 2010.
This text file was formatted by the U.S. Government Accountability
Office (GAO) to be accessible to users with visual impairments, as
part of a longer term project to improve GAO products' accessibility.
Every attempt has been made to maintain the structural and data
integrity of the original printed product. Accessibility features,
such as text descriptions of tables, consecutively numbered footnotes
placed at the end of the file, and the text of agency comment letters,
are provided but may not exactly duplicate the presentation or format
of the printed version. The portable document format (PDF) file is an
exact electronic replica of the printed version. We welcome your
feedback. Please E-mail your comments regarding the contents or
accessibility features of this document to Webmaster@gao.gov.
This is a work of the U.S. government and is not subject to copyright
protection in the United States. It may be reproduced and distributed
in its entirety without further permission from GAO. Because this work
may contain copyrighted images or other material, permission from the
copyright holder may be necessary if you wish to reproduce this
material separately.
Testimony before the Subcommittee on Federal Financial Management,
Government Information, Federal Services and International Security,
Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs, U.S. Senate:
United States Government Accountability Office:
GAO:
For Release on Delivery:
Expected at 2:30 p.m. EST:
Tuesday, February 23, 2010:
2010 Census:
Key Enumeration Activities Are Moving Forward, but Information
Technology Systems Remain a Concern:
Statement of Robert Goldenkoff, Director:
Strategic Issues:
GAO-10-430T:
GAO Highlights:
Highlights of GAO-10-430T, a testimony before the Subcommittee on
Federal Financial Management, Government Information, Federal Services
and International Security, Committee on Homeland Security and
Governmental Affairs, U.S. Senate.
Why GAO Did This Study:
In March 2008, GAO designated the 2010 Census a high-risk area in part
because of information technology (IT) shortcomings and uncertainty
over the ultimate cost of the census, now estimated at around $15
billion. The U.S. Census Bureau (Bureau) has since made improvements
to various IT systems and taken other steps to mitigate the risks of a
successful census. However, last year, GAO noted that a number of
challenges and uncertainties remained, and much work remained to be
completed under very tight time frames.
As requested, this testimony provides an update on the Bureau‘s
readiness for an effective headcount, covering (1) the status of key
IT systems; (2) steps the Bureau has taken to revise its cost
estimates; and (3) the extent to which critical enumeration
activities, particularly those aimed at hard-to-count populations, are
on track. The testimony is based on previously issued and ongoing GAO
work.
What GAO Found:
Overall, the Bureau‘s readiness for a successful headcount is mixed.
On the one hand, ongoing performance issues are affecting key IT
systems, especially a workflow management system essential for the
Bureau‘s field operations and a payroll processing system that will be
used to pay more than 1 million temporary workers. Indeed, an
important performance test the Bureau held in December 2009 revealed
significant performance issues with each system. Bureau officials
stated that many of these issues were resolved in further testing;
however, others remain unresolved, and new defects were identified.
The Bureau is going to great lengths to address these issues. However,
little time remains before the systems need to become fully
operational.
In addition, the Bureau revised its cost estimate from $2.7 billion to
$2.3 billion for nonresponse follow-up, the largest and most costly
field operation where census workers follow up in person with
nonresponding households. However, the Bureau‘s analyses of cost are
not complete. According to the Bureau, it continues to reexamine the
cost of two other nonresponse follow-up related operations.
On the other hand, the rollout of key enumeration activities is
generally on track, and the Bureau has taken action to address some
previously identified problems. For example, the Bureau has taken
several steps to reduce the number of unreadable fingerprint cards of
temporary workers, a problem that plagued an earlier field operation.
Among other actions, the Bureau plans to digitally capture a third and
fourth set of fingerprints if the first two sets cannot be read for
background security checks. The Bureau has also developed new
procedures for counting those living in group quarters, such as
dormitories and prisons. For example, the Bureau is using a single
address list containing both group quarters and housing units, rather
than separate lists as in the 2000 Census, to reduce the chance of
double counting. The Bureau‘s 2010 Census communications campaign is
also more robust than the one used in the 2000 Census. Key differences
from the 2000 campaign include increased partnership staffing,
targeted paid advertising based on market and attitudinal research,
and a contingency fund to address unexpected events. To increase
participation rates, the Bureau plans to mail a second, replacement
questionnaire to census tracts that had low or moderate response rates
in the 2000 Census. To help ensure a complete count of areas along the
Gulf Coast, the Bureau plans to hand deliver an estimated 1.2 million
census forms in areas devastated by hurricanes Katrina, Rita, and Ike.
This effort will help ensure that households”even those that were not
on the Bureau‘s address list but appear inhabitable”will be included
in the census.
Moving forward, it will be important for the Bureau to quickly
identify the problems affecting key IT systems and test solutions.
Further, given the complexity of the census and the likelihood that
other glitches might arise, it will be important for the Bureau to
stay on schedule, monitor operations, and have plans and personnel in
place to quickly address operational issues.
What GAO Recommends:
GAO is not making new recommendations in this testimony, but past
reports recommended that the Bureau strengthen its testing of key IT
systems, better document and update its cost estimates, and ensure the
accuracy of the address list used to mail out questionnaires. The
Bureau generally agreed with these recommendations and is in varying
stages of implementing them.
View [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-10-430T] or key
components. For more information, contact Robert Goldenkoff at (202)
512-2757 or goldenkoffr@gao.gov.
[End of section]
Mr. Chairman and Members of the Subcommittee: I am pleased to be here
today to discuss the Census Bureau's (Bureau) readiness to conduct the
2010 Census. With just over 5 weeks remaining until Census Day, April
1, 2010, the decade-long process of researching, planning, testing,
and evaluating procedures for the nation's largest peace-time
mobilization has come to a close, and the complex and costly business
of data collection is now underway.
The population count began on January 25, north of the Arctic Circle,
in the Inupiat Eskimo village of Noorvik, Alaska, when the Director of
the Census Bureau took the lead in counting the first 700 or so
residents of the more than 300 million people who reside in our
country. The Bureau is scheduled to mail census forms to most of the
nation's households in mid-March, and simultaneously launch additional
operations aimed at counting people in migrant worker housing, boats,
tent cities, homeless shelters, nursing homes, dormitories, prisons,
and other diverse dwellings, all in an effort to ensure a complete and
accurate enumeration. In short, a successful census will require the
near perfect alignment of thousands of interdependent activities;
partnerships with local, state, and tribal governments and various
community and other organizations; and automated systems, as well as
over a million temporary employees, all laboring under extremely tight
time frames.
At this critical juncture, it is important to examine the Bureau's
preparedness for the headcount, taking stock of the Bureau's progress
over the course of the decade, and the challenges that still need to
be addressed to ensure a successful enumeration. As you know, the road
to Census Day has been a rocky one, fraught with operational setbacks
and cost overruns. The hurdles the Bureau has experienced to date--
including weaknesses in the Bureau's information technology (IT)
acquisition and contract management function and uncertainty over the
ultimate cost of the census--now estimated at around $15 billion--led
us to designate the 2010 Census a high-risk area in March 2008.
