# Presentation: 625649

## Update on the Coverage Improvement Program for the 2010 CensusDave Sheppard Decennial Statistical Studies Division Census Information Center Program  October 9-11, 2007

## Coverage improvement

- Many operations or aspects of programs may lead to improved coverage in the Census
- 	We’ll focus on two of them today...

## Some plans to improve coverage for the 2010 Census

- Review and possibly revise census enumeration residence rules and how we communicate these rules to respondents.
- Determine ways to identify households with within-household coverage error and then develop and test methods to reduce the error.
- In addition, Census Bureau staff will also provide an update on plans for measuring coverage error in Census 2010.

**Notes:**
Review and possibly revise census enumeration residence rules and how we communicate these rules to respondents in order to ensure that we count persons once and only once at the appropriate place.
Determine ways to identify households with within-household coverage error and then develop and test methods to reduce the error.

## Some major coverage improvement topics not covered today:

- Improve housing unit coverage by identifying the best methods for keeping the Master Address File (MAF) up to date
- Develop methods for identifying the duplication of persons and housing units in the census

**Notes:**
Improve housing unit coverage by identifying the best methods for keeping the Master-Address-File (MAF) up-to-date, including the development of targeting methodology where appropriate.

Develop methods for identifying the duplication of persons and housing units in the census and then develop and test methods for reducing this duplication.

## Coverage? 

- Coverage Improvement
- Methods to address census error
- Impacts census counts of people and housing units
- Coverage Measurement
- Evaluates the error in the Census
- Does not change census counts

## How do we end up with everyone* counted only once and in the right place?  

* or at least as many people as possible

- * or at least as many people as possible

## 2010 Census coverage improvementresearch - two approaches

**Get it right the first time **
- Help respondents to initially include the correct people on their Census form
**Fix it later**
- Identify households with coverage problems, get back in touch with them, and make corrections

**Notes:**
To count everyone once and in the right place,  we can do two things:

The first is to - Help the respondent to GET IT RIGHT the first time,

The second is to FIX IT LATER -  identify households with ‘mistakes’(?) and correct them.

## Improve residence rules instructions to respondents
Self response paper forms 
Enumerator wording for roster building
Simplify residence rules 
Review of rules from Census 2000

- Self response paper forms
- Enumerator wording for roster building
**Simplify residence rules**** **
- Review of rules from Census 2000

**To get it right the first time ... **

## To fix it later, we identify households ...

- We identify households with potential coverage problems because:
- They missed counting someone (omissions), or
- They counted someone who should not have been counted there (erroneous enumerations)

**Notes:**
We identify households with potential coverage problems either because they missed counting someone or because they counted someone who should not have been counted.

We refer to missing people as OMISSIONS and people who should not have been counted as ERRONEOUS ENUMERATIONS.

## Identify omissions 
Count discrepancies (low person count) 
Use of undercount coverage question
Use of administrative records
Identify erroneous enumerations 
Count discrepancies (high person count)
Use of overcount coverage question
Use of unduplication within the census
For both omissions & erroneous enumerations
Large households

- Count discrepancies (low person count)
- Use of undercount coverage question
- Use of administrative records
**Identify erroneous enumerations**** **
- Count discrepancies (high person count)
- Use of overcount coverage question
- Use of unduplication within the census
**For both ****omissions & ****erroneous enumerations**
- Large households

**... ****for specific reasons**

**Notes:**

Households with more than six people have been found to contain both omissions and erroneous enumerations at significant rates

In addition, followup allows us to collect missing data for all household members

## The CFU Interview

- Verify the household and the validate the address
- Review the list of people reported in the initial enumeration
- Update the roster
- Remove anyone who is unknown
- Add anyone who is missing
- Ask questions about possible living situations for each person on the updated roster
- Collect any missing demographic information

**Notes:**
Here’s a brief overview of the CFU interview for those of you who are unfamiliar with the sorts of questions it asks in order to determine the correct household composition.  
First, the interviewers verify that they’ve reached the correct household at the correct address.
Then, the interviewers review with the respondent the list of people they reported in the initial enumeration.
The respondent is then given the opportunity to update the roster, if necessary.  They can remove anyone who unknown (there are probes that ask ‘is there anyone you don’t know?’ and ‘is there anyone on this list more than once?’)  They also are given the opportunity to add anyone who is missing (there are probes that ask ‘were there any missed babies or newborns, foster children, non-related children, other relatives, nonrelatives, etc?’)
After the updated roster is established, a series of questions about other possible living situations is asked for each person (these questions ask about movers, anyone attending college, anyone in shared custody, military service, away for work, have a seasonal home, stay somewhere else for an extended time or part of the time, and then also a series of questions targeted at group quarters).
Lastly, any missing demographic information is collected.

So how do we know who to call for a CFU interview?  We want to call households we think have a coverage problem.

