U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE

WASHINGTON : 

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Publishing Office

Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512–1800; DC area (202) 512–1800

Fax: (202) 512–2104 Mail: Stop IDCC, Washington, DC 20402–0001

94–905 PDF 2016

S. Hrg. 114–436 

2020 CENSUS: CHALLENGES FACING THE BUREAU 

FOR A MODERN, COST–EFFECTIVE SURVEY 

HEARING 

BEFORE THE

COMMITTEE ON 

HOMELAND SECURITY AND 

GOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS 

UNITED STATES SENATE 

ONE HUNDRED FOURTEENTH CONGRESS 

FIRST SESSION 

APRIL 20, 2015 

Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.fdsys.gov/ 

Printed for the use of the 

Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs 

( 
(II) 

COMMITTEE ON HOMELAND SECURITY AND GOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS 

RON JOHNSON, Wisconsin Chairman 

JOHN MCCAIN, Arizona 

ROB PORTMAN, Ohio 

RAND PAUL, Kentucky 

JAMES LANKFORD, Oklahoma 

MICHAEL B. ENZI, Wyoming 

KELLY AYOTTE, New Hampshire 

JONI ERNST, Iowa 

BEN SASSE, Nebraska 

THOMAS R. CARPER, Delaware 

CLAIRE MCCASKILL, Missouri 

JON TESTER, Montana 

TAMMY BALDWIN, Wisconsin 

HEIDI HEITKAMP, North Dakota 

CORY A. BOOKER, New Jersey 

GARY C. PETERS, Michigan 

KEITH B. ASHDOWN, Staff Director 

COURTNEY J. ALLEN, Counsel 

GABRIELLE A. BATKIN. Minority Staff Director 

JOHN P. KILVINGTON, Minority Deputy Staff Director 

TROY H. CRIBB, Minority Chief Counsel for Governmental Affairs 

DEIRDRE G. ARMSTRONG, Minority Professional Staff Member 

LAURA W. KILBRIDE, Chief Clerk 

LAUREN M. CORCORAN, Hearing Clerk 
(III) 

C O N T E N T S 

Opening statements: Page 

Senator Lankford .............................................................................................. 1 

Senator Carper ................................................................................................. 10 

Senator Ayotte .................................................................................................. 12 

Senator Peters .................................................................................................. 15 

Prepared statements: 

Senator Johnson ............................................................................................... 33 

Senator Carper ................................................................................................. 35 

Senator Lankford .............................................................................................. 37 

WITNESSES 

MONDAY, APRIL 20, 2015 

Hon. John H. Thompson, Director, U.S. Census Bureau, U.S. Department 

of Commerce ......................................................................................................... 3 

Robert Goldenkoff, Director of Strategic Issues, U.S. Government Accountability Office ......................................................................................................... 6 

Carol R. Cha, Director of Information Technology Acquisition Management 

Issues, U.S. Government Accountability Office ................................................. 8 

ALPHABETICAL LIST OF WITNESSES

Cha, Carol R.: 

Testimony .......................................................................................................... 8 

Joint prepared statement ................................................................................. 45 

Goldenkoff, Robert: 

Testimony .......................................................................................................... 6 

Joint prepared statement ................................................................................. 45 

Thompson, Hon. John H.: 

Testimony .......................................................................................................... 3 

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 38 

APPENDIX 

Response to post-hearing questions submitted by Mr. Thompson ...................... 65 

(1) 

2020 CENSUS: CHALLENGES FACING THE 

BUREAU FOR A MODERN, COST-EFFECTIVE 

SURVEY 

MONDAY, APRIL 20, 2015 

U.S. SENATE,

COMMITTEE ON HOMELAND SECURITY

AND GOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS, 

Washington, DC. 

The Committee met, pursuant to notice, at 3:01 p.m., in room 

SD–342, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. James Lankford, 

presiding. 

Present: Senators Johnson, Lankford, Ayotte, Carper, McCaskill, 

and Peters. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR LANKFORD 

Senator LANKFORD. This hearing will come to order. I wanted to 

do an opening statement, and then Senator Carper is on his way. 

Senator Johnson is also on his way, and so as they slip in, we will 

recognize them at the appropriate time as well. I want to have this 

Committee come to order so we can begin this process on time 

today. 

I would like to welcome everyone to this afternoon’s hearing on 

the ‘‘2020 Census: Challenges Facing the Bureau for a Modern, 

Cost-Effective Survey.’’ I will begin by recognizing myself for this 

opening statement. 

Director Thompson, let me first say to you on behalf of the Committee, we would like to express all of our condolences on the loss 

of Lawrence Buckner. We lost him in the line of duty on April 9 

in Census Bureau headquarters in Suitland, Maryland. Know that 

our thoughts and prayers are with you and the agency as you all 

walk through this time together. It was a senseless act of violence, 

and we will all walk through it together with his family. 

The United States Constitution mandates that an actual enumeration be made within 3 years after the first meeting of the Congress of the United States and every subsequent 10 years. 

As the 2020 decennial census approaches, I appreciate the fact 

that the Census Bureau is actually taking steps to prepare since, 

as we have seen in the past, a failure to do so can drastically increase costs for the Federal Government and ultimately the taxpayers. It is laudable that the Bureau is working toward implementation of an innovation strategy with the goal of saving the 

taxpayers’ money. 
2 

1The prepared statement of Senator Johnson appears in the Appendix on page 33. 

However, as the Government Accountability Office (GAO), has 

noted, although progress has been made since 2010, more work is 

needed to ensure that technology systems are fully operational and 

information remains secure and confidential. 

While it is important that we have information regarding the 

makeup of this Nation, it is also important that we safeguard the 

privacy of the American people. Questions asked of citizens of this 

Nation must be cost-effective and should not be overly intrusive. 

When the questions go too far and exceed what we should ask from 

the U.S. Government, it is invasive and fuels an environment of 

distrust. 

It is important that we examine not just the preparation for the 

2020 Census itself, but also the manner in which the Census and 

other surveys, like the American Community Survey (ACS), are 

being conducted, as well the substantive nature of the questions 

asked. I look forward to the testimony, and I will acknowledge the 

Ranking Member Senator Carper for his opening statement when 

he arrives as well. 

Let me introduce the witnesses. Then I am going to swear the 

witnesses in as we go from here. 

John Thompson is the Director of the Census Bureau. Before his 

appointment as Director, Mr. Thompson was the President and 

Chief Executive Officer (CEO) of the National Opinion Research 

Center (NORC). Thanks again for being here. 

Robert Goldenkoff is the Director of Strategic Issues at the GAO. 

Mr. Goldenkoff leads reviews of the governmentwide civil service 

reforms and ways of improving the cost-effectiveness of the Federal 

statistical system. 

Carol Cha is the Director of Information Technology Acquisition 

Management Issues at the Government Accountability Office. Before joining GAO, Ms. Cha led numerous reviews of information 

technology (IT) systems at Federal agencies, including the Departments of Commerce, Defense (DOD), and Homeland Security 

(DHS). 

Thank you, all three of you, for being here, and thanks for your 

testimony, both your written testimony and the oral testimony that 

you are about to begin as well. 

I would like to ask unanimous consent that Senator Johnson’s 

statement be included in the record.1 Without objection, so ordered. 

It is the tradition of this Committee that we swear in all witnesses, so would you please rise and raise your right hand? Do you 

swear that the testimony you will give before this Committee will 

be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help 

you, God? 

Mr. THOMPSON. I do. 

Mr. GOLDENKOFF. I do. 

Ms. CHA. I do. 

Senator LANKFORD. Thank you. You may be seated. 

Let the record reflect that the witnesses have answered in the 

affirmative. 

I will ask that each of you will give your testimony. You have 

plenty of time to be able to do that. We are glad that you came and 
3 

1The prepared statement of Mr. Thompson appears in the Appendix on page 38. 

you came well prepared on that. When Senator Carper comes, I 

will recognize him for an opening statement. That may be in between one of you, but I will not interrupt you in the middle of your 

statement if he comes in during that time. 

Mr. Thompson, you are first. Thank you. We would be glad to receive your testimony now. 

TESTIMONY OF HON. JOHN H. THOMPSON,1 DIRECTOR, U.S. 

CENSUS BUREAU, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

Mr. THOMPSON. Thank you, Senator Lankford. I would also like 

to thank Chairman Johnson and Ranking Member Carper and the 

Committee for allowing me this opportunity to testify on our preparations for the 2020 Census. 

Before I testify, however, I would like to take a moment to honor 

a true hero, Officer Lawrence Buckner, who lost his life protecting 

all of us at the U.S. Census Bureau. We are profoundly saddened 

by the loss of Officer Buckner. No one can ever measure the loss 

to his family. But our hearts are full, and the Census Bureau extends its deepest sympathy to his wife, Linda, his son, Lawrence, 

and his family. Thank you, and we mourn this tragic loss. 

I will now proceed with my testimony. The Census Bureau is 

fundamentally changing the way we will conduct the decennial census, which is the largest civilian mobilization in the United States. 

These efforts began earlier this decade by establishing a goal to design and conduct the 2020 Census to cost less per housing unit 

than the 2010 Census, while maintaining the highest levels of 

quality. 

The Census Bureau then identified the major cost drivers, and 

with the Congress’ support, we began researching and testing 

major innovations oriented around technology and the strategic use 

of information to rein in these cost drivers. 

Today I will describe our work in four key innovation areas that 

will lead to the reengineered 2020 Census. We believe that investing now in these four key innovation areas can yield up to $5 billion in savings relative to repeating the 2010 Census in 2020. The 

tests we conducted in 2013 and 2014 and the four tests we are conducting this year are informing the 2020 Census design decisions, 

which we will deliver later this year. I will discuss how these tests 

informed our planning and how the next 2 years position us for the 

critical end-to-end test in 2018. The alternative is repeating the 

2010 Census, which would forfeit the savings of $5 billion. 

There are four key areas of innovation and potential savings: 

First, better address validation. By using the U.S. Postal Service 

(USPS) and other information sources, including aerial imagery, we 

plan to avoid walking every street in the Nation to validate the address list. We can save $1 billion through these efforts. 