[Footnote 1] In the last year, however, we testified that the Bureau
had made commendable progress in rolling out key components of the
census, making improvements to various IT systems and certain risk
management efforts, among other activities. At the same time, we
cautioned that a number of operations and support systems still needed
to be designed, planned, and tested; little time remained to address a
range of outstanding IT issues; and, perhaps most importantly, the
Bureau faced significant challenges finalizing an automated system
used to manage field data collection known as the Paper-Based
Operations Control System (PBOCS).[Footnote 2]
As requested, my remarks today will focus on the Bureau's readiness
for the 2010 Census and the challenges and opportunities that lie
ahead. In particular, I will update the Subcommittee on the progress
the Bureau is making in addressing issues that prompted us to
designate the 2010 Census a high-risk area: (1) the reliability of key
IT systems, and (2) the quality of its cost estimates, as well as (3)
a broad range of activities critical to an effective headcount, some
of which were problematic in either earlier 2010 operations or in the
2000 Census. The activities include procedures for fingerprinting
temporary employees; the Bureau's efforts to count people residing in
nursing homes, dormitories, and other group living arrangements known
as "group quarters"; the rollout of key marketing efforts aimed at
improving the participation of hard-to-count populations and how
Recovery Act[Footnote 3] funds are being used as part of that effort;
the Bureau's plans for a mailing a second, follow-up questionnaire and
the removal of late mail returns; and the Bureau's plans to secure a
complete count in the hurricane-affected areas along the Gulf Coast.
My testimony today is based on our ongoing and completed reviews of
key census-taking operations.[Footnote 4] In our review, we analyzed
key documents including plans, procedures, and guidance for the
selected activities, and interviewed cognizant Bureau officials at
headquarters and local census offices. In addition, to examine the
Bureau's group quarters activities, we observed the group quarters
validation operation at Atlanta, Georgia; Fresno, Los Angeles, and San
Bernardino, California; Philadelphia, Pennsylvania; and Washington,
D.C. We selected these locations because of their geographic
diversity, variety of group quarters, and hard-to-count populations.
We also made onsite observations of certain census promotional events
in Boston, Massachusetts; Washington D.C.; and Atlanta.
On February 2, 2010, we provided the Bureau with a statement of facts
for our audit work, and on February 5, 2010, the Bureau provided
written comments. The Bureau made some suggestions where additional
context or clarification was needed and, where appropriate, we made
those changes. We conducted our work in accordance with generally
accepted government auditing standards. Those standards require that
we plan and perform the audits to obtain sufficient, appropriate
evidence to provide a reasonable basis for our findings and
conclusions based on our audit objectives. We believe that the
evidence obtained provides a reasonable basis for our findings and
conclusions based on our audit objectives.
In summary, key IT functions--namely the Bureau's personnel and
payroll system and PBOCS--continue to face performance problems and
have not yet demonstrated the ability to function reliably under full
operational loads. With key deadlines looming, it will be important
for the Bureau to identify the defects affecting the IT systems, test
solutions, and quickly implement changes. Likewise, the Bureau's
analyses of cost are not complete. While the Bureau has finalized its
reexamination of nonresponse follow-up (NRFU) cost, now estimated at
$2.3 billion, it continues to update the costs for other NRFU-related
operations. In other areas, the Bureau continues to make progress. For
example, the Bureau has improved its fingerprinting procedures for
temporary workers, and its plans to count people in group quarters and
to market the census--especially to hard-to-count populations--are
generally on track and more robust compared to similar efforts during
the 2000 Census.
The performance of the IT systems notwithstanding, a successful
outcome is far from guaranteed. To be sure, the 2010 Census is
unprecedented in its scope and complexity, and experience from past
enumerations suggests that various glitches are all but inevitable
once the headcount is fully underway. Given this difficult operating
environment, as the Bureau well knows, it will be critical to (1) stay
on schedule; (2) closely monitor operations with appropriate cost,
performance, and scheduling metrics; and (3) have appropriate plans
and personnel in place to quickly address operational issues.
Importantly, I also want to stress, as we have in the past, that the
Census Bureau cannot conduct a successful enumeration on its own.
Indeed, the decennial census is a shared national undertaking, and it
is now up to the general public to fulfill its civic responsibility to
mail back the census questionnaires in a timely fashion.[Footnote 5]
According to the Bureau, each percentage point increase in the mail
response rate saves taxpayers around $85 million and yields more
accurate data compared to information collected by enumerators from
nonrespondents. The bottom line, Mr. Chairman, is that in a few weeks,
a key determinant of the success of the 2010 Census will be, both
literally and figuratively, in the hands of the American people.
Background:
As you know, Mr. Chairman, the decennial census is a constitutionally
mandated enterprise critical to our nation. Census data are used to
apportion seats and redraw congressional districts, and to help
allocate hundreds of billions of dollars in federal aid to state and
local governments each year.
In developing the 2010 Census, a long-standing challenge for the
Bureau has been the reliability of its IT systems. For example, in
March 2009, we reported that the Bureau needed to develop a master
list of interfaces between systems; set priorities for the testing of
interfaces based on criticality; and develop testing plans and
schedules.[Footnote 6] In the months that followed, while the Bureau
strengthened its management and oversight of its IT systems,
additional work was needed under very tight time frames.
More generally, now that the census has moved to the operational
phase, it will be important for the Bureau to stay on schedule. The
enumeration has several immutable deadlines, and an elaborate chain of
interrelated pre-and post-Census Day activities are predicated upon
those dates. Specifically, the Department of Commerce--the Bureau's
parent agency--is legally required to (1) conduct the census on April
1 of the decennial year, (2) report the state population counts to the
President for purposes of congressional apportionment by December 31
of the decennial year, and (3) send population tabulations to the
states for purposes of redistricting no later than 1 year after the
April 1 census date. To meet these reporting requirements, census
activities need to take place at specific times and in the proper
sequence. A time line of key census operations is shown in figure 1.
Figure 1: Time Frames for Key Census Activities:
[Refer to PDF for image: illustration]
Operation or activity: Local update of census addresses (LUCA):
Localities assist in updating address lists and maps;
Timeframe: February 2007 through February 2010.
Operation or activity: Opening of 494 local census offices;
Timeframe: October 2008 through December 2009.
Operation or activity: Large block canvassing: Field staff validate
addresses for blocks containing over 1,000 housing units;
Timeframe: January 2009 through June 2009.
Operation or activity: Address canvassing: Field staff validate
address lists and maps;
Timeframe: April 2009 through July 2009.
Operation or activity: Group quarters validation: Field staff validate
addresses for group housing such as prisons and nursing facilities;
Timeframe: September 2009 through October 2009.
Operation or activity: Mailout/mailback: Most households are mailed
census questionnaires;
Timeframe: March 2010 through September 2010.
Operation or activity: Update/enumerate: Field staff visit housing
units that do not have house numbers and/or street names;
Timeframe: March 2010 through May 2010.
Operation or activity: Group quarters enumeration: Field staff visit
group housing such as prisons and nursing facilities;
Timeframe: March 2010 through May 2010.
Operation or activity: Nonresponse follow-up: Field staff follow-up in
person with nonresponding households;
Timeframe: May 2010 through July 2010.
Operation or activity: Coverage follow-up: Staff follow-up by
telephone to resolve conflicting information provided on census forms;
Timeframe: April 2010 through August 2010.
Key Dates:
April 1, 2010: Census Day;
December 31, 2010: Delivery of apportionment to the President;
April 1, 2011: Complete delivery of redistricting data to states.
Source: GAO summary of U.S. Census Bureau information.