## Past   Present

- Census 2000 – About 2% of all households
- Large households (LHH)
- Count discrepancies (CD)
- 2010 research – LHH/CD and ???
- Undercount coverage question
- Overcount coverage question
- Use of administrative record matching
- Use of person matching to identify duplication
- Coverage Followup
- Field Verification`

**Notes:**
We will be using the two strata as part of our analysis to see how the treatments are performing ...

## Large households (LHH)

- Household contains more people than fit on the form
- Mailback cases with 7 or more people
- Conducts CFU interview to:
- Improve coverage
- Collect demographics for persons 7+

## Count discrepancies

- High data defined person discrepancies (HDDP)
- Reported more people than the reported POP count on the census return
- Low data defined person discrepancies (LDDP)
- Reported fewer people than the reported POP count on the census return

## Count discrepancies (cont.)

- Conduct CFU interview to improve coverage
- Even if no one is added or deleted, we still determine the correct HH size

## Undercount coverage question 

- Asked once at the household-level
- Directly after question 1 about household size
- To identify housing units with potential omissions
- Probes include types of people historically missed in the Census

**Notes:**
Moving on to more details about the coverage questions in the 2005 NCT

The undercount coverage question was 
Asked once at the household-level
Directly after question 1 about household size
Some of the probes include types of people historically missed in the Census

## Undercount coverage question for the 2008 Dress Rehearsal

**Notes:**
Coverage questions

Undercount 
Household level
Identify potential missed persons
Follows population count question

## Overcount coverage question	

- Asked once for each of the first six people listed on the form
- To identify housing units with potential erroneous enumerations
- Probes include places where people are historically overcounted in the Census

**Notes:**
The overcount question in the 2005 NCT
Was asked for every person 1-6
Was used to identify housing units with potential erroneous enumerations
Probes include places where people are historically overcounted in the Census.

## Overcount coverage question for the 2008 Dress Rehearsal

**Notes:**
Coverage questions
Overcount 
Person level
Identify potential people counted in error

## Use of administrative records

- First time we used this methodology was in the 2005 NCT, then in the 2006 Census test
- Returns identified that contain fewer people than the administrative records database has for that address
- Designed only to identify potential omissions

**Notes:**
We matched the initial census returns in this test to a database of administrative records from a variety of governmental sources.  

We identified cases where one or more persons on the comparable administrative record were not present on the census return.

StARS – Statistical Administrative Records system

## Use of person matching to identify duplication

- Research from Census 2000 continued this decade
- Identifies both potential person and housing unit duplication
- Resolution through Coverage Followup or Field Verification

**Notes:**
Initial research by Bob Fay and Tom Mule

Continued by Mike Ikeda, Ned Porter working with Maureen Lynch and her staff

## Residence Rules Instructions

- One little box ... so many rules

**Notes:**
You’ve already heard a lot of the 31 residence rules we used in 2000 and a little about how they got to be the way they are from Ed this morning.

Remember at the end of his talk, he contrasted the 31 rules with the much more streamlined RR instructions we provide to respondents on the form or on a flashcard when visited by an enumerator.  

Some may say that because the instructions are what we provide, they are, in fact, our actual residence rules.  However, the entire list of 31 rules ARE used in the planning of our enumeration operations and are officially the rules for establishing residence in the Census.

Our goal in researching the residence rules instructions is to convey enough of the spirit of the 31 rules so that responses will follow the rules themselves.

## Residence rules instructions

- Explains how to apply the Census Residence Rules on paper forms:
- Three sets of bullets detailing
- who to include
- who not to include
- how to count people without a permanent place to stay
- A question about the number of people in the household

**Notes:**
You’ve already heard a lot of the 31 residence rules we used in 2000 and a little about how they got to be the way they are from Ed this morning.

Remember at the end of his talk, he contrasted the 31 rules with the much more streamlined RR instructions we provide to respondents on the form or on a flashcard when visited by an enumerator.  

Some may say that because the instructions are what we provide, they are, in fact, our actual residence rules.  However, the entire list of 31 rules ARE used in the planning of our enumeration operations and are officially the rules for establishing residence in the Census.

Our goal in researching the residence rules instructions is to convey enough of the spirit of the 31 rules so that responses will follow the rules themselves.

## Slide 24

**Notes:**
Six  versions were tested in the 2005 NCT to determine which led to the best coverage.  This one, the principle based approach, came out on top.

## Ongoing & Future Research

## Ongoing & future research for coverage followup

- Streamline coverage followup selection criteria
- Comparing efficiencies of all types of cases
- Primary measure: Cost per change to a roster
- Added people and deleted people
- Additional consideration possibly given to other factors as well
- Effects on differential undercount
- Effect on net census error

**Notes:**
Streamline coverage followup selection criteria - Conducting coverage followup for more than 14 percent of the census universe is impractical, expensive, and a large increase in respondent burden.  We plan to continue to try to find more efficient methods of identifying households with coverage errors.   For example, only 15 % of all households with omissions answer positively to the undercount coverage question, while over 70% of households with erroneous enumerations answered positively to the overcount coverage question for one or more people.

## Ongoing & future research (cont.)

- Improve the coverage followup interview
- Identification of cases through the use of administrative records
- Identification of duplicates through person matching

**Notes:**
 Improve the coverage followup interview - In addition, we plan to improve the coverage followup interview to make it more effective at eliciting the ‘truth’ about the composition of each household as defined by our residence rule.  In a recent test (Martin, 2007), high percentages of potential omissions identified at the time of initial enumeration were not elicited during the CFU interview.  We plan to investigate why.

Identification through the use of administrative records - The focus of this methodology is solely to identify omissions.  We matched the initial census returns in this test to a database of administrative records from a variety of governmental sources.  We identified cases where one or more persons on the comparable administrative record were not present on the census return. Initial results show some promise.
Identification of duplicates through person matching – Lots of potential here – see SRD seminar on Sept 19

## Questions?

- Dave Sheppard
- david.w.sheppard@census.gov