Second, better response options. By making responding to the 

Census more convenient through the Internet, phone, or by mail, 

we can potentially save approximately $550 million. 

Third, better use of existing information. By using existing government and commercial information to reduce the need to follow- 
4 

up with non-responding housing units, we can potentially save $1.2 

billion. 

Fourth, better field operations. By using technology to manage 

and track cases, as well as to route the Census takers who will be 

using smartphones and tablets rather than pencil and paper, we 

can potentially save $2.3 billion. 

As I noted above, the total savings we expect from these four areas of innovation is $5 billion. I will now discuss each of these 

innovation areas in more detail. 

The foundation of an accurate Census is an accurate address list, 

which includes both the address and the geospatial location. Over 

the past few years, there have been tremendous technological advances in the geospatial field. More and more data become available, meaning that we no longer have to validate every address by 

a personal visit. We are now examining how to refine our procedures to integrate private sector data and services to update our 

geospatial assets. Specifically, we want to purchase address, road, 

and satellite imagery instead of physically walking the entire 

United States. 

This year’s Address Validation Test encompasses two components 

that will also bring insights into how we can build a better address 

frame. The first component is to assess the ability of statistical 

models to predict change, such as new roads, new housing units, 

or other changes. The second component will provide measures of 

the current accuracy of our address list and our geospatial database. 

The second area of innovation is developing better response options. We are moving away from relying solely on the mailed questionnaire and enumerator to count every household. We are expanding options for people to self-respond by the Internet, at home 

or on a mobile device remotely, as well as by telephone. However, 

it is important to note that paper will continue to be an option. 

We want to make the Census as mobile and convenient as possible. This means allowing respondents to answer the Census without entering a Census ID. In fact, we anticipate that by promoting 

the Internet option, there will be a dramatic increase in the number of these responses in 2020. For this to work, we must validate 

these responses quickly in real time. 

The third area of innovation is better use of existing information. 

The increased use of administrative records from other Federal and 

State government agencies and third-party commercial data can reduce costs. The use of administrative records is not new to the decennial census, and we want to expand our use of these data for 

the 2020 Census. We are exploring several options, and two of the 

most promising are using those data to help manage and even reduce the field workload. 

The two most significant areas of innovation and cost savings are 

removing vacant units and using existing information on persons 

to enumerate occupied housing units, thereby removing them from 

the non-response follow-up operations. 

For example, during the 2010 Census, the field workload included 50 million housing units. Each housing unit received at 

least one in-person visit. Of these, 19 million were either vacant or 

no longer existed. By using administrative data from the Postal 
5 

Service and other agencies, we believe we can identify these vacant 

and non-existent housing units and remove them from the in-person follow-up workload, achieving substantial cost savings. 

Administrative records may also us to enumerate occupied housing units rather than enumerate them directly, and I would like to 

have a conversation with the Congress about this potential step. 

Ultimately, we will have to send Census takers into the field to 

enumerate the remaining non-responding households, which underscores the importance of the fourth area of innovation: better field 

operations. As part of the research and testing, including the 2015 

Census test in Maricopa County, Arizona, we are examining our 

field staffing structure and testing several technological innovations. The goal of reengineering our field operations is to use technology more efficiently and effectively to conduct and manage the 

2020 Census field workload. 

In previous Censuses, the entire process, both data collection and 

management, was conducted by paper and pencil. To measure 

progress, we had to rely on daily in-person meetings with field staff 

and had no ability for real-time communication. This paper-based 

data collection process was a significant contributor to the overall 

cost increases of the previous Census field operations. 

We are developing a sophisticated operational control system 

that will manage tasks and assignments in real time. We intend 

to send our interviewers out with mobile devices rather than paper 

and pencil. They will use these devices to collect responses and report their time and attendance instead of using the paper forms as 

in 2010. And we will have real-time measures of progress. 

Our goals are to incorporate operational best practices, including 

the optimization of daily assignments, intelligent routing, and realtime issue management. We are working with the private sector as 

we build these systems. 

The four key innovation areas represent significant cost savings 

that can only be achieved if we get the opportunity to complete significant testing and development in the next 2 years. We have very 

little time left to test and ultimately important these innovations 

before we reach 2018, when the cost of the Census will rise. 2018 

is also important because we must conduct a complete end-to-end 

test so we can be confident that when we go live in 2020, all of our 

systems will work. 

To realize the most modern decennial census ever, we have to 

stay on track. That is why next year is crucial to the 2020 Census 

for the development of the key systems to support the infrastructure to handle data collection and processing. 

One of the critical activities in 2016 is the continued development of our Census Enterprise system that will support not just 

the 2020 Census but all of our data collection activities at the Census Bureau. We will no longer build a system that we will throw 

away after the decennial, as we have for each previous Census. 

Known as the Census Enterprise Data Collection and Processing 

(CEDCaP) program, we are moving to a smarter, more cost-efficient, enterprise-level strategy to manage core information technology aspects for all of our Censuses and surveys. 

At the core of this modern system that we are building is our 

continued commitment to protecting privacy and confidentiality of 
6 

1The joint prepared statement of Mr. Goldenkoff and Ms. Cha appears in the Appendix on 

page 45. 

individuals’ information. Confidentiality and privacy is the very 

core of the Census Bureau’s mission and deeply ingrained in our 

culture. We protect the information the public provides with a robust, comprehensive, and layered cybersecurity system. We are actively engaged with the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) and the Department of Homeland Security on these 

efforts. 

From the Census Enterprise system and cybersecurity to each 

test, each activity plays a significant role helping the Census Bureau design an accurate and cost-effective 2020 Census. Scaling up 

to the decennial census is complex, ranging over many years and 

many operations, which must be synchronized to meet our ultimate 

mandate. The $5 billion in savings cannot be achieved without rigorous testing designed to inform development of the systems and 

operations. We need your support to achieve these goals. 

Thank you, and I hope this update has been informative, and I 

look forward to answering your questions. 

Senator LANKFORD. Mr. Goldenkoff. 

TESTIMONY OF ROBERT GOLDENKOFF,1 DIRECTOR OF STRATEGIC ISSUES, U.S. GOVERNMENT ACCOUNTABILITY OFFICE 

Mr. GOLDENKOFF. Thank you, Senator Lankford. I would like to 

thank you and Chairman Johnson and Ranking Member Carper for 

the opportunity to be here this afternoon to discuss the Census Bureau’s progress in developing a more cost-effective approach to 

counting the Nation’s population. 

As you know, this month the Bureau marked the midway point 

in the decade-long countdown to Census Day 2020, giving greater 

urgency and importance to the testing, operational, and procurement decisions that it will make in the months ahead. For example, this September, the Bureau plans to announce its preliminary 

design for the 2020 Census, and two key field tests to inform that 

decision are currently underway. 

The cost of the decennial census has continually increased during 

the past 40 years, in part because the Nation’s population has 

grown steadily larger, more diverse, and increasingly difficult to 

enumerate. At about $13 billion, the 2010 Census was the costliest 

U.S. Census in history and was 56 percent more expensive than 

the $8.1 billion spent on the 2000 Census in constant 2010 dollars. 

In my remarks today, I will discuss the Bureau’s progress in implementing four critical cost-savings initiatives and their associated 

challenges. The four areas include: using data previously provided 

to the government to help enumerate the population; new processes 

for updating the Bureau’s address list and maps; reengineering 

field operations; and maximizing self-response. 

As the Director said, combined, the Bureau estimates that these 

efforts could generate up to $5 billion in cost savings and enable 

the Bureau to conduct the 2020 Census at a total life-cycle cost of 

around $12.7 billion, or about the same as the 2020 head count. 

With respect to using data previously provided to the government, the Bureau estimates that this initiative, sometimes referred 
7 

to as ‘‘using administrative records,’’ could save as much as $1.2 

billion by reducing the need for costly, labor-intensive follow-up 

work with non-responding households. 

The Bureau is testing the extent to which it can use Federal data 

such as Social Security and Medicare records as well as records 

from State, local, and tribal governments and commercial sources 

to reduce the number of in-person visits, local Census offices, and 

operations needed to ensure a complete count. 

However, before it will be able to realize cost savings or improvements in data reliability from the use of these records, the Bureau 

will first need to address such questions as the quality of the 

records and whether they will meet the Bureau’s needs. For example, while race and ethnicity data are collected in the Census, certain records available to the Bureau do not include this information. 

To reduce the cost of its efforts to update its address list and 

maps by as much as $1 billion, the Bureau is testing whether it 

can rely mainly on data from government agencies at all levels to 

share and continuously update their address list and street data 

with the Bureau. 

In prior decennials, thousands of Bureau field staff walked almost every street in the Nation as one of several operations to update the Bureau’s address list. Key questions here include which 

map and address data sources are the most cost-effective and 

whether the Bureau can accurately target its address canvassing 

efforts. 

With respect to improving the management of its field operations, the Bureau is examining, among other things, how best to 

automate enumerators’ work, which could save an estimated $2.3 

billion. However, the Bureau must first resolve whether it can fully 

test all the systems and procedures in time for 2020. 

A fourth cost-saving area involves maximizing self-response 

through enhanced outreach and an Internet response option. This 

effort could reduce the need for enumerators to visit non-responding households and save around $500 million. However, among 

other issues, the Bureau has yet to establish reliable estimates of 

how much it will cost to deliver an Internet response option and 

does not have integrated schedules for completing the work. 

The Bureau has identified or acknowledged many of the challenges and questions associated with these four initiatives and is 

working to address them. Because of their interrelated nature, 

shortcomings in any one area could impact the success of the others and thus put estimated cost savings and the accuracy of the 

count at risk. 