[End of figure]
Because of these tight deadlines, as the enumeration progresses, the
tolerance for any operational delays or changes becomes increasingly
small. Consequently, as the enumeration progresses, it will be
important for the Bureau to closely monitor key performance metrics to
ensure that the various operations are on track and quickly address
any glitches. Indeed, the interrelated nature of census activities
raises the risk that a shortcoming in one operation could trigger
other activities to spiral downward. For example, a lower than
expected mail response rate would drive up the follow-up workload,
which in turn would increase staffing needs and costs. Of course the
reverse is also true, where a success in one operation could have a
number of positive downstream impacts.
Key IT Systems Are Experiencing Significant Performance Issues:
Although the Bureau has made progress in testing and deploying IT
systems for the 2010 Census, significant performance issues have been
identified with both the workflow management system--PBOCS--as well as
with the Decennial Applicant Personnel and Payroll System (DAPPS), the
automated system the Bureau is using to handle the payroll of the more
than 1 million temporary employees that are to work on the census.
In March 2009, we reported that the Bureau had a number of problems
related to testing of key IT systems, including weaknesses in test
plans and schedules, and a lack of executive-level oversight and
guidance.[Footnote 7] In that report, we recommended that the Bureau
complete key system testing activities and improve testing oversight
and guidance. The Bureau agreed with our recommendations. Since that
time, we have been monitoring and tracking the Bureau's progress and,
last October, we testified that the Bureau had taken steps to improve
its management and testing of key IT system for the 2010 Census, such
as naming a Decennial Census Testing Officer whose primary
responsibilities include monitoring testing for decennial census
activities.[Footnote 8] The Bureau had also completed limited end-to-
end testing[Footnote 9] of PBOCS. The Bureau developed this workflow
management system--which is designed to manage the work assignments
and related maps for hundreds of thousands of enumerators--late in the
decade when it moved from handheld computers, which it found
unreliable, to a paper-based approach for some field operations. These
operations include NRFU, when enumerators collect data through
personal interviews from the tens of millions of households that fail
to mail back a census questionnaire.
However, critical performance issues still need to be addressed and
additional testing remains to be completed. For example, in December
2009, the Bureau completed two iterations of a key performance test,
known as the Decennial Application Load Test. For the test, more than
8,000 field staff at about 400 local census offices performed a
combination of manual and automated tests to assess the performance of
key IT systems, including DAPPS and the first release of PBOCS. In the
first test, DAPPS failed, and other key systems, including PBOCS,
performed slowly. There were system communication errors as well.
Bureau officials stated that many of these issues were resolved during
the second iteration of testing; however, others remain to be resolved
and new issues were identified. For example, DAPPS performed slowly
during the second iteration of testing. This issue must be resolved
and retested. To the Bureau's credit, the performance test helped to
identify significant issues before systems are needed for key field
operations.
DAPPS program officials stated that the current version of the program
has been deployed since October 2008 and has been processing payroll
for a smaller number of temporary census employees (about 140,000).
However, three major issues, involving system hardware, software, and
the operating system, were identified as the likely causes of DAPPS
system failure during the first load test. At least one of these
issues was known to exist before the load test, but has not yet been
resolved. The officials stated that they are taking several steps to
resolve these issues, including upgrading and reconfiguring the
system, and deploying additional hardware to support the system. An
additional load test is also planned for DAPPS. The officials stated
that they plan to have all issues resolved by the end of February, and
acknowledge that it is critical that DAPPS be fully functional under a
heavy load by mid-March, when the Bureau will begin hiring a large
number of temporary employees (about 600,000) for NRFU who will need
to be paid using the system.
In addition to issues mentioned with DAPPS, the December load test was
not intended to be a comprehensive test of PBOCS, which has multiple
releases at varying stages of development and testing. The first
release of this system was deployed for early census field operations
in January 2010, but it has known defects, such as limited
functionality, slow performance, and problems generating certain
progress and performance reports. In addition, the development and
testing of two other releases is needed before the system is ready for
other key field operations, such as the enumeration of residents in
group quarters, scheduled to begin in March 2010.
In recognition of the serious implications that a failed PBOCS would
have for conducting of the 2010 Census, the Bureau has taken
additional steps to mitigate the outstanding risks. For example, in
June 2009, the Bureau chartered an independent assessment team,
chaired by the Bureau's Chief Information Officer, to monitor and
report on, among other things, the system's development and testing
progress. These efforts are encouraging. However, the aggressive
development and testing schedule presents various challenges. For
example, two of the three releases of PBOCS were not included in the
recent performance test because development of these releases had not
yet been completed. This increases the risk that performance issues,
such as those described above, may reoccur in future releases of the
system and the Bureau's ability to resolve and retest these issues
before the system is needed for key field operations will be limited.
In addition to DAPPS and PBOCS, the Bureau will rely on six other key
automated systems to conduct the census. Progress has been made with
respect to system testing. However, much system testing remains to be
completed in the next few months, as shown in the following table.
Table 1: Status of key system testing activities (as of January 2010):
Census system: Headquarters Processing - Universe Control and
Management;
Description: Organizes address files into enumeration "universes,"
which serve as the basis for enumeration operations and response data
collection;
Status of testing activities: System development is divided into three
phases. According to the Bureau, the first of three phases was
deployed for initial operations in July 2009, which was completed in
January 2010. Limited functionality of the second release was deployed
in December 2009 and deployment of the remaining functionality is
planned to be completed by September 2010.
Census system: Headquarters Processing - Response Processing System;
Description: Receives response data and edits the data to help
eliminate duplicate responses by, for example, identifying people who
have been enumerated more than once;
Status of testing activities: System development is divided into six
components. Testing of the first of six components, intended to
receive response data, began in August 2009. The program plans to
complete testing of the five remaining components by December 2010.
The first component of this system is needed for operations in
February 2010.
Census system: Master Address File/Topologically Integrated Geographic
Encoding and Referencing system;
Description: Provides geographic information and support to aid the
Bureau in establishing where to count the U.S. population for the 2010
Census;
Status of testing activities: The system has been functioning in a
limited capacity since September 2007; however, additional testing is
needed for 2010 Operations. As of January 2010, all nine test plans
for 2010 Operations have been finalized. Testing activities for one
test plan have been completed; seven are under way; and one has not
yet started. Geographic information needed to support key operations,
such as NRFU, is planned to be delivered by April 2010.
Census system: Field Data Collection Automation (FDCA);
Description: Provides automation support for field data collection
operations. It includes the development of handheld computers for the
address canvassing operation and the systems, equipment, and
infrastructure that field staff will use to collect data;
Status of testing activities: Development and testing for FDCA has
been completed. The FDCA applications related to address canvassing
were deployed and the operation completed. Map printing software has
been deployed to field offices. The FDCA contractor is supporting map
printing activities.
Census system: Decennial Response Integration System;
Description: Collects and integrates census responses from all
sources, including forms and telephone interviews;
Status of testing activities: Six increments of system development and
testing have been completed; however, additional regression testing is
needed. The program is also conducting additional interface testing
and operational testing before the system is needed for operations in
February 2010.
Census system: Data Access and Dissemination System II (DADS II);
Description: Replaces legacy systems for tabulating and publicly
disseminating data;
Status of testing activities: The system consists of two subsystems,
each with three iterations of development and testing. For one
subsystem, the program is testing the second of the three iterations.
For the other subsystem, the program is currently testing the third
iteration. DADS II is needed for operations beginning in December 2010.
Source: GAO analysis of U.S. Census Bureau data.
[End of table]
Given the importance of IT systems to the decennial census, it is
critical that the Bureau ensure that DAPPS, PBOCS, and other key
systems are thoroughly tested. The limited amount of time to resolve
what are, in certain cases, significant performance issues creates a
substantial challenge for the Bureau.
The Bureau Has Revised Its Cost Estimate for Nonresponse Follow-up,
but Needs to Complete Additional Updates as Planned:
In 2008, we reported that the Bureau had not carried out the necessary
analyses to demonstrate that the then life-cycle cost estimate of
about $11.5 billion for the 2010 Census was credible, and we
recommended that the Bureau better document and update the estimate,
to which it generally agreed.[Footnote 10] Since then, two early
census field operations have experienced major differences between
their estimated and actual costs. For address canvassing, where census
workers verify address lists and maps, actual costs exceeded the
Bureau's initial estimate of $356 million by $89 million, or 25
percent. In contrast, for group quarters validation, where census
workers verify addresses of group housing, actual costs were below the
Bureau's estimate of $71 million by about $29 million, or 41 percent.
[Footnote 11]
Because of cost overruns during address canvassing, as well as
concerns over the increased number of vacant units due to
foreclosures, the Bureau has implemented our recommendation and
reexamined the assumptions and other data used to support the cost
estimate for NRFU, the most costly and labor-intensive of all census
field operations. Earlier this month, the Bureau provided us with the
results from that reexamination. Although we have not fully assessed
the Bureau's analysis, our preliminary review shows that the Bureau
now estimates that NRFU will cost about $2.3 billion, a decrease of
around $400 million (15 percent) from its previous estimate of about
$2.7 billion. In updating the estimate, the Bureau considered a number
of cost drivers. For example, the Bureau reviewed 1) field work
assumptions--such as miles driven per case, pay rates, hours worked
per week, and attrition--which the Bureau updated based on actual
Census 2000 data, national and field tests, and address canvassing
results; 2) factors affecting response rate and hence NRFU workload--
such as the national trend in survey response, use of a bilingual
questionnaire and replacement mailing for 2010, and the vacancy rate;
and 3) enumerator productivity rates, based on regional managers'
concerns over enumerating vacant units and non-English-speaking
households. Further, in its analysis, the Bureau cited holding pay
rates for NRFU temporary staff at 2009 levels, rather than the
proposed 2010 pay rate, as one of the reasons for the reduction in
NRFU costs.
According to the Bureau, two cost drivers--workload, based on the mail
response rate, and productivity--are uncertain and could have a
significant effect on the ultimate cost of NRFU. For example, the
Bureau states that if the response rate decreases by 2 percentage
points due to extreme circumstances, such as an immigration backlash,
costs could increase by $170 million. Likewise, if PBOCS continues to
experience performance problems causing 2 weeks of lost productivity,
the Bureau says it would need to hire and train more staff to complete
NRFU in order to deliver the apportionment counts to the President by
December 31, 2010, which, according to the Bureau, could increase
costs by about $138 million.
As we previously recommended, revising cost estimates with updated
data is an important best practice for cost estimation. However, the
Bureau's analyses of cost are not complete. While the Bureau has
finalized its reexamination of NRFU cost, it continues to update the
costs for other NRFU-related operations. These operations include the
NRFU Reinterview, a quality assurance procedure designed to ensure
that field procedures were followed and to identify census workers who
intentionally or unintentionally produced data errors. It also
includes the Vacancy/Delete Check operation, which is a follow-up to
NRFU and is designed to verify the status of addresses classified as
vacant, or addresses determined to be nonexistent (deletes) during
NRFU, as well as cases added since the NRFU workload was initially
identified. According to the Bureau, emerging information about the
Vacancy/Delete Check operation suggest that the workload may be much
higher than originally expected and could increase costs from $345
million to $482 million--almost $137 million, or 40 percent. The
Bureau said it will update the cost estimates of both these operations
once additional information becomes available.
A reliable cost estimate is critical to the success of any program
because it provides the basis for informed investment decision making,
realistic budget formulation, meaningful progress measurement,
proactive course correction when warranted, and accountability for
results.
The Implementation of Key Enumeration Activities Continues to Make
Progress:
In contrast to the IT systems, the rollout of other activities is
going more smoothly. Indeed, the Bureau has taken steps to address
certain previously identified problems, and its plans to improve the
count of hard-to-enumerate groups are generally more robust compared
to similar activities during the 2000 Census. Those activities include
procedures for fingerprinting temporary employees; the Bureau's
efforts to count people residing in nursing homes, dormitories, and
other group living arrangements known as "group quarters"; the rollout
of key marketing efforts aimed at improving the participation of hard-
to-count populations; the Bureau's plans for a mailing a second,
follow-up questionnaire and the removal of late mail returns; and the
Bureau's plans to secure a complete count in the hurricane-affected
areas along the Gulf Coast.
Bureau Has Taken Steps to Reduce the Number of Unclassifiable
Fingerprints of Temporary Workers:
The Bureau plans to fingerprint its temporary workforce for the first
time in the 2010 Census to better conduct background security checks
on its workforce of hundreds of thousands of temporary census workers.
[Footnote 12] However, the Bureau found that during address
canvassing, an operation that the Bureau conducted in the summer of
2009 to verify every address in the country, 22 percent of the workers
(approximately 35,700 people) hired for the operation had
unclassifiable prints. The Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI)
determined that the issue was generally the result of errors that
occurred when the prints were first taken at the local census offices.
To fingerprint workers during address canvassing, Bureau employees
captured two sets of fingerprints on ink fingerprint cards from each
temporary worker by the end of the workers' first day of training. The
cards were then sent to the Bureau's National Processing Center in
Jeffersonville, Indiana, to be scanned and electronically submitted to
the FBI. If the first set of prints were unclassifiable, then the
National Processing Center sent the FBI the second set of prints. If
the results showed a criminal record that made an employee unsuitable
for employment, the Bureau either terminated the person immediately or
placed the individual in a nonworking status until the matter was
resolved.
To help ensure the success of fingerprinting operations for NRFU--
which will peak at approximately 484,000 fingerprint submissions over
a 3-day period from April 28-30, 2010--the Bureau will follow similar
procedures, but has taken additional steps to improve fingerprint
image quality. They include refining training manuals used to instruct
local census office staff on how to take fingerprints, scheduling
fingerprint training closer to when the prints are captured, and
increasing the length of training. Further, the Bureau plans on using
an oil-free lotion during fingerprinting that is believed to raise the
ridges on fingertips to improve the legibility of the prints.
The Bureau has also revised its procedures for refingerprinting
employees when both fingerprint cards cannot be read. During address
canvassing, if both sets of fingerprints were unclassifiable, workers
were allowed to continue working if their name background check was
acceptable, and would be refingerprinted only if they were rehired for
future operations. Under the revised policy, the Bureau plans to
digitally capture a third and fourth set of fingerprints if the FBI
cannot classify the first two sets. The Bureau plans to purchase
approximately 1,017 digital fingerprint scanners. Each local census
office will receive a minimum of one machine, with the remaining
scanners to be distributed at the discretion of the Regional Director.
The Bureau estimates that this additional step could reduce the
percentage of workers with unclassifiable prints from 22 percent down
to approximately 10 to 12 percent, or an estimated 60,000 to 72,000
temporary workers for NRFU. We did not receive a response from the
Bureau whether it will allow those workers with unclassifiable prints
to continue to work on NRFU operations.