Going forward, it will be important to ensure the research and 

testing for these initiatives continue as planned to inform key design decisions later this year. 

This concludes my prepared remarks, and I will be happy to answer any questions that you may have. 

Senator LANKFORD. Thank you. 

Ms. CHA. 
8 

1The joint prepared statement of Ms. Cha and Mr. Goldenkoff appears in the Appendix on 

page 45. 

TESTIMONY OF CAROL R. CHA,1 DIRECTOR OF INFORMATION 

TECHNOLOGY ACQUISITION MANAGEMENT ISSUES, U.S. 

GOVERNMENT ACCOUNTABILITY OFFICE 

Ms. CHA. I would like to express my thanks to you, Senator 

Lankford, to Chairman Johnson, Ranking Member Carper, and 

Members of the Committee for inviting me to testify today. 

IT implementation will be a key factor in whether the Bureau 

will be able to adequately contain the costs for 2020. The Bureau’s 

past efforts have not always gone well. Our work on the 2010 Census highlighted the mismanagement and major cost, schedule, and 

performance issues associated with several critical IT investments, 

one of which was intended as a cost-savings measure but instead 

increased the costs of the Census by up to $3 billion. 

For 2020, the Bureau will rely on an enterprisewide IT initiative 

called ‘‘CEDCaP’’ to deliver the systems and IT infrastructure 

needed to carry out its cost-savings initiatives. 

For example, CEDCaP is planning to deliver the online survey 

instrument and a cloud computing solution to support an Internet 

response option. For field reengineering, the program is planning 

to implement a new system to track and manage field work. It will 

also test the use of mobile devices, either government-issued or employee-owned, for field data collection. 

Recent estimates put the program’s cost at about $548 million 

through 2020. Given the Bureau’s prior and existing challenges, we 

highlighted CEDCaP as part of a new entry onto this year’s GAO 

high-risk list as one of a handful of major IT investments in need 

of the most attention, and we plan to initiate an in-depth review 

for this Committee later this year on CEDCaP. 

Based on our work to date, I would like to highlight two key 

challenges this afternoon regarding the Bureau’s IT plans for 2020. 

First, the time constraints. September’s decision is expected to 

drive the business requirements for CEDCaP’s systems and infrastructure. This milestone, which has already been delayed by a 

year, cannot afford to slip further. However, as we reported earlier 

this year, the Bureau had not yet addressed how two critical inputs 

into this decision would be addressed. These inputs relate to the 

Internet self-response rate and the IT infrastructure security and 

scalability needs. And if they are not adequately addressed by September, it could lead to system rework downstream, eating into an 

already narrow schedule margin. 

By October 2018, the Bureau intends to begin end-to-end testing 

to validate that CEDCaP’s systems are ready to go live on Census 

Day. This gives the Bureau roughly 31⁄2 years to develop and integrate planned systems, which may seem like a lot of time but is 

not based on past performance, and a lack of experience implementing technologies at the scale of the 2020. 

The October 2018 milestone date is a prudent one for planning 

purposes. If this date slips to the right and system testing is compressed, then we very well could have another HealthCare.gov on 

our hands. 
9 

In order to decrease the risk of system rework downstream and 

protect the October testing date, the Bureau should fully implement the recommendations we made to ensure that this September’s decision will be adequately informed. 

The second key challenge is the Bureau’s current IT posture. The 

Bureau has made important progress to strengthen and institutionalize IT governance and requirements management, and as a 

result, the Bureau is better positioned to manage and oversee its 

IT investments than in prior decennials. However, more work is 

needed to address critical IT workforce gaps and information security deficiencies. 

In particular, the Bureau does not have the requisite competencies in enough numbers to meet IT workforce needs. These 

skills gaps include systems engineering, IT security, cloud computing, and Internet data collection, to name a few. 

To the Bureau’s credit, it is aggressively working to close these 

gaps. However, if they do remain open, the Bureau’s ability to deliver CEDCaP effectively will be hampered. 

In addition, the Bureau does not yet have a comprehensive information security program, something we first reported on in January 2013. Among other things, the Bureau had not effectively implemented appropriate access controls to protect its systems from 

intrusion. For example, the Bureau did not adequately encrypt 

Title 13 data in transmission and at rest, nor did it use secure protocols to manage its IT infrastructure, which placed sensitive data 

such as administrative user accounts and passwords at risk of compromise. As a result, we made 115 recommendations to address 

these control deficiencies. As of today, the Bureau has fully addressed 19 of them. 

Given that the Bureau is considering using IT systems to collect 

the public’s personal information in ways that have not been used 

in the prior decennial, implementing our security recommendations 

must be a high priority. 

In summary, while the Bureau is in a stronger position to manage its IT investments than in the 2010 Census, it is also starting 

development work much later in the decade. The margin for error 

is slim. And the current workforce and information security gaps 

add significant risk to the 2020 Census. Moving forward, swift actions to fully implement our open recommendations must be taken. 

Doing so will improve the Bureau’s ability to deliver on its IT plans 

and realize cost savings. 

That concludes my statement, and I look forward to addressing 

your questions. 

Senator LANKFORD. Thank you, all of you. 

And as promised, Senator Carper is here and will give an opening statement. 
10 

1The prepared statement of Senator Carper appears in the Appendix on page 35. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR CARPER 

Senator CARPER. Thanks so much, Mr. Chairman. What I would 

really like to do is get right into the questions. It is nice of you to 

yield to me. 

I would say that I would like to ask that my statement be made 

part of the record,1 unless one of my colleagues objects. 

Senator LANKFORD. Without objection. 

Senator CARPER. All right. Good. 

Just very briefly, we have been doing this for 200-and-some 

years—not us here. We have not been in the Senate that long. But 

we have had Senators interested in trying to get a good Census 

and trying to do it in a cost-effective way. 

A lot of people think that we in Washington cannot organize and 

run a good three-car funeral procession. And we have a great opportunity here to demonstrate, by careful planning, smart funding, 

good oversight, that we can do some amazing things with the technology and the tools and the people that we have. It is just really 

imperative that we deliver. And this oversight hearing today is in 

part designed to make sure that you can deliver and that we will 

be proud of the work that is done in the next 5 years. 

Thank you. 

Senator LANKFORD. Thank you. 

Let me address just a few questions, and then we will continue 

moving through questions here on the dais as people arrived. 

Mr. Thompson, you had mentioned that there are some things 

you need to talk to Congress about, about vacant units. Is there 

something you are needing from Congress directly, clarification or 

statutory changes? 

Mr. THOMPSON. Thank you, Senator. There is, but let me clarify 

my statement first. So in collecting the information from our nonresponding households to the Census, we are testing ways in which 

we can use administrative records to enumerate occupied housing 

units instead of direct in-person enumeration. And we want to 

make sure that we are on the same page as the Congress in terms 

of taking this step, if we should propose to take this step. 

Now, with regard to help from the Congress, there is a data set— 

it is called the National Directory of New Hires (NDNH)—and it 

is maintained at the Department of Health and Human Services 

(HHS), and it would help us greatly in our program, and we would 

need some legislative changes to have access to that file. 

Senator LANKFORD. OK. What other data do you need here? Obviously there are multiple different databases between the IRS, Social Security, Department of Labor (DOL); HHS has it, you have 

it. There are lots of data sets around there. I guess the question 

for me initially would be: Which particular data sets do you want 

to be able to use? And, second, are any of these agencies charging 

Commerce to be able to have access to that data? 

Mr. THOMPSON. Thank you. So you have named some of the data 

sets that we already have access to. We are also in the process of 

acquiring the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) 

records State by State and the Women, Infants, and Children 

(WIC) program records so we can put these together in a very pri-
11 

vate way, protecting privacy, and using them and research them as 

we proceed with the Census. 

We are not being charged by the other agencies for these data 

sets. In fact, the Secretary of Commerce has great authority to ask 

for these records in conducting the job of carrying out the Census. 

Senator LANKFORD. OK. We had an extensive conversation here 

at this same Committee room just a couple of weeks ago about the 

Death Master File (DMF), and that we have about 6.5 million people that are listed in our systems right now that are over 114 years 

old, I believe—112? Excuse me. A lot younger than that, 112 years 

old, when we actually think there are less than two dozen in the 

United States. So we have some problems in those data sets that 

are out there. How are you going to try to address that to make 

sure we do not get individuals into the system that are not really 

alive anymore? 

Mr. THOMPSON. Part of our research program, is to look at which 

records can be effective and in which combinations of records that 

link together. So we do need to do an extensive research program 

to feel comfortable before we use administrative records. And we 

are looking at those very things right now. 

Senator LANKFORD. OK. That is one of the aspects that we will 

need to resolve, both how that is resolved within Census and then 

obviously we would like to know that information so we can get a 

chance to share that with other entities within the Federal Government, because as I mentioned, with the Death Master File, that 

has extensive millions of names on it that are no longer with us 

anymore. We have to be able to resolve that. 

Mr. Goldenkoff, you have a very interesting statement, which I 

have read and seen multiple times before. If we can put all of these 

different aspects into place, all these different innovations, we 

could save $5 billion. And so by saving $5 billion, we would spend 

the same as we did last time. 

Now, if I sold you a pizza for $10 and said I am going to sell you the next one for—I am going to save $5 for you, and it is going to 

be the same cost, I am not sure you would think that was a savings. So I am working through the math here between how we save 

$5 billion, yet we do it for the same cost as we did last time. 

Mr. GOLDENKOFF. Well, part of it is a unit cost, roughly $100 per 

housing unit. So you would expect to see some cost increase because the population—— 

Senator LANKFORD. Right, because of the number of people. 

Mr. GOLDENKOFF. Exactly. The workload is more. So that is why 

we look at the unit cost, and it works out roughly the same, about 

$100 per housing unit. 

Senator LANKFORD. Is there a way to be able to save unit cost, 

that the unit cost goes down? Or are we tapped out? I think it is 

$97, the last stat that I saw, per person to be able to do this. Is 

there a way to be able to save money per unit cost rather than saying we had a growing population, we assume it still costs $97 per 

person to do this. 