Operational Changes Made for 2010 Position the Bureau to More
Accurately Classify and Identify Group Quarters:
During the decennial census, the Bureau conducts separate operations
to count people residing in group quarters facilities. The Bureau
defines group quarters as "places where people live or stay in a group
living arrangement that are owned or managed by an entity or
organization providing housing and/or services for the residents,"
such as boarding schools, correctional facilities, health care
facilities, military quarters, and college and university housing.
According to Bureau estimates, more than 8.1 million people, or
approximately 3 percent of the population, live in group quarter
facilities.
During the 2000 Census, the Bureau did not always accurately enumerate
group quarters because, among other reasons, group quarters were
sometimes hard to distinguish from conventional housing units (see
figure 2), or the address of an administrative building was in a
separate geographic location than where the people actually lived, as
was sometimes the case with prison complexes. For example, in prior
work,[Footnote 13] we found that the population count of Cameron,
Missouri, was off by nearly 1,500 people because the population of the
state's Crossroads Correctional Center was inadvertently omitted from
the town's headcount. Similarly, North Carolina's population count was
reduced by 2,828 people, largely because the Bureau had to delete
duplicate data on almost 2,700 students in 26 dormitories (see figure
3) at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (UNC).[Footnote
14] Precision is critical because, in some cases, small differences in
population totals could potentially impact apportionment and/or
redistricting decisions.
Figure 2: Group Homes Could Resemble Conventional Housing:
[Refer to PDF for image: photograph]
Source: GAO.
[End of figure]
Figure 3: Students in 26 UNC Dormitories Were Counted Twice in the
Census:
[Refer to PDF for image: photograph]
Source: GAO.
[End of figure]
The Bureau developed and tested new procedures to address the
difficulties it had in identifying and counting this population during
the 2000 Census. For example, the Bureau moved from manual to GPS-
generated mapspots, which should reduce the chance of human error and
group quarters populations being counted in the wrong jurisdiction;
moved from a telephone interview to a field verification approach,
which should increase accuracy; and moved to a single address list,
which should reduce the chance of double counting. In addition,
following the 2004 Census Test, we recommended that the Bureau revisit
group quarter procedures to ensure that this population was properly
located and counted.[Footnote 15] The Bureau implemented our
recommendation and revised its group quarters procedures to clearly
instruct census workers to properly correct and delete addresses.
Further, to better ensure a more accurate group quarters count, the
Bureau employed a three-prong effort consisting of those operations
shown in table 2.
Table 2: Group Quarters Validation is the First Operation in a Three-
Prong Effort to Accurately Enumerate Group Quarters:
Operation name: Group Quarters Validation;
Dates: 9/28/09 to 10/23/09;
Purpose:
* Determine the status of the address as either a group quarter,
housing unit, transitory location, nonresidential, nonexistent,
duplicate, or vacant;
* Determine the type of facility (i.e., correctional facility, health
care facility, military quarters, dormitory, etc.) and confirm group
quarter's geographic location;
* Verify group quarters name, address, contact name and phone number.
Operation name: Group Quarters Advance Visit;
Dates: 2/1/10 to 3/19/10;
Purpose: Confirm locations of group quarters and identify contact
officials to facilitate actual enumeration.
Operation name: Group Quarters Enumeration;
Dates: 3/30/10 to 5/14/10;
Purpose: Visit each group quarter to obtain a complete list of the
names of the people living or staying at the group quarter and
enumerate all people living or staying there.
Source: GAO analysis of U.S. Census Bureau information.
[End of table]
For the 2010 group quarters operations, the Bureau drew from a number
of sources to build its list of group quarters addresses including
data from the 2000 Census, address submissions provided by state and
local governments, Internet-based research, and group quarters located
during door-to-door address canvassing. During the first of the three
group quarters operations (group quarters validation), approximately
25,000 temporary workers identified over 240,000 group quarters
facilities from a workload of over 2 million potential group quarters
in both the United States and Puerto Rico. The remaining approximately
1.76 million addresses were identified during group quarters
validation as conventional housing units, transitory locations,
nonresidential, nonexistent, or duplicates. All addresses that were
verified as housing units or transitory locations were added to the
appropriate address extracts for subsequent enumeration operations. In
addition, over 7,000 addresses from the group quarters validation
workload could not be properly processed in the Bureau's database
because they were returned with insufficient information. However, a
contingency plan was implemented to ensure these locations were
included in the census.
The changes made to group quarters operations appear promising, and
the Bureau plans to evaluate coverage of the group quarters
population. However, the Bureau will not evaluate each of the three
group quarters operation's effectiveness, cost, or value added. Such
evaluations could be useful in improving the operations, identifying
possibly duplicative operations, and identifying potential cost
savings for 2020. For example, given the large number of non-group
quarters included in the workload for group quarters validation (about
88 percent), the Bureau may want to consider ways to begin the
operation with a more concise initial workload. Additionally, in both
group quarters validation and group quarters advance visit operations,
census workers personally visit group quarters, verify the facility
contact information, provide confidentiality information, and collect
occupancy numbers. Because these activities appear to be duplicative,
the Bureau may want to reexamine the need to conduct both operations.
The Bureau's Communications Campaign Is Aimed at Hard-to-count Groups:
A complete and accurate census is becoming an increasingly daunting
task, in part because the nation's population is growing larger, more
diverse, and more reluctant to participate. To overcome these
challenges, the Bureau has developed the Integrated Communications
Campaign aimed at, among other things, improving the mail response
rate and reducing the differential undercount.[Footnote 16] An
undercount occurs when the census misses a person who should have been
included; an overcount occurs when an individual is counted in error.
What makes these errors particularly problematic is their differential
impact on various subgroups. Minorities, renters, and children, for
example, are more likely to be undercounted by the census while more
affluent groups, such as people with vacation homes, are more likely
to be enumerated more than once. As shown in table 3, the 2010
communications campaign consists of four components: the partnership
program, paid advertising, public relations, and an educational
program called Census in Schools.
Table 3: 2010 Census Communications Campaign Components:
Component: Partnership program;
Description: Engages key government and community organizations and
gains their commitment to support the census, focusing resources on
hard-to-count communities. Among other contributions, partners help
recruit census workers, help locate space for Questionnaire Assistance
Centers and for testing census job applicants, sponsor community
events to promote census participation, and motivate individuals to
complete their census forms.
Component: Paid advertising;
Description: Uses numerous paid media sources, such as TV, radio, the
Internet, and magazines to encourage census participation,
particularly by hard-to-count populations, such as minorities,
renters, and linguistically isolated populations.
Component: Public relations;
Description: Engages audiences via media activities to create
credible, memorable messages.
Component: Census in Schools;
Description: Provides schools with lesson plans and teaching materials
to support existing curricula so that students can get the message
home to parents and guardians that answering the census is important
and confidential.
Source: U.S. Census Bureau.
[End of table]
The 2010 communications campaign's initial budget of $410 million was
increased by $220 million in additional funds appropriated by the
American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009[Footnote 17] (Recovery
Act).[Footnote 18] As a result, the Bureau was able to greatly expand
its communications campaign activities. For example, the Bureau hired
about 3,000 partnership staff, over 2,000 more than originally
planned, and increased its paid advertising purchases targeted to
specific ethnic or language audiences by more than $33 million (85
percent) over its initial plan of about $39 million. The increased
funding should enhance the Bureau's capacity to reach out to hard-to-
count communities. In all, the Bureau plans to spend about $72 million
on paid advertising targeted to specific ethnic or language audiences,
which is about $11 million more than the almost $61 million the Bureau
plans to spend targeting the general population.