Mr. GOLDENKOFF. Well, there is always a cost-quality tradeoff. 

You can always conduct a count for less. The question is: How accurate is it going to be? And that is always—that has to be 

weighed. I mean, the Constitution requires that everybody be 
12 

counted, and so that is the gold standard. And so because of the 

increasing complexities of counting everybody, the cost goes up 

from Census to Census. The Census Bureau needs to work harder 

each decade just to stay in place. 

Senator LANKFORD. So going back to something Ms. Cha mentioned before, in 2010 we had a $3 billion process of innovation 

that came through. I think that was dealing with the handhelds— 

is that correct?—is what it circled around. 

Ms. CHA. That is correct. 

Senator LANKFORD. So a $3 billion cost. A $13 billion program 

really cost $10 billion because we had a $3 billion program that 

ended up not being fully implemented and we lost there. So what 

I am trying to figure out is we save $5 billion, however we are still 

at basically the same cost as we did last time per person, and we 

had a $3 billion failure last time. 

Mr. GOLDENKOFF. That is correct. And I also need to say that, 

GAO has not verified these cost estimates, so we are relying for 

now on the Bureau’s estimates. We will probably be doing work in 

the future where we will look into the validity of those estimates. 

Senator LANKFORD. Is there a difference in the American Community Survey and the cost per person in that piece versus the 

every-10-year-Census piece, cost per person? 

Mr. GOLDENKOFF. I do not have that information. 

Senator LANKFORD. Mr. Thompson, do you happen to know that 

number, cost per person, the American Community Survey that we 

do every quarter basically? 

Mr. THOMPSON. I am sorry. I do not have that figure. 

Senator LANKFORD. Do you think it is higher or lower? Just a 

ballpark on that. 

Mr. THOMPSON. I think it is probably higher for the American 

Community Survey, somewhat. 

Senator LANKFORD. OK. I am going to keep going on questions, 

and I will come around for a second round here in just a moment. 

I will recognize Senator Carper, the Ranking Member, for the next 

set of questions. 

Senator CARPER. Why don’t I just go last? I would like to hear 

the others. 

Senator LANKFORD. OK. 

Senator CARPER. Then I will just come in at the end. Thank you. 

Senator LANKFORD. Senator Ayotte, you came in next after that. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR AYOTTE 

Senator AYOTTE. Thank you. Thank you all for being here. 

Here is what I wanted to understand. I know that you have 

taken steps to use commercial mapping information in putting together the proposal for the upcoming Census. And as I understand 

it, you are using portions of that commercial data to fill in gaps, 

but you still would be creating essentially your own product of the 

map that you need for this. What I wanted to understand is why 

we do not further use the commercial products that may be available. Why is the Request for Proposal (RFP) limited to filling in 

gaps rather than relying more heavily on commercial, already existing products where they already have? I know that their prod-
13 

ucts may not be able to fully do this, but could do a significant 

amount of it. So what is the thinking there? 

Mr. THOMPSON. Well, thank you, Senator. We have been talking 

with a number of the companies in that field. We have an RFP, as 

you noticed. 

Senator AYOTTE. Right. 

Mr. THOMPSON. We want to evaluate the quality of the materials 

that are available in the private sector and where they will work 

and save us from walking the ground where we intend to use them. 

We also will be having another RFP coming out soon which is 

going to be asking the private sector for services such as automated 

change detection and the like. 

So we are looking forward to seeing the responses to the RFP, 

and we are looking forward to using commercial data where it is 

available. 

Senator AYOTTE. So couldn’t commercial data be used in a much 

broader capacity than what your current RFP suggests? 

Mr. THOMPSON. I did not think that we were trying to limit the 

commercial data through the RFP process. 

Senator AYOTTE. So are you open to—for example, if commercial 

data for mapping would get you—I am just using a number—90 

percent there and you had to fill in the rest to complete your product, are you open to doing that? 

Mr. THOMPSON. Yes. 

Senator AYOTTE. OK. 

Mr. THOMPSON. Yes. 

Senator AYOTTE. It seems to me, I mean, so many of us use this 

data in so many capacities, and so always re-creating the wheel, 

this is a place where I know you are already taking important 

steps to do this, but we could save a lot of money for the public. 

Mr. THOMPSON. Yes. 

Senator AYOTTE. I wanted to follow-up on some of the GAO findings. What are the issues that you are going to be able to—one of 

the big things, I think, that overlies all of this is transparency in 

costs and measuring and achieving savings. How do you think that 

you will meet the transparency goals so that we can actually understand how much we are paying for things in a much more open 

way so that when we have our oversight function we do not end 

up in a position where we are not having the right type of oversight? 

Mr. THOMPSON. Well, thank you. We are committed for this Census and the 2020 cycle to being very open and transparent with our 

methods. I think we have a good relationship with the GAO. We 

certainly hope that they will—and we know they will—look carefully at what we are doing. 

I should also note that once a quarter we have a project management review in a public way for the 2020 program, and we webcast 

it. We make it available and we want everyone to see how we are 

planning and what we are doing, and we are trying to be very 

transparent with that. 

Senator AYOTTE. So, Ms. Cha, thank you for your testimony, and 

I think it is an eye opener for all of us when we hear potential 

analogies to HealthCare.gov, because obviously we all got an earful 

from our constituents and others over that rollout. 
14 

What are the most significant steps that we could take in this 

Committee to make sure that, in fact, this IT procurement goes 

properly? One of the issues that we have I think overall in the government—it is not just unique to this. We are particularly bad at 

this. Throughout the government we have had numerous occasions 

where we have invested a lot in a particular system, and we have 

not ended up with the system that we hoped for or the costs went 

way over. So I just wanted to hear from your perspective. If you 

were sitting in our shoes, what would you think that we should do 

most to make sure that the warnings that you have given us do 

not occur? 

Ms. CHA. Well, Senator, your continued and sustained oversight 

of the 2020 Census and particularly the CEDCaP program will be 

vital. These large and complex IT modernization programs are 

challenging, and it is one of the reasons why we cited CEDCaP as 

part of a new GAO high-risk entry this year in terms of improving 

IT management governmentwide. These programs rarely meet cost 

schedule and performance goals, and we have an opportunity here. 

The train has not left the station. And so, when we look at 

CEDCaP and we look at the complexity and the risks associated 

with this program and you layer on top of that the key challenges 

that I identified in terms of the time constraints as well as the 

risks associated with the IT workforce gap and the information security control deficiencies, there is quite a bit of risk here. I think 

there is an imbalance. 

And so to the extent that that the Bureau can focus on implementing a simpler solution, that would, I think, set the Bureau up 

for success relative to IT. 

Senator AYOTTE. So as I see it, I hear you saying that the solution they are proposing may be too complex to achieve during this 

period with the workforce that they have. 

Ms. CHA. That is correct. 

Senator AYOTTE. And is there anything more we should be doing 

also on the workforce gap issue? Which, frankly, is something that 

we face across government agencies, because this is a highly competitive field. 

Ms. CHA. Well, again, it is that continued monitoring on your 

end. I do want to say that the Bureau is aggressively looking to 

close these gaps that they do have. However, if these gaps are not 

effectively closed, then I think the Bureau needs to, again, continue 

to identify ways to decrease the complexity of the CEDCaP initiative. 

Senator AYOTTE. So my timing is up, but I would like to hear 

what your response would be to that about making this a simpler 

process so it could be easier to achieve. 

Mr. THOMPSON. Certainly, Senator. So I think I would coin a 

phrase from our Chief Information Officer (CIO), and it is something that worked very successfully in the 2000 Census when we 

did deliver our systems on time and on schedule, and that is, we 

are innovating but we are not inventing. So our plan is to use existing technology and existing expertise and innovate by using that 

intelligently. 
15 

So, for example, we are going to be using a smartphone, but the 

smartphone already exists. We are not going to invent one like we 

tried to invent a handheld the last time. 

We are using optimized systems for our routing, but we are not 

building—those systems already exist, and a number of people 

have very good ones, including the United Parcel Service (UPS). So 

we are trying to take advantage of what is existing and not trying 

to invent new things. 

Senator AYOTTE. Thank you. 

Senator LANKFORD. Senator Peters. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR PETERS 

Senator PETERS. Thank you for being here and for your testimony. As Senator Carper mentioned, it is important to get this 

right, and certainly it is a monumental undertaking to be able to 

count every individual in this country, and this is not an easy task. 

I appreciate that. But it is a very important task that you undertake, particularly from a public policy standpoint, so that we can 

make sure folks are protected, have resources, allocations that are 

done properly, so my hat goes off to you. 

I represent an area in Michigan, however, that has a very large 

population of folks from the Middle East and from North Africa. 

Mr. Thompson, I sent a letter to you earlier this year with a couple 

of my colleagues talking about that issue and the fact that that 

classification is not part of the Census. And as you know, it can 

be problematic because if you are not on the Census, you do not 

have access to some voting rights protections, including access to 

ballots in your home language to be able to vote and exercise that 

right. Also, it is difficult for researchers if we do not have that type 

of Census information to understand potential health disparities 

that may exist in the Middle Eastern population in Michigan and 

other places around the country, as well as employment discrimination and a whole host of things that we need to look into, and this 

would provide accurate data. 

My understanding is that you are going to test that category for 

Middle Eastern descent as well as North African. I appreciate your 

prompt response to our letter a ways back, but I want to take this 

opportunity to get an update from you as to where you are. I know 

when you responded to my letter, you mentioned you were going 

to be reaching out to stakeholders in the spring and consulting 

with community leaders within that community to get some assessment as to how you would proceed. Could you give me an update, 

please, on where we stand on that and how you look to proceed? 

Mr. THOMPSON. Certainly. So we have been having ongoing discussions with various members of the Middle Eastern and North 

African community, and we are testing including that categorization as part of our race and ethnic questions, and that test will 

take place this fall. 

We are looking forward to having an expert meeting of various 

Middle Eastern and North African scholars this spring so that we 

can really come up with a definition, if you will, of Middle Eastern 

and North African that everyone agrees to so we can use that as 

part of how we explain it when we conduct the Census. So we are 

on track. 
16 

Senator PETERS. Well, that is good to hear. I appreciate that. 

Have you heard from any other Americans or other organizations 

about a lack of representation in the Census? Is this unique to 

Middle Eastern community, or are there others that you are working on? 

Mr. THOMPSON. In terms of the—— 

Senator PETERS. Classification. 

Mr. THOMPSON. Classification of Middle Eastern and North African. We have heard from other constituents on other aspects of the 

question, but for inclusion, it has been basically the Middle Eastern 

and North African. 

Senator PETERS. So that is where your focus is, it is going to be 

on this going forward? 

Mr. THOMPSON. Yes. 

Senator PETERS. Great. I have many constituents, as you can 

imagine, given the large size of our community in Michigan, that 

are very passionate about this, and I understand that you have received thousands of inquiries from the community. Have you been 

responding directly? Or how can I respond to my constituents as 

to how you are listening to them and the response that they will 

receive? 

Mr. THOMPSON. I think what you are referring to is a Federal 

Register notice we put out that announced our plans for this fall 

test, and we received well over a thousand recommendations that 

we include in that test the Middle Eastern and North African category. And we are responding by a comment to the Federal Register notice to those recommendations that we got. 

Senator PETERS. OK. 

Mr. THOMPSON. Now, we will group them together because many 

recommendations said the same thing. 

Senator PETERS. Right. So you will be summarizing that in the 

Register. 

Mr. THOMPSON. Yes. 

Senator PETERS. And the folks we could refer them to that as 

well as get back—— 

Mr. THOMPSON. Yes. 

Senator PETERS. Well, I appreciate that. The other issue that I 

am concerned about deals with the homeless population. I know 

you are reaching out to folks who are not going to be at an address 

to count to make sure that they are represented. In fact, in Michigan, Washtenaw County is one of 71 communities that participates 

in Zero: 2016, which is a campaign to end veteran and chronic 

homelessness. And as a result of a recent survey that they did, 

they did show a 24-percent decline in the number of people living 

on the streets and in shelters, which is a good thing. But I am particularly concerned, as they are, with homeless veterans who may 

be out there, who have the ability and certainly the right to access 

benefits, but may not be aware of it. 

It seems to me having Census workers out finding people who 

are living on the street—and you have the staffing to do that—presents an opportunity, first, to identify those individuals, but also, 

two, present them with information that may be helpful to get 

them to a place where they can get the services that they have 

earned and they deserve. 
17 

Could you talk a little bit about how you reach out to folks who 

are homeless living on the streets and if you would be in a position 

to help in our efforts to bring these folks out of the shadows and 

into the help that they deserve and need? 

Mr. THOMPSON. Senator, getting an accurate count of all Americans is our primary goal for 2020. We are right now at this point 

in the process of starting to look at how we will blend in operations 

on top of our automation and reengineering to count these populations. So, for example, 

I have a National Advisory Committee on Racial, Ethnic, and 

Other Populations, and we are starting a working group on that 

committee right now to start addressing these issues. 

We want to address these issues over the years ahead, but right 

now I do not have a proposal for how we are going to count the 

homeless and the veterans in 2020. But we do intend to have a 

plan for that, and we will share it widely. 

Senator PETERS. When do you expect to have that plan? 

Mr. THOMPSON. I would have to get back to you. I would say by 

the end of next year we should have some significant progress on 

that. 

Senator PETERS. Well, I would appreciate that, and if you could 

inform our office about that, I would appreciate that. And then the 

second step is that when we identify these individuals, it also is an 

opportunity to make sure that these individuals, particularly homeless veterans, that there are benefits that are available to them 

and places of refuge for them to go. Although it is a different mission than you have for your Census workers now because of certainly the concern about those who have served our country who 

may be homeless, this may be an opportunity for us to kind of take 

a whole-government approach to helping those individuals. I would 

hope you would be open to that as well. 

Mr. THOMPSON. Of course. 

Senator PETERS. Thank you. 

Senator LANKFORD. Mr. Thompson, before I recognize Senator 

Carper, can I get a clarification? By the end of 2015 or by the end 

of 2016 you will have the plan for the homeless? 

Mr. THOMPSON. I was referring to the end of 2016. 

Senator LANKFORD. OK. So by the end of 2016, you will be able 

to have articulated a plan for that, for identifying the homeless and 

then doing a count there? 

Mr. THOMPSON. Yes. 

Senator LANKFORD. Great. Thank you. Senator Carper. 

Senator CARPER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. Thompson, it is very nice to see you, and Mr. Goldenkoff, Ms. 

Cha. I love saying your name. 

This is not your first opportunity to be involved at a senior level 

for the Census. Is that correct, Mr. Thompson? 

Mr. THOMPSON. That is correct, Senator. I was the career person 

in charge of the 2000 Census. 

Senator CARPER. OK. Just thinking back on your tenure with the 

Census Bureau, share with us some of the insights or things you 

have learned in this tour as our Director that are new and that you 

did not know before and how might they direct us as we try to get 

a better result for less money? 
18 

Mr. THOMPSON. Well, Senator, you are hitting on the reason that 

I came back into public service. When I left the government in 

2002 and went to the private sector, I had no intention of coming 

back into government. But I could not foresee just the way that 

technology had developed and offered a lot of opportunities to do 

the Census fundamentally differently than we had done it before. 

And that got me excited to come back into government and help 

the Census Bureau move forward. 

Senator CARPER. When you watched back in 2010, or actually the 

run-up to 2010, when they were trying to develop the handheld, 

and rather than get something off the shelf, actually develop and 

build and invent it, as you said, invent it ourselves, what did you 

think as you watched that unfold? 

Mr. THOMPSON. I was very disappointed that that happened, that 

that event happened. I was fairly close to it. I was on a panel that 

Secretary Carlos Gutierrez called together to give him a recommendation on how to proceed in the aftermath of the handheld 

contract issues. I was just disappointed and sorry for the Census 

Bureau. I wish I could have been there, but I was not. 

Senator CARPER. My recollection was this is when Dr. Coburn 

and I were taking turns leading the Subcommittee on Federal Financial Management that had jurisdiction over the Census. And it 

seems to me we went through a period of time where we had a fair 

amount of churning in terms of leadership at the Census. Is that 

correct? I think we had someone who was Acting Director, and then 

within the span of a couple years, we had maybe a couple of other 

people who were Acting Directors. We do not have that challenge 

anymore, do we? 

Mr. THOMPSON. Not right now. 

Senator CARPER. That is right. 

Mr. THOMPSON. I am delighted to be the Director. 

Senator CARPER. Because we have a law that actually says that 

the folks who are appointed in the job serve for 5 years, and the 

idea is that hopefully we will end up in a situation where we are 

not going to be in the throes or we are in the face of the Census 

and all of a sudden have turnover in leadership. My hope is that 

is going to serve us well. 

I am a guy who likes to think about incentives, how do we 

incentivize behavior to get better results, and I am real interested 

in root causes. We have a lot of people that are not interested in 

cooperating and being counted and providing information to the 

Census because of their right to privacy or they do not see any 

value for taking the time to either respond online or in person if 

somebody knocks on their door. They do not have an appreciation 

for the value of the information that we gain from the Census. 

They do not care how their Congressional districts are apportioned 

and all that. 

How do we incentivize people to be better citizens in this process? What are we doing, we collectively, to incentivize people to be 

better citizens in this regard? It is all great that we have the technology, we provide the money, the oversight, the funding. But how 

do we incentivize people? Collectively, how do we do that? 

Mr. THOMPSON. That is a very good question, Senator. We have 

started research on that issue already for the 2020 Census. We 
19 

have a test in the Savannah, Georgia, area, the Savannah, Georgia, 

media market, and we have already started to test different ways 

to reach out to the American public to encourage them to respond. 

And this is just the first in a series of tests, but we are starting 

this process much earlier than we did in the 2010 Census process. 

Senator CARPER. OK. 

Mr. THOMPSON. But it is something that we have to conduct 

some research on because the population has changed. It is not the 

same population that we had in 2010. 

Senator CARPER. All right. I agree with you. I thought that was 

a pretty good question, and I am going to ask you to think about 

your answer and respond to me on the record, because I think this 

is a big issue, and most people have not a clue of the value to our 

country, to their communities, of a Census done well. 

Let me also ask, one of my many favorite sayings is, ‘‘Pay me 

now or pay me later.’’ And I think that also applies with the President’s budget request for 2016, and he is asking in his budget for 

the Census a bump-up in funding. Explain to us why that relates 

to pay me now or pay me later. 

Mr. THOMPSON. Certainly. So the biggest part of the bump-up is 

to start developing the systems and processes that we will use to 

take this reengineered Census, and it is a challenge because we 

have never done a Census this way before. We have never used 

handheld devices. We have never used the Internet as a self-response option for the Census. We have never used optimized routing. So there are a lot of gains through that. But we really have 

to do the work in 2016 and 2017 to have in place the system so 

that we can run a complete end-to-end test in 2018, and that would 

give us the assurance that we could avoid a bad situation, similar 

to what happened before. 

Senator CARPER. OK. I have some more questions, and I will look 

forward to another round. It will give me a chance to pick on our 

other two witnesses. Do not go away. 

Senator LANKFORD. Thank you. We will open it up for questions 

here, and we will get a chance to go through as much as we can. 

Mr. Thompson, you had made a comment about identifiers and 

the Internet, as far as being able to follow-up. Can you complete 

that thought as well? If individuals go on to the Internet and they 

actually do their information, will they have an identifier there 

that is consistent so we will know who that was and have the consistency of that, as we would with a paper form? 

Mr. THOMPSON. Thank you, Senator. So let me be clear. What we 

are testing is in every Census to date, most of the enumeration required that an individual have either a Census questionnaire or an 

ID number that linked them to an address. What we are testing 

now is letting people respond with their address alone, and that 

has two issues that we have to feel comfortable with before we do 

it. One issue is we have to be able to validate their response as accurate. And the other issue is we know that in the past even we 

have had more than one response for the same address. And so we 

are going to have to be able to unduplicate the responses that we 

get. These are some challenging problems. We are working with experts in the field, including the National Institute of Standards and 

Technology, the MITRE Corporation, and some others. 
20 

So we are taking this very seriously, and we need to be convinced 

that it will work. But if we can make it work, it does give us the 

opportunity to allow people to be counted when we reach them with 

a message if they do not have their questionnaire. So we think that 

the opportunity there is worth trying to do that. But as I said, we 

are testing it. We are going to have the results of our testing, and 

we are only going to implement it if we feel comfortable. 

Senator LANKFORD. So the assumption is that we would have a 

master list of every address in the United States, and if they pull 

up that particular address, they could fill out the information for 

that address, not that they are creating an address in the system. 

So there is some sort of verification even at the beginning if they 

are typing in an identifying address that we do not recognize as a 

real address. 

Mr. THOMPSON. Yes. 

Senator LANKFORD. OK. Ms. Cha, questions and thoughts about 

that? What are the risks involved? 

Ms. CHA. Well, in addition to the address verification, there is 

also the identity verification as well. So I just wanted to kind of 

round out that piece, these two key elements. 

On the former, it seems to be much more simple from a technology perspective to match the address that a respondent enters 

into the form and match that against the Master Address File 

(MAF). However, the concern that we have here is that it is unclear as to whether the Bureau knows exactly what it needs to 

know in time for its September 2015 decision. Again, that milestone decision is going to—it is intended to deliver the complete set 

of business requirements for the systems development piece. 

So if there is information regarding non-ID processing that is not 

contained in that decision, then ultimately it could lead to system 

rework downstream. So that is the primary concern that we have 

with regard to non-ID processing, just that the Bureau is—we are 

in year 5 at this time, and if continued testing in this area proceeds beyond September 2015, it will impact the systems that they 

are expecting to deliver and to deploy. 

Senator LANKFORD. Right. And you made extensive comments 

about cybersecurity issues and vulnerabilities. Your statement, if I 

remember correctly, access controls, you have 115 recommendations of which 19 have actually been responded to at this point. 

Ms. CHA. That is correct. 

Senator LANKFORD. So what does that mean as far as your perception? At this point you would expect 115, 19 have been responded to. When would you anticipate the other 90-some-odd are 

going to be responded to? 

Ms. CHA. Well, we would like to see this be one of the top priorities for the Census Bureau. My understanding from my team is 

that the Bureau provided additional evidence late Friday afternoon, so my team will be looking at the progress that they have 

made in the remaining recommendations. And we are committed to 

working with the Bureau to ensure that they effectively close those 

out, because ensuring that the information that they are collecting 

is secured is of vital importance. 

Senator LANKFORD. Sure. Mr. Thompson, do you want to comment on any of that at this point? 
21 

Mr. THOMPSON. Yes, Senator. My team is of the perspective that 

we have responded to all of the concerns. However, we have obviously not communicated that to our colleagues at the GAO, and I 

certainly intend to make sure we communicate that and we reach 

agreement as to which ones have been responded to, which ones 

have not, and what we have to do. And then I would be pleased 

to send a report back to you. 

Senator LANKFORD. Good. There has been great conversation in 

the last several years about the questions that are included or not 

included. There was a little bit of conversation in 2010 over the 

issue of citizenship, as I am sure you will remember distinctly. 

Where do we stand on that conversation for 2020 as far as whether 

citizenship will be asked or are we going to get every single house, 

and then other questions that may change or that are being currently considered and when that list will get to us and we are evaluating these questions to be different than the previous 10 that 

were there, and when will we get a chance to take a look at those 

as well? 

Mr. THOMPSON. Senator, right now the citizenship question is on 

the American Community Survey. We have not received a request, 

because that is what determines the content of the Census, from 

those entities that have asked us to put that on there. So we have 

not received a request to put citizenship on the Census itself. 

Let me be clear about a couple things. In 2017, we will be submitting the topics that we plan to ask on both the Census and the 

American Community Survey to the Congress, and in 2018, we will 

be submitting the actual questions. 

Senator LANKFORD. OK. And let me ask about the American 

Community Survey. There has been a lot of consternation in Oklahoma, and I would assume in other States as well, about the nature of how it is collected if you do not respond to it. My office consistently gets calls from individuals saying someone is at their 

door, someone is parked outside. We have a single mom that is 

very uncomfortable that there is some guy outside in a car; they 

are knocking on the door consistently. All of those things to get the 

American Community Survey. How are we going to put this into 

a process that they understand this is a Federal Government that 

is working for them rather than a Federal Government that is 

stalking them? If they do not want to complete this, shifting that 

to a voluntary status, and so we can have some way that they do 

not feel like it is oppressive coming after them to be able to fill out 

the American Community Survey? 

Mr. THOMPSON. Thank you, Senator. I have heard the concerns 

about the American Community Survey. While it provides a wealth 

of very important information that is used by the Federal Government to allocate funds by State and local governments and by businesses to create jobs, we understand that there are concerns with 

the length of the American Community Survey and with the perception that the language on the envelope which says your response is required by law is offsetting. So we have embarked on a 

program to look at how we can address these concerns, and we are 

doing a number of things. We are looking to see if we can make 

the questionnaire shorter by asking some questions every other 

year if the data is not needed on an annual basis. 
22 

Senator LANKFORD. There is some publicly available data as well 

that we seem to replicate. 

Mr. THOMPSON. Right. And we are also looking to see if we can 

use administrative data records to answer some of the questions on 

the form. We are looking at how we can increase our messaging, 

change our messaging to be more of a communicator, why it is so 

important that you fill it out, what it means to your community. 

And we are also beginning a program to test the language that we 

put on the envelope. So this May, we are running the test. That 

is next month. We are doing a test to measure the effect of not putting that language on the envelope so we can see what the effect 

is. So we are taking these concerns very seriously. The Secretary 

of Commerce is very attuned to this. I am providing a report to her 

at the end of this fiscal year, and she expects to see some significant progress in this area. 

Senator LANKFORD. Well, surely you can understand someone 

that shows up on your doorstep repetitively with a badge saying, 

‘‘I would like to ask you: What time do you leave for work? How 

many people are in your house? How many toilets do you have in 

your house?’’ those questions immediately raise red flags for a lot 

of Americans. They do not want to answer it. But they also cannot 

make this person go away, which is why our office gets calls to say, 

‘‘Why is this person here? Why won’t they go away? I have told 

them no, but yet they just keep coming at me.’’ 

So it is not just the nature of the questions, the length of the 

questions, the type of questions. It is the treatment of the individual that is at their door and the repetitive push for them. So 

there is a whole series of issues there. I understand the information is valuable, but there are a lot of issues that are still there 

in the American Community Survey that we have to resolve, and 

I am glad to hear that—you said this testing is in May. When will 

we get results from this? 

Mr. THOMPSON. I do not know exactly, but we do not intend to 

take that long to get it out. 

Senator LANKFORD. OK. So give me an example: By December? 

Mr. THOMPSON. Oh, definitely by December. 

Senator LANKFORD. OK. So this year, this summer? Into the 

summer? 

Mr. THOMPSON. I would hope so. But I do not want to commit 

to it, but we will definitely have it by December, probably much 

sooner than that. 

Senator LANKFORD. OK. Thank you. Senator Carper. 

Senator CARPER. Before I move away from the American Community Survey, let us say if my household were one of those chosen 

in Delaware for the completion of the survey, is the first notification that we have been selected somebody knocking on my door? 

What would precede that? 

Mr. THOMPSON. The first thing you would see would be a postcard notifying you that you have been selected for the survey in the 

mail. 

Senator CARPER. And then what? 

Mr. THOMPSON. And then you would get a letter asking you to 

respond by the Internet, and then you would get a questionnaire 

asking you to fill out the questionnaire and mail it back. 
23 

At that point the next step would be if we had a telephone number for you, we would call the telephone number. The next step 

would be then we would send a person to visit you in person. 

Senator CARPER. OK. Is there any time during that process we 

somehow convey to people why this is important for them to do it, 

to respond? 

Mr. THOMPSON. Senator, we do do that, but I think that there 

is room for us to improve on that. For example, we have already 

had one training of our entire field staff on how to approach households, and we are going to be doing additional trainings in this 

area. We need to do a better job of communicating to the American 

public why this survey is so valuable to them and why—— 

Senator CARPER. Just to keep in mind maybe what I hope we already do this, but whether it is in the postcard or whether it is in 

something that folks get over the Internet or something that people 

get in writing saying, ‘‘You are going to get a survey,’’ just to be 

able to say in a very short few words why this is important, without a whole lot of verbiage. 

I want to sort of refocus for a little bit, if we could, and talk 

about cybersecurity. Ms. Cha, we are going to get you in the act 

here. Let me just ask, what do you believe needs to be done with 

respect to cybersecurity, on the cybersecurity front, as we prepare 

for the 2020 Census? 

Ms. CHA. First and foremost, it has to be addressing the 115 recommendations that we have made relative to those control deficiencies. Again, as I mentioned to Senator Lankford, access controls 

in particular are of vital importance in strengthening, because 

those regulate who and what is accessing the Bureau’s systems. 

And so, as the Bureau is exploring these methods to collect data 

out in the field, including, using personally owned devices or government-issued devices, it is going to be critical for the Bureau to 

secure those back-end systems to make sure that the information 

is properly secure. 

In addition, if they are expanding the use of administrative 

records, they are also going to have to shore up the controls there 

to ensure that that information is adequately protected. 

So addressing our 115 recommendations made is the top priority. 

Senator CARPER. 115? That sounds like a lot. 

Ms. CHA. Well, actually, it is a little lower since the Bureau at 

this time has addressed 19 of them, so roughly 20 percent. 

Senator CARPER. OK. You have already talked a little bit about 

this today, I think, Mr. Thompson. Would you just kind of think 

out loud again for us on the cyber front? As we sit here, folks from 

all over the world are hacking into government systems trying to 

steal our intellectual property, identifiable information, and it is a 

huge challenge for us. What can you tell us that would make us 

think that we are up to this challenge? 

Mr. THOMPSON. Yes. So we have a multi-layered system to protect information. We limit the access to our systems. Within our 

program we have ways to control who can access the data. We 

encrypt all of our individual data when it is at rest, so, for example, our philosophy is that if we have data on a machine, we assume the machine can be compromised and, therefore, we have to 

protect and encrypt the data. 
24 

We have some very sophisticated ways that we look at the Internet traffic that moves in and out of the Census Bureau. We work 

with the Department of Homeland Security on that detection. We 

also scan all of our outgoing traffic to make sure there is no personal information in it. 

But having said that, and we do want to get straight with the 

GAO on the 119 recommendations because we take that very seriously, and we want to be in compliance with those because that is 

the kind of practices that we need, and we will get to the bottom 

of that. 

Senator CARPER. Let me just ask a question. Of the 115 minus 

19—what is that, 96—outstanding, are some more important than 

others? I presume they are. 

Ms. CHA. Yes, and the access controls-related recommendations 

are of the utmost priority. 

Senator CARPER. What Ms. Cha just said, is that something that 

rings a bell, access controls? 

Mr. THOMPSON. I believe we have addressed that. But, again, I 

need to get with our people and her people and make sure that 

what we think is addressed is what the GAO thinks is addressed, 

because I would rely on them and their final say on that. 

Senator CARPER. OK. Let me ask you about hard-to-count populations. We talked about this already, but it is certainly one of the 

most challenging jobs in the Census and also one of the most expensive, a real cost driver. Maybe what we learned from the last 

couple of times out, 2000, 2010, about counting hard-to-count populations, one of the ideas I floated, I guess in the run-up to 2010, 

was maybe we could have—in terms of incentivizing people, to find 

ways to really say, ‘‘I would love to’’—‘‘I cannot wait to respond to 

the Census because this is what I will get out of it.’’ We threw out 

ideas for lotteries where people could have their name—if they 

were early responders, they could be in a lottery, just all kinds of 

ideas. But hard-to-count populations, people who do not want to be 

counted, people who do not want you to know they are there, folks 

who maybe because they are undocumented, or maybe because 

they are parole violators, how do we get some of those people to 

come out of the shadows? 

Mr. THOMPSON. So one of the most important ways that we have 

found to help count those populations is through a program that 

we call ‘‘local partnership,’’ and that is where during the decennial 

census we have a number of individuals that we identified that 

have local ties to communities, they are trusted voices in the community, and by working with these people, giving them materials 

about why the Census is important to their community in particular, not just in general but to particular communities, we have 

seen gains in the 2000 Census and the 2010 Census in reducing 

the differential undercount between minority and non-minority 

populations. So we are seeing those gains. It is not perfect, but it 

does show that the more we can reach out on the local level with 

trusted voices to convince people to be counted, that works and 

pays big dividends. And that is something else we are starting to 

work on at this point in the decade. 

Senator CARPER. Good. All right. Thanks. Thanks so much. 
25 

Mr. Chairman, if we have another round, I have a few more 

questions. 

Senator LANKFORD. Go ahead. 

[Pause.] 

Senator CARPER. Mr. Goldenkoff and Ms. Cha, what is next for 

GAO’s oversight for the 2020 Census? Give us a look ahead. 

Mr. GOLDENKOFF. Our focus is on the operational aspects and the 

cost-savings estimates, so we are going to be looking at these other 

four cost-savings initiatives that Director Thompson mentioned. We 

have ongoing work that is looking at the Census Bureau’s use of 

administrative records. That report will be out in a couple of 

months. After that, we will be looking at the Census Bureau’s use 

of targeted address canvassing, and we also expect to look at the 

Census Bureau’s cost estimates, and we will try and validate them. 

Right now they are estimates, but we do not know what is behind 

them. 

Senator CARPER. Ms. Cha. 

Ms. CHA. In addition to that, Senator Carper, we will be starting 

a review for this Committee with regards to the CEDCaP initiative, 

and we will be starting that later this year, roughly in the October 

timeframe. So that is going to be very critical because we will know 

early on whether or not the quality of the September 2015 decision 

is good or not in terms of the completeness of the business requirements, again, because having a full, comprehensive set of business 

requirements is critical to informing the system development work 

downstream. 

Senator CARPER. Why don’t each of you give us—we have already 

heard you in response to other questions talk a little bit about this. 

But if you were sitting up here with us and you wanted to make 

darn sure that we got a good Census at a reasonable price, what 

are the one or two things that you would do if you were in our 

shoes to make sure that that happened so that it would not be on 

us and we would have better met our responsibilities? Ms. Cha, 

why don’t you go first? You look like a potential Senator. 

Ms. CHA. Well, I think going back to my response to Senator 

Ayotte, with regards to the complexity of the CEDCaP initiative 

itself, I think based on the risk that the Bureau currently has relative to IT acquisition, it would behoove them to look at whether 

there are simpler ways to go about acquiring the CEDCaP initiative. It is quite ambitious, and, again—— 

Senator CARPER. There are people who might be watching this 

on television or listening, and they would say, ‘‘What is CEDCaP? ’’ 

Could you just explain it in terms that people might understand? 

Ms. CHA. Yes. It is the enterprisewide IT initiative that will deliver the systems and the infrastructure to support the 2020 Census. So it is a collection of roughly 14 projects and multiple systems 

beneath those projects. So it is a large and complex IT modernization program, and it is critical that the risks that we have identified with regards to the time constraints as well as their IT posture 

in general, that those risks inform the decisions about IT that they 

will be making in September in terms of what is actually realistic 

and viable for 2020. 

Senator CARPER. All right. Same question. Mr. Goldenkoff, 

please. 
26 

Mr. GOLDENKOFF. I would hold the Bureau accountable for meeting costs and scheduled milestones. If you look at where the 2000 

Census went off the track and the 2010 Census went off the track, 

past experience has shown that the Census Bureau either runs out 

of time or runs out of money. So the best way to make sure that 

the Census Bureau is on track is regularly checking in with them 

and monitoring whether they are meeting their cost milestones and 

their schedule milestones. And that is the early indication that 

things are going off the rails. 

Senator CARPER. All right. Director Thompson, if you were Senator Thompson and this was Director Lankford, what would you 

make sure we get done? 

Mr. THOMPSON. I would rather comment in a different way. 

Senator CARPER. OK. 

Mr. THOMPSON. We are putting some things in place to try to 

minimize the risk, because you can never be sure. So, for example, 

the document we are producing this fall, the 2020 Census Operational Plan, and it will be 3 years earlier than we issued an operational plan for the 2010 Census. So we are getting an early start 

on it. 

We have in place an active risk management framework (RMF) 

and risk management process where we constantly identify major 

risks, and we constantly look at how we can find contingencies for 

those risks. We would be happy to share that with the Committee 

so you can feel comfortable that we are looking at the right risks. 

In terms of the enterprise IT systems, we do not argue with the 

GAO that it is a high-risk system because we are developing new 

processes. But I can assure you that this is getting full attention 

from the Department of Commerce. The Department of Commerce 

CIO is fully engaged with this program and with our CIO on the 

program. In fact, he is running an independent verification and 

validation (IV&V) process on the program. So he is taking it very 

seriously, too. The whole Department of Commerce has this as one 

of their priorities, and success is one of the priorities of the Department of Commerce. 

Senator CARPER. Good. Mr. Chairman, I have one more. Do we 

have—— 

Senator LANKFORD. Sure. 

Senator CARPER. In my old job as Governor, when we were wrestling with a problem in Delaware, trying to figure out how to deal 

with a challenge, sometimes in a Cabinet meeting I would say to 

my Cabinet, ‘‘Some other Governor in some other State has dealt 

with this issue. They figured out how to deal with it in an appropriate way successfully. What we have to do is find that State, that 

Governor, whoever worked on this issue in another State, and find 

out: Did it really work? Is their solution transferable to us in Delaware?’’ 

We are not the only nation grappling with doing a Census, and 

we are not the only nation grappling with doing it in a more costeffective way. Who are some other countries that we are learning 

from? What are we learning from them? 

Mr. THOMPSON. We regularly work with other countries like the 

United Kingdom, Canada, Australia, and share our progress; we 
27 

share our problems. We have an ongoing dialogue about what 

works, what does not work. 

So, for example, Canada has been using the Internet as a response option before we have, so we have been working with the 

Statistics Canada people to understand what they have learned 

that is both good and not good in terms of how to implement an 

Internet self-response option. But we do have active discussions 

going on with our fellow countries. 

Senator CARPER. Could you give us just maybe one example, a 

clear, easy-to-understand example of something that we have 

learned in this back-and-forth with other nations, maybe the ones 

you mentioned, maybe others, say this is what we learned from 

Canada, this is what we learned from Britain that we are going to 

be doing differently this cycle? 

Mr. THOMPSON. Well, I think there were two things with Canada. 

One thing was that the Internet can be a very successful way to 

get responses in on a very timely basis, and Canada has had great 

success in using the Internet as a primary response option. 

The other thing we have learned from Canada is that if you are 

not cautious about how you word the equivalent of the American 

Community Survey and the messaging on that, you can lose a lot 

of data quality. At the last minute Canada had to make their survey voluntary in 2011, and they did not have much time to work 

on it, and they lost a lot of data quality and were not able to publish a lot of the data from their equivalent to the American Community Survey. So those are two examples of some things that we 

have learned. 

Senator CARPER. Good. Thanks. 

Thanks, Mr. Chairman. 

Senator LANKFORD. One other thing I would just ask you to submit for the record is the controls and how you are going to handle 

staff for 2020, background checks, citizenship status, and such for 

actual Census takers and Census staff, so when that is settled and 

resolved. Do you have a good idea of when you are going to set 

those parameters? 

Mr. THOMPSON. Right now, our intention is to use similar processes in terms of fingerprinting and validation as we did before. 

However, there is still an active class action suit on that issue, and 

so we are awaiting the outcome of that, and I do not have an estimate of when that suit may be resolved. 

Senator LANKFORD. OK. So the assumption is to use basically the 

same standards as the last time, pending this class action suit. 

Mr. THOMPSON. Yes. 

Senator LANKFORD. OK. Then we will follow-up from there. 

Going back to the American Community Survey again, is there 

anything on the American Community Survey that is not publicly 

available from other places or from other survey teams? I understand our every-10-year Census, that one is constitutionally mandated. The American Community Survey is not. And so what I am 

looking for are some of the efficiencies that are there of cost. What 

data can we buy at less expensive—you are saying if it is $97 a 

person for a main Census but you think it is more for the American 

Community Survey, is there a company we can buy this same information from for $50 apiece and save us half the money? That 
28 

is what I want to try to figure out and to see do we need to gather 

this data this way from Census, or is there a more efficient way 

to do that? And I would be interested to know if GAO has examined that in the past. 

So, Mr. Thompson, if you want to just be able to address just 

some of the other resources that are out there that are publicly 

available that may already be there. I am sure you are talking 

about that with your questions, and then other places and efficiencies. 

Mr. THOMPSON. So, Senator, we are looking right now as we 

speak at what resources are available to supplement or remove 

some of the questions on the American Community Survey and getting them from other places. I must say, though, having run a business myself, my efforts in running the business were, trying to 

keep the business in business and to grow the business. And so I 

was not motivated to form a comprehensive data series for the entire United States. I was looking at where my data was most important to my business. 

Senator LANKFORD. Right. 

Mr. THOMPSON. And so that is why it would be very difficult to 

get from the business community a comprehensive data set for all 

parts of the United States. 

That being said, we are certainly looking to use existing information in lieu of asking people that information. 

Senator LANKFORD. Right. So my question is: There are businesses that do this kind of investigation all the time, this kind of 

research. You are right, they are not trying to comprehensively 

touch on every single area, but if we are able to say to them, ‘‘We 

want to buy your data. It has to include this,’’ they already have 

half the data, they could gather the other half and probably half 

the cost for us as well. I am trying to figure out how do we get 

below $100 apiece to be able to ask a set of questions when everyone who does surveys—and maybe I am missing it, but I do not 

know of another survey that costs as much as that one does to be 

able to do it. I understand the unique parameters that we have 

with every household, every street. That is different. It is like U.S. 

Mail has a different set of cost parameters than FedEx does because it is every house, every day, every street. I get that. But I 

am trying to find are there other ways. Has GAO examined something like that in the past? 

Mr. GOLDENKOFF. Not a very detailed analysis. We have not gone 

question by question. What we have looked at is the availability of 

some of the data in other Federal surveys and other Federal data, 

and it really varies. In some cases there really is no substitute for 

the ACS data because it really gets data down to a very low level 

of geography, and sometimes that is needed for some of the requirements. Some of it goes back to statute. Some statutes require 

that the data come from the Census. In other cases, it is just the 

best data available for that need, and so it is more for administrative purposes. 

So this is something that the Census Bureau has to look at, go 

item by item and see what are the alternatives and what is the 

cost-benefit, again, balancing that cost-accuracy tradeoff. 
29 

Senator LANKFORD. Right. But has GAO taken a look before 

about private entities doing this if we paid them—again, if we are 

at $100 a survey, are there entities that would gather the same 

amount of data—— 

Mr. GOLDENKOFF. No, we have not—— 

Senator LANKFORD [continuing]. For less cost? Again, we have a 

difference between the American Community Survey, the Census 

between the Census, and the actual Census. We have a constitutional mandate for the actual Census every 10 years. This one is 

supplementary data that helps us, but it is not the same constitutional mandate, does not have to be done by a government entity, 

but is useful to us. 

Mr. GOLDENKOFF. We have not looked into that, no. 

Senator LANKFORD. OK. Well, that may be one that we try to follow-up on in the days ahead and try to find the most efficient way 

to be able to gather this so that we have good data and information, but we do not lose in cost. 

Senator Carper, any additional questions? 

Senator CARPER. Just one. I do not recall whether you are married or not, Director Thompson, but every now and then our 

spouses have a way of saying to us, ‘‘Well, whatever plans we had 

for the rest of our career, you can forget about that.’’ Every now 

and then, my wife—I do not know if it is tongue in cheek or not, 

but she will say, ‘‘Somewhere down the line here, why don’t we just 

put everything we have in storage and just go and travel around 

the world.’’ And I say, ‘‘OK. When do we have to do that?’’ And so 

far she keeps letting me off the hook. 

But let us say you were married—maybe you are—and you get 

into 2016 and your spouse says, ‘‘Everything we have, let us just 

put everything in storage and let us spend the next several years 

just traveling around the world.’’ And, you are serving this 5-year 

term. We are grateful that you are doing it. But in order to maintain peace in the valley with your spouse, you declined the President’s offer for another 5-year term. And so then we have to figure 

out how do we get a smooth handoff, how do we get a smooth handoff carrying up to the next Census. 

One of the reasons we have this 5-year term in law is to try to 

ensure we have a better transition. But there is nothing to ensure 

that you will want to stay beyond this at this time. Hopefully you 

will. But what else are we doing to ensure a smooth handoff of the 

Census? I think this is premature, but what else are we doing and 

should we be doing to make sure that, whether you stay or do not, 

we have that smooth handoff? 

Mr. THOMPSON. Well, thank you, Senator. So there are some 

things that are certain, and one is that my term ends December 

31, 2016, the term I am currently in. Then there will be another 

term, which I could be reappointed for or not. But there are a lot 

of things that are going to happen between now and then, including a Presidential election, that I have no control over. 

So what I am focusing on is putting in place the best plan for 

implementing the 2020 Census that I can by the end of my term 

so that the Census Bureau has good guidance. That is something 

I can control. 
30 

I also need to say that the Department of Commerce is being 

very supportive of me in that effort. So that is what I am doing. 

Senator CARPER. During an earlier administration, I felt we were 

at a point where we were really struggling with the Census. We 

reached a point where I felt that there was the kind of engagement 

from the Secretary of Commerce that we needed. And you mentioned a couple of times the involvement of the Secretary and the 

Secretary’s senior staff. Would you just characterize that again? 

Because I think it is really important. 

Mr. THOMPSON. Thank you. The Census Bureau has had tremendous support from the Office of the Under Secretary for Economic 

Affairs, they oversee the Census Bureau and the Bureau of Economic Analysis. We have had tremendous support from the Office 

of the Secretary and from the Secretary herself. I met with the Secretary periodically, and she wants to make sure that we are on 

track to do a good Census and how she can help me. 

And we have had tremendous support from the Office of Management and Budget, which has understood our needs and has been 

very helpful in defining those. 

So the Administration is behind conducting an accurate Census 

for 2020 and supporting the Bureau in moving forward. 

Senator CARPER. Good. 

Mr. Chairman, it has been an encouraging hearing and an important one, and I am sorry all of our colleagues could not be here. 

On the question of the budget issue that we have raised and talked 

a little bit about for 2016, our Chairman is on the Budget Committee, and he has been out there participating, as you probably 

know, in a conference on the budget. So he is probably in there 

wrestling and trying to make sure we get this bump-up so that we 

will get a good Census in 2020. 

Senator LANKFORD. While we are in here trying to make sure that we are protected from a $3 billion error. 

Senator CARPER. There you go. 

Senator LANKFORD. Back and forth again. So thank you all for 

being here and what you bring to this. There is a tremendous gain 

for the entire Nation. It is a constitutionally mandated operation, 

and we are grateful for the service, and hopefully we can continue 

to work on efficiencies and bring down the cost per person and try 

to examine some efficiencies out of the box in the days ahead. So 

thanks. Good hunting on a lot of the testing and evaluation and 

things that are happening to us in the days ahead. 

The hearing record will remain open for 15 days until May the 

5 at 5 p.m. for the submission of statements and questions for the 

record. Thank you all for being here. 

Senator CARPER. Mr. Chairman. 

Senator LANKFORD. Yes, sir. 

Senator CARPER. I want to again mention the name of Lawrence 

Buckner who was killed in the line of duty, I think about 11 days 

ago. 

Senator LANKFORD. Right. 

Senator CARPER. I know his name was mentioned earlier. 

Senator LANKFORD. Yes, in the opening. 

Senator CARPER. You and others extended your condolences to 

his family, but sometimes we talk about nameless, faceless bureau-
31 

crats in the Federal Government, and these are people, a lot of 

them, who work hard, work long hours, in some cases at great risk 

to themselves, and we remember him and thank him and other of 

his colleagues who do this dangerous work. Thank you. 

Senator LANKFORD. Entirely appropriate. Thank you again for 

the way you are taking care of them and their families. 

Thank you. This hearing is adjourned. 

[Whereupon, at 4:33 p.m., the Committee was adjourned.] 

(33) 

A P P E N D I X 
34 
35 
36 
37 
38 
39 
40 
41 
42 
43 
44 
45 
46 
47 
48 
49 
50 
51 
52 
53 
54 
55 
56 
57 
58 
59 
60 
61 
62 
63 
64 
65 
66 
67 
68 
69 
70 
71 
72 
73 
74 

Æ