However, even with the additional Recovery Act funds, the Bureau plans
to spend less for some components of the 2010 paid media buys than it
did for 2000, when compared in constant 2010 dollars. For example,
although the total budget for the 2010 paid advertising is $253
million, which is about $12 million (5 percent) more than 2000, the
Bureau plans to spend about $133 million of it on the total
advertising buy (excluding production, labor, and other management
costs), which is about $27 million (17 percent) less compared to the
about $160 million spent in 2000. Table 4 shows the Bureau's 2010
budget for paid media buys by target audience compared to what was
spent in 2000.
Table 4: Paid Advertising Buys by Target Audience, 2000 vs. 2010:
Component: Total buy;
2000 Census (2000 actual expenditures in 2010 constant dollars):
$160,406,244;
2010 Census (budgeted): $133,003,094.
Component: Mass audience;
2000 Census (2000 actual expenditures in 2010 constant dollars):
$84,441,528;
2010 Census (budgeted): $60,811,800.
Component: Ethnic/Language audience;
2000 Census (2000 actual expenditures in 2010 constant dollars):
$75,964,716;
2010 Census (budgeted): $72,191,294.
Component: Hispanic;
2000 Census (2000 actual expenditures in 2010 constant dollars):
$27,535,788;
2010 Census (budgeted): $25,496,100.
Component: Black (including African and Caribbean);
2000 Census (2000 actual expenditures in 2010 constant dollars):
$24,816,618;
2010 Census (budgeted): $22,978,350.
Component: Asian;
2000 Census (2000 actual expenditures in 2010 constant dollars):
$14,603,328;
2010 Census (budgeted): $13,521,600.
Component: Native Hawaiian and Pacific Islanders;
2000 Census (2000 actual expenditures in 2010 constant dollars):
$214,326;
2010 Census (budgeted): $1,100,000.
Component: American Indian/Alaska Native;
2000 Census (2000 actual expenditures in 2010 constant dollars):
$4,088,232;
2010 Census (budgeted): $3,785,400.
Component: Emerging audiences[A];
2000 Census (2000 actual expenditures in 2010 constant dollars):
$2,198,664;
2010 Census (budgeted): $2,035,800.
Component: Puerto Rico;
2000 Census (2000 actual expenditures in 2010 constant dollars):
$1,892,484;
2010 Census (budgeted): $2,400,000.
Component: Island areas;
2000 Census (2000 actual expenditures in 2010 constant dollars):
$615,276;
2010 Census (budgeted): 0.
Component: New legacy languages[B];
2000 Census (2000 actual expenditures in 2010 constant dollars): Not
applicable;
2010 Census (budgeted): $874,044.
Source: GAO analysis of U.S. Census Bureau information.
Notes:
[A] Emerging audiences includes Polish, Russian, and Arabic Speaking.
[B] New legacy languages includes Portuguese, German, Italian, Greek,
French, and Yiddish.
[End of table]
Decreased spending on paid advertising may seem like a step in the
wrong direction for promoting census participation. However, by better
targeting paid advertising buys the Bureau expects to reach those who
have historically been the hardest to count. For example, the Bureau
based its decisions on how to allocate spending across different
ethnic and language audiences based on a variety of factors, such as
historical response data for an area, prevalence of hard-to-count
households in a market, population size, and availability of in-market
media. The Bureau also received input from staff in census regional
offices, as well as from an independent 2010 Census advisory group
called the Race and Ethnic Advisory Committee. Further, the Bureau
targeted the paid advertising messages based on market and attitudinal
research. For example, the Bureau's attitudinal research identified
five mindsets people have about the census, ranging from what Bureau
research identified as "leading edge"--those who are highly likely to
respond--to the "cynical fifth" who are less likely to participate
because they doubt that the census provides tangible benefits. The
Bureau used this information to develop messages to motivate each
cohort to participate in the census. To target the cynical fifth, for
example, the Bureau developed advertising that focus on the message
that the census is important to their community.
In addition, as shown in table 5, the Bureau has made other noteworthy
changes to 2010 paid advertising and partnership program activities,
which are aimed at expanding outreach to hard-to-count groups and
better monitoring campaign effectiveness.
Table 5: Key Differences Between 2000 and 2010 Paid Advertising and
Partnership Program Activities:
Paid advertising and partnership program activities: Campaign
development and targeting;
2000 Census: Targeted advertisements by segmenting the population into
three groups of census participation likelihood, based on measures of
civic participation in an area, such as school board involvement;
2010 Census: Advertisements targeted based in part on actual Census
2000 participation rates and attitudinal research.
Paid advertising and partnership program activities: Implementation;
2000 Census: Hired about 600 partnership staff;
2010 Census: Hired about 3,000 partnership staff.
Paid advertising and partnership program activities: Implementation;
2000 Census: Partnership staff spoke 35 languages;
2010 Census: Partnership staff speak 124 languages.
Paid advertising and partnership program activities: Implementation;
2000 Census: No rapid response/media contingency fund for unexpected
events;
2010 Census: Established a $7.4 million rapid response/media
contingency fund to address unexpected events such as lower response
rates in certain areas.
Paid advertising and partnership program activities: Monitoring;
2000 Census: No real-time metrics to measure effectiveness of paid
media and limited real-time tracking of partnership activities;
2010 Census: Established metrics to measure effectiveness of paid
media and partnership program, such as real-time tracking of attitudes
through national polling and value added contributions of partner
organizations.
Paid advertising and partnership program activities: Monitoring;
2000 Census: Partnership tracking system cumbersome and not user-
friendly;
2010 Census: Revamped partnership tracking system by, among other
things, allowing for up to date monitoring of partner activity.
Source: GAO analysis of U.S. Census Bureau information.
[End of table]
In summary, our analysis suggests that the paid advertising and
partnership activities, along with the other components of the
Bureau's communications campaign, are generally more robust than the
Bureau's promotional efforts during the 2000 Census in that the entire
effort is more comprehensive, and activities appear to be more data-
driven and targeted. Moving forward, the key challenge facing the
campaign is that it must not only raise awareness of the census, it
must also influence behavior, a far more difficult task.
Second Census Questionnaire Has Potential to Increase Response Rate,
but Will Be Available in English Only:
The Bureau's strategy to mail a second, or replacement, census
questionnaire will be implemented for the first time in 2010 and is an
important step towards improving response and decreasing costs.
According to Bureau studies, mailing a replacement questionnaire
increases overall response from households that do not respond to the
initial questionnaire, which could generate significant cost savings
by eliminating the need for census workers to obtain those responses
via personal visits.
The Bureau plans to mail approximately 30 million replacement
questionnaires to all households in census tracts that had the lowest
response rates in Census 2000 (known as blanket replacement). Also,
the Bureau plans to mail approximately 12 million replacement
questionnaires to nonresponding households in other census tracts that
had low-to-moderate response rates in 2000 (known as targeted
replacement). In order to enhance the effectiveness of the replacement
mailing, the Bureau will include a cover letter to distinguish the
initial and replacement questionnaires and thus avoid receiving
duplicate responses. However, replacement questionnaires will be
provided in English-only, regardless of whether the household will
receive a bilingual English/Spanish questionnaire in the initial
mailing.[Footnote 19] According to a Bureau official, mailing a
bilingual replacement questionnaire was logistically impractical for
2010, given the limitations of the printing process and the five-day
time frame for the targeted replacement mailing. Thus, in looking
forward to the 2020 Census, it will be important for the Bureau to
evaluate potential changes to the mailing strategy that would include,
at a minimum, sending bilingual replacement questionnaires to those
households that initially received a bilingual questionnaire.
The Bureau plans to mail replacement questionnaires between April 1
and April 10 and develop an initial list of nonresponding households
on April 7 (see table 6 for key dates in this process). Because the
Bureau will likely receive replacement questionnaires after April 7,
it must be able to effectively remove these late mail returns from the
list of nonresponding households, or NRFU workload. Removing late mail
returns is important because it prevents enumerators from visiting
households that already returned their census forms, thus reducing
NRFU workload and cost, as well as respondent burden. As shown in
table 6, the Bureau plans to remove late mail returns from the NRFU
workload four times using one automated and three manual processes.
The Bureau has some experience with the manual process because some
local census offices did some testing of late mail removals during the
2000 Census. In addition, they have developed quality assurance
procedures for the manual removal process. Moving forward, it will be
important for the Bureau to ensure that local census offices follow
these procedures so that households are not unnecessarily visited by
an enumerator or inadvertently removed from the follow-up workload and
missed in the census count.
Table 6: Replacement Mailing and Late Mail Returns Removal Are on a
Tight Schedule:
Activity: Initial Census Questionnaires mailed;
Date: March 15-17, 2010.
Activity: Census Day;
Date: April 1.
Activity: Blanket replacement mailing questionnaires mailed;
Date: April 1-3, 2010.
Activity: Targeted replacement mail questionnaires mailed;
Date: April 6-10, 2010.
Activity: NRFU workload created;
Date: April 7, 2010.
Activity: Automated removal of late mail returns;
Date: April 21, 2010.
Activity: First manual removal of late mail returns (even numbered
assignment areas);
Date: April 24-25, 2010.
Activity: Second manual removal of late mail returns (odd numbered
assignment areas);
Date: May 1-2, 2010.
Activity: Third manual removal of late mail returns;
Date: June 2010[A].
Source: GAO analysis of U.S. Census Bureau data.
[A] The third clerical removal occurs when 95 percent of the work in a
local census office is completed and the remaining assignments are
brought in to redistribute.
[End of table]
The Bureau Has Tailored Operations to Enumerate Hurricane-Affected
Areas:
The scale of the destruction in areas affected by hurricanes Katrina,
Rita, and Ike has made getting a complete and accurate population
count in parts of Mississippi, Louisiana, and Texas especially
challenging (see figure 4). Hurricane Katrina alone destroyed or made
uninhabitable an estimated 300,000 homes. As we have previously
testified,[Footnote 20] the Bureau, partly in response to
recommendations made in our June 2007 report,[Footnote 21] developed
supplemental training materials for natural disaster areas to help
census address listers, when developing the census address list,
identify addresses where people are, or may be, living when census
questionnaires are distributed. For example, the materials noted the
various situations that address listers might encounter, such as
people living in trailers, homes marked for demolition, converted
buses and recreational vehicles, and nonresidential space such as
storage areas above restaurants. The training material also described
the clues that could alert address listers to the presence of
nontraditional places where people are living and provided a script
they should follow when interviewing residents on the possible
presence of hidden housing units.
Figure 4: Locating and Counting People Displaced by Storms Presents a
Challenge Because Occupied Housing Units Could Be Hard to Identify:
[Refer PDF for image: 2 photographs]
Source: GAO.
[End of figure]
To ensure a quality count in the hurricane-affected areas, the Bureau
will hand-deliver an estimated 1.2 million census questionnaires in
these areas through the Update Leave operation, where census workers
update addresses and provide a mail-back census questionnaire to each
living quarter in their assigned areas. The Bureau estimates that it
will be delivering questionnaires starting March 1, 2010, to housing
units that appear inhabitable in much of southeast Louisiana, south
Mississippi, and Texas, even if they do not appear on the Bureau's
address list. Occupants will be asked to complete and return the
questionnaire by mail. Census workers will also identify modifications
for the Bureau's address list, including additions, deletions,
corrections, and spotting duplicate information. By hand delivering
questionnaires, the Bureau hopes to ensure that housing units that may
have been missed will receive and return questionnaires, ultimately
improving the accuracy of the count. Finally, the Bureau stated that
it must count people where they are living on Census Day and
emphasized that if a housing unit gets rebuilt and people move back
before Census Day, then that is where those people will be counted.
However, if they are living someplace else, then they should be
counted where they are living on Census Day.
Concluding Observations:
Mr. Chairman, with less than two months to go until Census Day, the
Bureau's readiness for the headcount is mixed. On the one hand, with
data collection already underway, the ability of key IT systems to
function under full operational loads has not yet been demonstrated.
The issues facing these systems need to be resolved, and additional
testing must take place, with little time remaining. Likewise,
questions remain regarding the ultimate cost of the 2010 Census, as
the Bureau continues to analyze the cost of NRFU-related operations.
On the other hand, certain operations, such as the communications
campaign and efforts to enumerate group quarters, generally appear to
be on track and more robust compared to similar efforts for the 2000
Census, better positioning the Bureau for a complete and accurate
headcount. In the coming weeks and months ahead, we will continue to
monitor the Bureau's progress in addressing these issues, as well as
the implementation of the census as a whole, on behalf of the
Subcommittee.
Mr. Chairman and members of this Subcommittee, this concludes my
statement. I would be happy to respond to any questions that you might
have at this time.
Contacts and Acknowledgments:
If you have any questions on matters discussed in this statement,
please contact Robert N. Goldenkoff at (202) 512-2757 or by e-mail at
goldenkoffr@gao.gov. Other key contributors to this testimony include
Peter Beck, Steven Berke, Clayton Brisson, Virginia Chanley, Benjamin
Crawford, Dewi Djunaidy, Vijay D'Souza, Jennifer Echard, Elizabeth
Fan, Ronald Fecso, Robert Gebhart, Ellen Grady, Richard Hung, Kirsten
Lauber, Jason Lee, Andrea Levine, Signora May, Catherine Myrick, Lisa
Pearson, David Powner, Jonathan Ticehurst, Cheri Truett, Timothy
Wexler, and Katherine Wulff.
[End of section]
Related GAO Products:
2010 Census: Census Bureau Has Made Progress on Schedule and
Operational Control Tools, but Needs to Prioritize Remaining System
Requirements. [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-10-59].
Washington, D.C.: November 13, 2009.
2010 Census: Efforts to Build an Accurate Address List Are Making
Progress, but Face Software and Other Challenges. [hyperlink,
http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-10-140T]. Washington, D.C.: October
21, 2009.
2010 Census: Census Bureau Continues to Make Progress in Mitigating
Risks to a Successful Enumeration, but Still Faces Various Challenges.
[hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-10-132T]. Washington,
D.C.: October 7, 2009.
2010 Census: Communications Campaign Has Potential to Boost
Participation. [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-09-525T].
Washington, D.C.: March 23, 2009.
2010 Census: Fundamental Building Blocks of a Successful Enumeration
Face Challenges. [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-09-430T].
Washington, D.C.: March 5, 2009.
Information Technology: Census Bureau Testing of 2010 Decennial
Systems Can Be Strengthened. [hyperlink,
http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-09-262]. Washington, D.C.: March 5,
2009.
2010 Census: The Bureau's Plans for Reducing the Undercount Show
Promise, but Key Uncertainties Remain. [hyperlink,
http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-08-1167T]. Washington, D.C.: September
23, 2008.
2010 Census: Census Bureau's Decision to Continue with Handheld
Computers for Address Canvassing Makes Planning and Testing Critical.
[hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-08-936]. Washington, D.C.:
July 31, 2008.
2010 Census: Census Bureau Should Take Action to Improve the
Credibility and Accuracy of Its Cost Estimate for the Decennial
Census. [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-08-554].
Washington, D.C.: June 16, 2008.
Census 2010: Census at Critical Juncture for Implementing Risk
Reduction Strategies. [hyperlink,
http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-08-659T]. Washington, D.C.: April 9,
2008.
Information Technology: Census Bureau Needs to Improve Its Risk
Management of Decennial Systems. [hyperlink,
http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-08-79]. Washington, D.C.: October 5,
2007.
2010 Census: Basic Design Has Potential, but Remaining Challenges Need
Prompt Resolution. [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-05-9].
Washington, D.C.: January 12, 2005.
[End of section]
Footnotes:
[1] GAO, Information Technology: Significant Problems of Critical
Automation Program Contribute to Risks Facing 2010 Census, [hyperlink,
http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-08-550T (Washington, D.C.: Mar. 5,
2008).
[2] See for example, GAO, 2010 Census: Fundamental Building Blocks of
a Successful Enumeration Face Challenges, [hyperlink,
http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-09-430T] (Washington, D.C.: Mar. 5,
2009), and GAO, 2010 Census: Census Bureau Continues to Make Progress
in Mitigating Risks to a Successful Enumeration, but Still Faces
Various Challenges, [hyperlink,
http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-10-132T] (Washington, D.C.: Oct. 7,
2009).
[3] American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009, Pub. L. No. 111-5
(Feb. 17, 2009).
[4] See related GAO products at the end of this statement.
[5] [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-10-132T].
[6] GAO, Information Technology: Census Bureau Testing of 2010
Decennial Systems Can Be Strengthened, [hyperlink,
http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-09-262] (Washington, D.C.: Mar. 5,
2009).
[7] [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-09-262].
[8] [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-10-132T].
[9] End-to-end testing helps verify that a defined set of interrelated
systems can function as intended in an operational environment.
[10] See GAO, 2010 Census: Census Bureau Should Take Action to Improve
the Credibility and Accuracy of Its Cost Estimate for the Decennial
Census, [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-08-554]
(Washington, D.C.: June 16, 2008). In [hyperlink,
http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-08-554], we reported that the Bureau
had not performed sensitivity analysis (examining each cost estimate
assumption or factor independently, while holding all others
constant), or uncertainty analysis (capturing the cumulative effect of
risks, which provides a level of confidence for the estimate), and had
not obtained an independent cost estimate. As noted in GAO's Cost
Estimating and Assessment Guide (GAO-09-3SP), these steps provide a
basis for determining whether a cost estimate is credible and are key
best practices for cost estimation. See GAO, GAO Cost Estimating and
Assessment Guide: Best Practices for Developing and Managing Capital
Program Costs, [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-09-3SP]
(Washington, D.C.: March 2009).
[11] In a preliminary assessment, the Bureau attributed cost overruns
in address canvassing to increased initial workload, underestimated
quality control workload, and training additional staff. The Bureau
has not yet provided a cost assessment for group quarters validation.
[12] For the 2000 Census, temporary employees were subject only to a
background check on their names.
[13] GAO, Data Quality: Improvements to Count Correction Efforts Could
Produce More Accurate Census Data, [hyperlink,
http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-05-463] (Washington, D.C.: June 20,
2005).
[14] The students were counted twice because, during the 2000 Census,
the Bureau inadvertently included the UNC dormitories on both the
group quarters and conventional housing unit address lists (they
should have only been on the group quarters list). As a result, two
questionnaires were delivered to the dormitories--one distributed by
the university, and one sent to them through the mail.
[15] GAO, 2010 Census: Basic Design Has Potential, but Remaining
Challenges Need Prompt Resolution, [hyperlink,
http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-05-9] (Washington, D.C.: Jan. 12, 2005).
[16] Differential undercount describes subpopulations that are
undercounted at a different rate than the total population.
[17] Pub. L. No. 111-5, div. A, tit. II, 123 Stat. 115, 127; H.R.
Conf. Rep. No. 116-16 at 417 (2009).
[18] In the conference report accompanying the Act, the conferees
stated that "of the amounts provided, up to $250,000,000 shall be for
partnership and outreach efforts to minority communities and hard-to-
reach populations." According to the Bureau, it plans to use $220
million for expanding the communications campaign and $30 million for
expanding its coverage follow-up operation, where census workers
follow up to resolve conflicting information provided on census forms.
[19] The Bureau has identified about 13 million households that will
receive a bilingual questionnaire for the 2010 Census.
[20] GAO, 2010 Census: Efforts to Build an Accurate Address List Are
Making Progress, but Face Software and Other Challenges, [hyperlink,
http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-10-140T] (Washington, D.C.: Oct. 21,
2009).
[21] GAO, 2010 Census: Census Bureau Has Improved the Local Update of
Census Addresses Program, but Challenges Remain, [hyperlink,
http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-07-736] (Washington, D.C.: June 14,
2007).
[End of section]
GAO's Mission:
The Government Accountability Office, the audit, evaluation and
investigative arm of Congress, exists to support Congress in meeting
its constitutional responsibilities and to help improve the performance
and accountability of the federal government for the American people.
GAO examines the use of public funds; evaluates federal programs and
policies; and provides analyses, recommendations, and other assistance
to help Congress make informed oversight, policy, and funding
decisions. GAO's commitment to good government is reflected in its core
values of accountability, integrity, and reliability.
Obtaining Copies of GAO Reports and Testimony:
The fastest and easiest way to obtain copies of GAO documents at no
cost is through GAO's Web site [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov]. Each
weekday, GAO posts newly released reports, testimony, and
correspondence on its Web site. To have GAO e-mail you a list of newly
posted products every afternoon, go to [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov]
and select "E-mail Updates."
Order by Phone:
The price of each GAO publication reflects GAO‘s actual cost of
production and distribution and depends on the number of pages in the
publication and whether the publication is printed in color or black and
white. Pricing and ordering information is posted on GAO‘s Web site,
[hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/ordering.htm].
Place orders by calling (202) 512-6000, toll free (866) 801-7077, or
TDD (202) 512-2537.
Orders may be paid for using American Express, Discover Card,
MasterCard, Visa, check, or money order. Call for additional
information.
To Report Fraud, Waste, and Abuse in Federal Programs:
Contact:
Web site: [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/fraudnet/fraudnet.htm]:
E-mail: fraudnet@gao.gov:
Automated answering system: (800) 424-5454 or (202) 512-7470:
Congressional Relations:
Ralph Dawn, Managing Director, dawnr@gao.gov:
(202) 512-4400:
U.S. Government Accountability Office:
441 G Street NW, Room 7125:
Washington, D.C. 20548:
Public Affairs:
Chuck Young, Managing Director, youngc1@gao.gov:
(202) 512-4800:
U.S. Government Accountability Office:
441 G Street NW, Room 7149:
Washington, D.C. 20548:
