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

22–362 PDF 2017

PREPARING FOR THE 2020 CENSUS: WILL THE 

TECHNOLOGY BE READY? 

JOINT HEARING 

BEFORE THE

SUBCOMMITTEE ON 

GOVERNMENT OPERATIONS 

AND THE

SUBCOMMITTEE ON 

INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY 

OF THE

COMMITTEE ON OVERSIGHT 

AND GOVERNMENT REFORM 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

ONE HUNDRED FOURTEENTH CONGRESS 

FIRST SESSION 

NOVEMBER 3, 2015 

Serial No. 114–82 

Printed for the use of the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform 

( 

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

http://www.house.gov/reform 


AKING-6430 with DISTILLER
(II) 

COMMITTEE ON OVERSIGHT AND GOVERNMENT REFORM 

JASON CHAFFETZ, Utah, Chairman 

JOHN L. MICA, Florida 

MICHAEL R. TURNER, Ohio 

JOHN J. DUNCAN, JR., Tennessee 

JIM JORDAN, Ohio 

TIM WALBERG, Michigan 

JUSTIN AMASH, Michigan 

PAUL A. GOSAR, Arizona 

SCOTT DESJARLAIS, Tennessee 

TREY GOWDY, South Carolina 

BLAKE FARENTHOLD, Texas 

CYNTHIA M. LUMMIS, Wyoming 

THOMAS MASSIE, Kentucky 

MARK MEADOWS, North Carolina 

RON DESANTIS, Florida 

MICK MULVANEY, South Carolina 

KEN BUCK, Colorado 

MARK WALKER, North Carolina 

ROD BLUM, Iowa 

JODY B. HICE, Georgia 

STEVE RUSSELL, Oklahoma 

EARL L. ‘‘BUDDY’’ CARTER, Georgia 

GLENN GROTHMAN, Wisconsin 

WILL HURD, Texas 

GARY J. PALMER, Alabama 

ELIJAH E. CUMMINGS, Maryland, Ranking 

Minority Member 

CAROLYN B. MALONEY, New York 

ELEANOR HOLMES NORTON, District of 

Columbia 

WM. LACY CLAY, Missouri 

STEPHEN F. LYNCH, Massachusetts 

JIM COOPER, Tennessee 

GERALD E. CONNOLLY, Virginia 

MATT CARTWRIGHT, Pennsylvania 

TAMMY DUCKWORTH, Illinois 

ROBIN L. KELLY, Illinois 

BRENDA L. LAWRENCE, Michigan 

TED LIEU, California 

BONNIE WATSON COLEMAN, New Jersey 

STACEY E. PLASKETT, Virgin Islands 

MARK DeSAULNIER, California 

BRENDAN F. BOYLE, Pennsylvania 

PETER WELCH, Vermont 

MICHELLE LUJAN GRISHAM, New Mexico 

SEAN MCLAUGHLIN, Staff Director 

DAVID RAPALLO, Minority Staff Director 

JEFF POST, Government Operations Subcommittee Deputy Staff Director 

SHARON CASEY, Deputy Chief Clerk 


AKING-6430 with DISTILLER
(III) 

SUBCOMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENT OPERATIONS

MARK MEADOWS, North Carolina, Chairman 

JIM JORDAN, Ohio 

TIM WALBERG, Michigan, Vice Chair 

TREY GOWDY, South Carolina 

THOMAS MASSIE, Kentucky 

MICK MULVANEY, South Carolina 

KEN BUCK, Colorado 

EARL L. ‘‘BUDDY’’ CARTER, Georgia 

GLENN GROTHMAN, Wisconsin 

GERALD E. CONNOLLY, Virginia, Ranking 

Minority Member 

CAROLYN B. MALONEY, New York 

ELEANOR HOLMES NORTON, District of 

Columbia 

WM. LACY CLAY, Missouri 

STACEY E. PLASKETT, Virgin Islands 

STEPHEN F. LYNCH, Massachusetts 

SUBCOMMITTEE ON INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY

WILL HURD, Texas, Chairman 

BLAKE FARENTHOLD, Texas, Vice Chair 

MARK WALKER, North Carolina 

ROD BLUM, Iowa 

PAUL A. GOSAR, Arizona 

ROBIN L. KELLY, Illinois, Ranking Member 

GERALD E. CONNOLLY, Virginia 

TAMMY DUCKWORTH, Illinois 

TED LIEU, California 


AKING-6430 with DISTILLER

AKING-6430 with DISTILLER
(V) 

C O N T E N T S 

Page 

Hearing held on November 3, 2015 ........................................................................ 1 

WITNESSES 

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

Oral Statement ................................................................................................. 6 

Written Statement ............................................................................................ 9 

Mr. Steven I. Cooper, Chief Information Officer, U.S. Department of Commerce 

Oral Statement ................................................................................................. 14 

Written Statement ............................................................................................ 16 

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

Oral Statement ................................................................................................. 23 

Written Statement ............................................................................................ 25 

Ms. Carol R. Cha, Director, Information Technology Acquisition Management 

Issues, U.S. Government Accountability Office 

Oral Statement ................................................................................................. 39 

Written Statement ............................................................................................ 41 

APPENDIX 

Rep. Plaskett Statement for Record ....................................................................... 78 

RESPONSE Director Thompson, Census, Questions for the Record ................... 79 

RESPONSE Mr. Cooper, CIO, DOC, Questions for the Record ........................... 100 

RESPONSE Mr. Goldenkoff, GAO, Questions for the Record ............................. 108 

RESPONSE Ms. Cha, GAO, Questions for the Record ......................................... 113 


AKING-6430 with DISTILLER

AKING-6430 with DISTILLER
(1) 

PREPARING FOR THE 2020 CENSUS: WILL THE 

TECHNOLOGY BE READY? 

Wednesday, November 3, 2015 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, SUBCOMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENT OPERATIONS, JOINT

WITH THE SUBCOMMITTEE ON INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY, COMMITTEE ON OVERSIGHT AND GOVERNMENT REFORM, Washington, D.C. 

The subcommittees met, pursuant to call, at 2:36 p.m., in Room 

2154, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Mark Meadows [chairman of the Subcommittee on Government Operations] presiding. 

Present from Subcommittee on Government Operations: Representatives Meadows, Walberg, Carter, Grothman, Connolly, 

Maloney, and Clay. 

Present from Subcommittee on Information Technology: Representatives Hurd, Walker, Blum, Kelly, and Duckworth. 

Mr. MEADOWS. The Subcommittee on Government Operations 

and the Subcommittee on Information Technology will come to 

order. And without objection, the chair is authorized to declare a 

recess at any time. Thank you so much for being here. My apologies for being a little late coming from votes. 

We’re here today to talk about a very important topic, but one 

that does not get much attention in the years that don’t end in 

zero. And so as we talk about the Census, actually last month the 

Bureau released its operational plan for the 2020 Census. The purpose of this plan was to ensure that the Bureau has all the necessary systems and procedures in place to effectively complete its 

core mission. 

As our witnesses’ testimony will indicate, the plan for 2020 is 

probably the most ambitious Census plan in our Nation’s history. 

Quite simply, the Bureau is attempting to rewrite how the Census 

is conducted from the ground up, making it easier for people to respond and better value to the American taxpayer certainly as we 

look at that. 

These are laudable and necessary goals, particularly in light of the Bureau’s track record. The 2010 Census cost some $12.3 billion 

or more than $100 per household. This is substantially more than 

the $8 billion or the about $70 per household cost of the 2000 year 

Census. In fact, we have to go all the way back to the 1970 Census 

to find a Census where the cost did not rise dramatically compared 

to its predecessor. 

To correct this unsustainable trend, the Census Bureau is attempting to greatly increase its ability to leverage technology to 

utilize preexisting data in a completely new way. Assuming the 


AKING-6430 with DISTILLER
2 

current design hold, this will be the first Census where Americans 

will be able to respond through the Internet. It will be the first 

where Nonresponse Followup enumerators will be able to collect 

data electronically and have the case list updated in real time and 

organize their route based on travel efficiency with directions. 

What a novel idea. 

It will be the first time that the Bureau will use both Federal, 

State, and local addresses updates for the past decade to avoid the 

added expense of a nationwide, in-field address canvass. It will also 

be the first time that the Bureau will use the Federal administrative records like tax returns and Medicare information to identify 

vacant housing units and to encourage self-response. This plan involves sending paper reply forms only to the older individuals that 

are in areas with poor Internet connectivity. 

If the Bureau can deliver on its plan, it’s believed that the 2020 

Census could cost less per household than the 2010 Census and almost the same on an absolute level. However, ‘‘if’’ is the key word 

in that last sentence, and in preparation for the 2010 Census, the 

Bureau spent some $600 million attempting to build a proprietary 

handheld device for the enumerators to electronically report the 

field data. Despite this massive investment of hard-working American taxpayer dollars, poor program management led the Bureau to 

abandon that project in its entirety in 2008, forcing them to go 

back to paper response forms for the 2010 Census. 

The Bureau tells us that it has learned valuable lessons from 

that failed effort. The initiatives it is hoping to implement for the 

2020 Census are several times the size and complexity of the program that failed in 2008 and it is why we are here today. Although 

I know that there are still some questions about how exactly the 

Bureau will use the administrative records, I feel confident in saying that all of the members on both the subcommittees are broadly 

supportive of what the Bureau is trying to accomplish. 

With that in mind, my goal today is to learn more about the Bureau’s ongoing initiatives, but also make sure realistic time lines, 

deadlines, operational controls are in place to avoid the failures of 

the past. Given the current budget environment, we cannot afford 

another incident like happened in 2008. 

But in closing, I would like to thank all of our witnesses. And 

some of you I’ve met before. And I’m encouraged to have you with 

us for your time today and I look forward to working with you as 

the clock ticks towards a Census date of April 1, 2020. 

The chair now recognizes my good friend, the ranking member 

of the Subcommittee on Government Operations, Mr. Connolly, for 

his opening statement. 

Mr. CONNOLLY. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And thanks for this 

joint hearing, which is well-timed given the recent release of the 

2020 operational plan for the Census. 

At the midpoint of this decade it’s instructive to look at lessons 

learned from the last Census and the preparations underway for 

the next. The data derived from the Census provides a treasure 

trove of information both to the public and private sectors. 

For the government, Census data provides the foundation for our 

representative system of governance. From Congress down to local 

school boards, Census data is used to prudently and fairly allocate 


AKING-6430 with DISTILLER
3 

Federal, State, and local dollars to the communities we represent. 

For businesses, this information informs employment and capital 

investment decisions, critical for the private sector. 

The Census is one of the few government functions expressly 

mandated by the Constitution. By the way, so is the Postal Service. 

And the advent of technology holds the promise of making this 

once-in-a-decade enumeration less arduous and hopefully less costly. 

Success will be largely dependent on the management and deployment of technology. The Bureau’s botched attempt to deploy 

mobile handheld devices for the 2010 Census actually increased 

costs—increased costs—by $3 billion. The 2010 Census was 56 percent more costly than its predecessor in 2000. 

Today the Bureau is proposing to expand its use of technology, 

including new handheld devices, with the stated goal of lowering 

its latest estimated cost by nearly one-third. That is a noble goal. 

One of the new initiatives the Bureau believes will produce great 

efficiencies and savings is the commonsense step of cross-referencing data from other Federal and non-Federal sources, such as 

the IRS, the U.S. Postal Service, and others. A county-level test 

earlier this year showed using such records reduced the follow-up 

workload at homes known to be vacant by nearly 12 percent. 

In addition, the Bureau intends to expand use of modern technology. I hope we hear today what lessons from the 2010 experience with handheld devices are being applied to this new effort. 

I’m also pleased to finally welcome the Census to the 21st century by offering an online response option. In today’s high-tech mobile society, people simply expect to be able to conduct business online and in many cases in the palm of their hand with a smart device. 

I’m encouraged by Mr. Cooper’s prepared remarks in which he 

indicates the Bureau is on track to meet its goals. As the Commerce Department’s CIO, he is accountable for overseeing the Census Enterprise Data Collection and Processing initiative, which will 

integrate and standardize systems and data sharing across the Bureau. 

I want to congratulate him on his efforts to implement the 

FITARA act—better known as Connolly-Issa, Issa-Connolly—which 

is guiding IT investments with enhanced risk assessments and performance metrics. Commerce has been a leader among Federal 

agencies for embracing the new IT management model, and I 

would welcome his insight on how it has helped—or not—improve 

preparations for the Census. 

I also look forward to hearing responses from Mr. Cooper and 

Mr. Thompson, Director of the Census Bureau, to concerns raised 

by the GAO that the Bureau is not moving quickly enough to 

achieve certain milestones. For example, GAO has cited gaps in 

staffing and the deferral of key IT decisions, such as the scope of 

the IT infrastructure that will be necessary, cybersecurity protocols, and a procurement strategy for the handheld devices. These 

are important issues that must be resolved soon as the window of 

time in which the Bureau has to complete this transformation before end-to-end testing of the system is scheduled to begin in 2018. 


AKING-6430 with DISTILLER
4 

As Mr. Cooper notes, however, the Bureau has delivered its operational plan 3 years earlier than it did in 2010. And, hopefully, 

that allows us time to identify and address gaps or shortfalls well 

in advance of the deadline. 

Finally, Mr. Chairman, let me address the elephant in the room, 

which is the urgency for Congress adequately to fund the Census. 

Providing robust oversight of its operations and these IT investments is a laudable and necessary goal for us, but it is for naught 

if the Bureau does not have the resources it needs with which to 

execute its constitutional duty in what has now become a monumental task given the size of our population and the complexity of 

our country. 

The initial budget proposal offered by my friends for fiscal year 2016 would have reduced funding for the Census Bureau by $374 

million, almost one-third compared to the President’s request. I’m 

hopeful that last week’s bipartisan budget agreement will allow us 

to restore those necessary investments. We cannot afford to shortchange an activity so fundamental to our democracy and the sustained well-being of our communities. 

I look forward to hearing from the panel. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. MEADOWS. Thank you, Mr. Connolly. 

The chair recognizes the chairman of the Information Technology 

Subcommittee, the gentleman from Texas, Mr. Hurd. 

Mr. HURD. Thank you, Chairman. I would like to thank the distinguished gentlemen from North Carolina and Virginia for holding 

this important hearing today. 

Every 10 years the United States Census Bureau administers a 

very important survey of the American public. It’s vital for many 

reasons. We will use the gathered information to ensure the proper 

distribution of government funds and the proportionate number of 

representatives in government. But in order to make sure the information collected is as accurate as possible, the Census Bureau 

must deploy the best possible tactics and plans to collect the data. 

I want to give credit where credit is due. The Census Bureau is 

attempting to go to great lengths to drive down their costs and the 

results will be significant. This is atypical of the culture in Washington where agencies always seem to be asking for more tax dollars without producing the results that warrant them. The Census 

Bureau has accomplished this by utilizing existing information and 

new technology, something that other Federal agencies could learn 

from. 

But like many Federal agencies, the Census Bureau has serious 

IT challenges that must be addressed and corrected now. First, 

while the Bureau has made some significant progress in fully staffing its IT department, a number of key leadership positions remain 

vacant. These positions need to be filled immediately, and I’m looking forward to this hearing today on how the agency plans to address this. 

Second, the Census Bureau hasn’t addressed all the GAO recommendations on improving its IT systems. We saw what happens 

when agencies ignore IG reports with the massive data breach at 

OPM. This is a trend that I continually see as chairman of the Subcommittee on Information Technology, Federal agencies ignoring 


AKING-6430 with DISTILLER
5 

IG and GAO recommendations. It is vital that the Census Bureau 

take action to address all of the remaining recommendations as 

soon as possible. 

Finally, I agree wholeheartedly with the GAO and our witness, 

Ms. Cha, that the Bureau must begin now to make critical IT decisions. Their deferral of decisions in IT so far has, in my view, increased the overall risk around the 2020 Census. I look forward to 

hearing from all our witnesses today on specific ways we can successfully utilize technology to complete an accurate and cost-effective Census in 2020. I yield back. 

Mr. MEADOWS. I thank the gentleman. 

The chair now recognizes Ms. Kelly, the ranking member of the 

Subcommittee on Information Technology, for her opening statement. 

Ms. KELLY. Thank you, Mr. Chair. 

Good afternoon. Mr. Chairman, thank you for holding this important hearing. I would also like to extend my thanks to the witnesses here today. 

The purpose of this oversight hearing is to determine if the Census Bureau’s plans for 2020 Census is sufficient to ensure complete 

and accurate counts of the Nation’s population. Getting an accurate 

count is important. Numerous key decisions are based on data collected from the decennial Census. Census data is integral in determining the equitable distribution of Federal funds, enforcing civil 

and voting rights legislation, and determining congressional 

proportionment, among other things. 

With advances in technology, we have tools available to help administer the Census more efficiently and accurately. For instance, 

in October 2014, the Bureau began an enterprise-wide IT initiative 

called the Census Enterprise Data Collection and Processing Program, which is intended to, ‘‘deliver a system-of-systems to serve 

all of the Bureau’s survey, data collection, and processing functions—rather than continuing to build and maintain unique survey-specific systems with redundant capabilities.’’ 

CEDCaP will help reengineer fieldwork by implementing an 

operational control system to track and manage field assignments. 

This will help census takers decide, using real-time data, which 

houses to visit on a daily basis. 

CEDCaP will also be responsible for the development of a Webbased survey application in order to maximize Internet self-response. The 2020 Census will be the first Census with the option 

of responding online. The Bureau will rely heavily on Internet responses as part of its cost-saving initiatives. 

The Bureau also decided to use mobile devices for field data collection purposes. The Bureau estimates it will save nearly $400 

million through the increased use of technology, which is certainly 

to be commended. 

While technology can help increase efficiency, which yields significant sayings, I am also concerned about the safety of the 

public’s personal information. As you may know, the Bureau experienced a data breach in July. While no sensitive information was 

stolen, this incident underscores the importance of having controls 

in place to protect sensitive information. 


AKING-6430 with DISTILLER
6 

I applaud the Bureau for responding swiftly to the breach and 

recognizing the need for continued monitoring of their systems. It 

is our job to ensure that these agencies have the resources they 

need to keep our private information safe from hackers. 

Additionally, I share GAO’s concern that a number of important 

IT decisions have yet to be made for the 2020 Census. GAO recommends that key IT decisions be made quickly or we’ll find ourselves in the situation we saw in 2010, where a costly IT project 

went awry, causing turmoil for the entire Census operation. 

I look forward to hearing from the Bureau regarding its ability 

to meet critical milestones as they finalize plans for 2020, and I 

look forward to a productive discussion on this vital issue. 

I yield back the balance of my time, and thank you. 

Mr. MEADOWS. Thank you, Ms. Kelly. 

I will hold the record open for 5 legislative days for any member 

who would like to submit a written statement. 

Mr. MEADOWS. We will now recognize our panel of witnesses. I’m 

pleased to welcome the Honorable John Thompson, the Director of 

the U.S. Census Bureau; Mr. Steven Cooper, Chief Information Officer at the U.S. Department of Commerce; Mr. Robert Goldenkoff, 

Director of Strategic Issues at the U.S. Government Accountability 

Office; and Ms. Carol Cha, Director of Information Technology Acquisitions Management Issues at the U.S. Government Accountability Office. 

Welcome to you all. 

Pursuant to committee rules, all witnesses will be sworn in before they testify. So if you would please rise and raise your right 

hand. 

Do you solemnly swear or affirm that the testimony you’re about 

to give will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the 

truth? Thank you. Please be seated. 

Let the record reflect that the witnesses answered in the affirmative. 

And in order to allow time for discussion, we would appreciate 

if you would limit your oral testimony to 5 minutes. However, your 

entire written statement will be made part of the record. 

Mr. Thompson, who I would also say looks an awful lot like Robert De Niro, you are recognized for 5 minutes. 

WITNESS STATEMENTS 

STATEMENT OF JOHN H. THOMPSON 

Mr. THOMPSON. Thank you, Chairman Meadows. 

Chairman Meadows, Chairman Hurd, Ranking Members Connolly and Kelly, thank you for the opportunity to testify this afternoon. I’m also pleased to be testifying with Mr. Steve Cooper, the 

Chief Information Officer of the Department of Commerce, with 

whom we work very closely. 

I am honored to serve as the Director of the Census Bureau 

which has the tremendous responsibility of administering an accurate Census that fairly represents everyone in America. We have 

reached a major milestone in our preparations for the 2020 Census. 

Just last month, we released an operational plan that allows us to 


AKING-6430 with DISTILLER
7 

change the way we have conducted the decennial Census for over 

46 years and save $5.2 billion. 

For each Census since 1970, the paper-based process has been 

the standard, and it has been increasingly challenged by the growing diversity and complexity of our Nation. We do not believe that 

a paper-and-pencil approach to the Census is sustainable for the 

2020 or future Censuses. The Census Bureau has concentrated on 

four innovation areas that have the potential to improve Census 

operations and save taxpayers money. I will briefly describe each 

of these innovation areas. 

First, we’re building a more accurate address list, and for 2020, 

we have reengineered the process to incorporate a 100 percent inoffice canvassing that will be supplemented with up to a 25 percent 

in-field operation. We have already started this effort, and we expect to realize $900 million in cost savings from this strategy. 

Second, we want to make it easier for people to respond, and our 

strategy incorporates not only the Internet as the primary response 

option, but also an integrated communication and partnership 

strategy and tailored contact strategies. We will mail an invitation 

to all housing units encouraging Internet response. 

For 28 percent of the addresses, however, in areas with low 

Internet connectivity, we will be including a paper questionnaire in 

the first mailing package. We will also incorporate a Census Questionnaire Assistance program with both telephone and Web-chat response options. We believe that by opening up the process and 

making it easy, we will encourage participation with respondents 

who have typically not responded. These efforts offer the potential 

of approximately $400 million in savings. 

Third, using existing information already provided to the government, we can reduce door-to-door visits in what we call the Nonresponse Followup operation. To reduce this workload, we are proposing to use administrative records for enumeration in two ways. 

We are planning to use administrative records to remove vacant 

addresses before sending census takers into the field, and we are 

also planning to use administrative records to enumerate occupied 

housing units after we have knocked on each door at least once. 

Using administrative records in this way will result in savings of 

$1.4 billion. 

Fourth, we are automating our field operations to save an estimated $2.5 billion. We will now use mobile technology to achieve 

significant efficiencies in the 2020 Census. I should note that we 

have successfully developed an innovative prototype system. We 

are now able to provide optimized assignments to our interviewers, 

including daily route assignments, the best time of day to attempt 

contact. We are also able to provide the supervisors of these enumerators real-time updates and alerts regarding the progress of the 

workers they oversee. 

Supporting these efforts is our enterprise approach to survey and 

Census data collection and processing through shared services, 

which we call CEDCaP. In the past, duplicative systems were created and used for every survey and Census. We will now move to 

a small suite of shared, reusable systems. Based on my experience 

in overseeing the 2000 Census and in the private sector, I am conVerDate Sep 11 2014 14:08 Jan 04, 2017 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00013 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 F:\22362.TXT APRIL

AKING-6430 with DISTILLER
8 

fident we are on course and we have a schedule for all major decisions. 

Finally, we are committed to protecting the privacy and confidentiality of individual information. The Census Bureau has implemented a robust, comprehensive, and layered cybersecurity program that is constantly evaluated by experts. 

The last 5 years have provided the groundwork for the 21st century Census. And now, looking forward, we must turn our attention 

to counting every person in America. But still a significant risk we 

face is receiving adequate funding. If adequate funding is not received in fiscal year 2016, we will prioritize activities to ensure 

that the 2018 end-to-end test will take place on time. We are committed to ensuring an accurate Census that fairly represents all 

people in America. If we have to defer activities to later years, the 

cost of the Census will increase. 

I am confident the Census Bureau can achieve these objectives 

given congressional support, and I look forward to discussing the 

2020 Census operational plan and other aspects of our planning 

with you today. Thank you. 

[Prepared statement of Mr. Thompson follows:] 


AKING-6430 with DISTILLER
9 


AKING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 1 here 22362.001

Written Testimony 

of 

John H. Thompson 

Director ofthe U.S. Census Bureau 

Before the U.S. House of Representatives 

Subcommittee on Government Operations 

and the 

Subcommittee on Information Technology 

of the Committee on Government Oversight and Reform 

November 3, 2015 

Chairman Meadows, Chairman Hurd and Ranking Members Connolly and Kelly, thank you for 

the opportunity to update the House Subcommittees on Government Operations and Information 

Technology on the U.S. Census Bureau's progress in planning for the 2020 Census. I am also 

pleased to be testifying with Mr. Steve Cooper, the Chieflnformation Officer of the Department 

of Commerce with whom we work closely. 

I am honored to serve as the Director of the Census Bureau, which has the Constitutional 

responsibility of administering an accurate census that fairly represents every person living in 

America, and is fundamental to our democracy. We have reached a major milestone in our 

preparations for the 2020 Census. We have released an operational plan that allows us to change 

fundamentally the way in which the Census Bureau has conducted the Decennial Census for over 

40 years. The 1970 Census was a breakthrough for its time. We built an address list and mailed 

questionnaires to each housing unit on the list. We asked respondents to complete and return the 

questionnaires through the mail. We developed automated processes to capture the information 

on the returns. However, the task of collecting information from those households that did not 

self-respond required recruiting and managing a army of enumerators using paper and pencil. 

For each census since 1970, this paper-based process has been the standard, and it has been 

increasingly challenged by the growing diversity and complexity of our nation. We do not 

believe that a paper and pencil approach to the Census is sustainable for the 2020 or future 

censuses. It is no longer affordable and more importantly, is not adequate to meet the challenges 

of enumerating an increasingly diverse society. The operational plan that we prepared 

incorporates a number of innovations that will allow us to achieve a modern census for the 21 '' 

century. We are proposing to use mobile technology, administrative records, innovations from 

the geospatial industry, and self-response via the Internet to build a census that will cost far less 

than repeating the outdated processes used in 20 I 0 to accurately count every person living in 

America. 
10 


AKING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 2 here 22362.002

Testimony of John H. Thompson 

November 3, 2015 

I will briefly discuss the components of our 2020 Census Operational Plan to provide an 

overview of the key operations and innovations it includes. We are also pleased that this plan 

has been released three years earlier than the corresponding plan for the 20 l 0 Census. It 

includes a number of important decisions that are based on the important research we have 

conducted and clearly documents the process by which we will conduct additional development 

and testing to have all key decisions in place to support a complete end-to-end test of our 

methodologies in 2018. 

The Census Bureau has concentrated on four key innovation areas: reengineering address 

canvassing; optimizing self-response; utilizing administrative records and third-party data; and 

reengineering field operations. Each of these combined innovation areas has the potential to 

dramatically improve census operations and to save taxpayers money. At this time, the 2020 

Census is estimated to cost $12.5 billion compared with a cost of $17.8 billion that it would take 

to repeat the paper and pencil design of the 20 I 0 Census. This represents approximately $5.2 

billion in cost avoidance. 

I will briefly describe each of these innovation areas. 

First, we must make sure we have a complete address list, and to accomplish this, we will 

canvass the entire nation as we have in each previous census. However, for 2020 we have 

reengineered the process to incorporate a one hundred percent in-office canvassing that will be 

supplemented with a twenty-five percent field operation. We have already started this effort and 

we expect to realize $900 million in cost savings from this strategy. 

Second, to generate the largest possible self-response, our strategy incorporates not only the 

Internet as the principal response option, but also a nationwide integrated communication and 

partnership strategy and tailored contact strategies. We will mail an invitation to all housing 

units, encouraging Internet response. For 20 percent of the addresses in areas with low Internet 

connectivity and older populations, we will be including a questionnaire in the first mail 

package. We will also incorporate a Census Questionnaire Assistance program with both 

telephone and web-chat options. We will make it easy for people to respond anytime and 

anywhere, which means we will accept responses over the Internet, even when respondents 

cannot locate and provide their unique census identification code. We believe that by opening up 

the process and making it easy, we will encourage participation with respondents who have 

typically not responded. These efforts offer the potential of approximately $400 million in 

savings. 

Third, using administrative records and third-party data will also increase our efficiency by 

reducing the workload that we face in collecting information from those housing units that do not 

provide a self-response an operation we refer to as nonresponse follow-up. Our current 

estimate for the non-response follow-up workload for the 2020 Census is 56 million housing 

units. To reduce the workload, we are proposing to use administrative records for enumeration 

in two ways. 

2 of5 
11 


AKING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 3 here 22362.003

Testimony of John R Thompson 

November 3, 20 !5 

We are planning to use administrative records to remove the vacant addresses before sending 

census takers into the field, meaning enumerators will not knock on doors where no one is living, 

which represents a significant number of addresses, approximately 11 percent of the workload or 

six million housing units from the total workload of 56 million. We are also planning to use 

administrative records to enumerate occupied housing units after attempting to obtain a response 

through an in person visit. We will knock on every door at least once, which we anticipate will 

net at least II million additional responses, reducing the non-response workload to 

approximately 40 million. The next step we propose is to use administrative records from trusted 

federal and state sources to enumerate an additional 6 million housing units. We would then visit 

the remaining housing units to complete the enumeration. According to our estimates, using 

administrative records in this way will result in a savings of$1.4 billion. 

We have identified the core set of records we will use for the 2020 Census, but we continue to 

assess other federal and state sources. However, one of the most important sources, the National 

Directory ofNew Hires (NDNH), is currently unavailable for most evaluation and statistical 

purposes government-wide, including the decennial census, because access to these data for 

these purposes is not currently permitted under the Social Security Act, This database supplies 

information on workers, including the newly hired, which the Census Bureau could use to 

corroborate and supplement other information. Last year, legislation permitting broadened access 

for Federal evaluation and statistical purposes, including the decennial census, was introduced in 

and partially moved by Congress. In addition, we developed draft language at the request of the 

Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Government Affairs. The language provided 

limited access for the Census Bureau to use these data for statistical purposes and ensured 

protection of those data under the Census Law. The President's FY 2016 Budget also highlights 

our need for these data. 

Finally, we have reengineered our nonresponse follow-up operation to save an estimated $2.5 

billion. We will now use mobile technology and smartphones to achieve significant efficiencies 

for the 2020 Census. I should note that we have successfully developed an innovative prototype 

system that incorporates commercial off-the shelf technology and software to deploy our 

workforce. We are now able to provide optimized work assignments to our enumerators, 

including daily route assignments and the best time of day to attempt contact, We are also able 

to provide the supervisors of our enumerators with real-time updates and alerts regarding the 

progress of the workers that they oversee. 

Supporting these efforts is the Census Enterprise Data Collection and Processing (CEDCaP) 

effort, which is an enterprise approach to survey and census data collection and processing 

through shared services. In the past, duplicative systems were created and used for every survey 

and census. This duplication meant there were more than I 00 systems the Census Bureau used to 

collect and process data, some of which, in the case of the Decennial Census, were 

decommissioned after use. This stove-piped approach was not the most economical or 

productive way to do business and the Census Bureau is working toward a sustainable, enterprise 

approach that simplifies and integrates data systems across the lifecycle from survey design 

through instrument development, survey, data collection, and data processing, editing, 

imputation, and estimation. 

3 of5 
12 


AKING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 4 here 22362.004

Testimony of John H. Thompson 

November 3, 2015 

From dozens of unique systems, we will move to a small suite of shared, reusable systems with 

the goal of conducting a modernized 2020 Census. Based on my experience, in overseeing the 

2000 Census and in the private sector, I am confident we are on course and we have a schedule 

for the major decisions. Over the course of the last year, we made substantial progress and 

developed prototype systems to eliminate the paper and pencil processes for the Decennial 

Census. We established milestones for moving forward and we have engaged Carnegie Mellon's 

Software Engineering Institute to help us make the critical decisions regarding deployment of 

production systems. 

As a final point, I must mention our commitment to protecting the privacy and confidentiality of 

individuals' information. The Census Bureau takes cybersecurity seriously. Protecting privacy 

and confidentiality are central to the Census Bureau's mission and is a core value of our 

agency-we know that if the public does not trust us to protect their information, they will not 

provide their information to us. To protect our information systems and the information we 

collect, the Census Bureau has implemented a robust, comprehensive, and layered cybersecurity 

program. Cybersecurity is an ongoing process and challenge, and we look to outside experts to 

constantly evaluate our posture and our security program. Some of the key points of the program 

are: 

• The Census Bureau utilizes the Department of Homeland Security's resources to protect 

Internet traffic, by looking for malicious code and suspicious activity. 

• Other key safeguards include 2-factor authentication; use of encryption in transmissions 

of data and data at rest; use of a Data Loss Prevention System; use of firewalls, intrusion 

detection systems and intrusion prevention systems; a dedicated cybersecurity staff that 

monitors these systems and investigates unusual activity; employee fingerprint and 

background checks for employees, including enumerators; and all employees receive 

annual training on data stewardship and security. 

• All Census Bureau systems are compliant with the National Institute of Standards and 

Technology (NIST) Federal Standards and Guidelines, and the Census Bureau security 

program incorporates continuous monitoring of all IT systems. We have implemented a 

Risk Management Framework (RMF) program, that is fully compliant with NIST 

standards and guidelines, and for which the initial step is to identify risks. 

• Finally, we work closely with the Department of Commerce Chief Information Officer 

and Office of Security. We also work with our oversight bodies, the Government 

Accountability Office (GAO) and Office of the Inspector General, whose 

recommendations we take seriously. 

From CEDCaP and cyber security to the 2016 Census Test and the 2018 Census End-to-End 

Test, each activity plays a significant role in helping the Census Bureau to design an accurate 

and cost-effective 2020 Census. The 2018 Census End-to-End Test represents the culmination of 

research and testing, as we implement the planned census operations in real-time. Even though 

2018 may be two years away, we have a sense of urgency right now about what we can 

accomplish this year to prepare for this test. We cannot risk a major IT system failure in 2020, 

therefore the 2018 Census End-to-End test is critical and must have all of the major systems in 

place for this test. The President's Budget includes adequate funding to accomplish our 

objectives and to conduct a full scale 2016 Census Test, which will provide insights and guide 

our planning to ensure an accurate census. 

4 of5 
13 


AKING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 5 here 22362.005

Testimony of John H. Thompson 

November 3, 2015 

The last five years have provided the groundwork for the 21" century census and now, looking 

forward, we must turn our attention to counting every person in America. But I must also be 

candid about the next five years and the risks we face. A significant risk we face to executing a 

2020 that reduces cost while maintaining quality is receiving adequate funding for the entire 

lifecyclc. Stated simply, if the funding appropriated for each fiscal year during the 2020 Census 

lifecycle is less than requested, then the Census Bureau must reprioritize its activities, which will 

affect our ability to reengineer systems and operations to conduct an accurate census. We are 

fully committed to a census that fairly represents every person in America. We are confident 

that with the President's Budget request we can build a sustainable census and count every 

person; however, if we have to defer activities to later years, the costs of an accurate census will 

escalate and the project;ed savings will diminish. 

I am confident the Census Bureau can achieve these objectives given Congressional support and 

I look forward to discussing the 2020 Census Operational Plan and other aspects of our planning 

with you. 

Thank you. 

5 of5 
14 

Mr. MEADOWS. Thank you so much. 

Mr. Cooper. 

STATEMENT OF STEVEN I. COOPER 

Mr. COOPER. Chairman Meadows, Chairman Hurd, Ranking 

Members Connolly and Kelly, thank you for the opportunity to testify this afternoon. I am Steve Cooper, Chief Information Officer for 

the Department of Commerce. It is my pleasure to appear before 

the subcommittees and update you on our work as we prepare for 

a successful 2020 Census. 

The Census Bureau is working to ensure the necessary information technology, or IT, is in place to support the 2020 Census. The 

Census Bureau faces an increasing set of challenges, including declining survey participation rates, increased survey costs per household, funding constraints, and cybersecurity threats. These challenges all create risk for the 2020 Census and the Census Bureau 

has developed a multifaceted strategy that will address these challenges, will transform the business model, and modernize 2020 

Census operations. 

The 2020 Census requires an IT architecture and infrastructure 

that is agile, flexible, scalable, and able to accommodate innovations and advances being introduced through IT. As the focus of the 

2020 Census shifts from planning to execution, our collective attention must include IT readiness. The Census Bureau has made significant progress in process improvements, IT governance, and closing the skill gaps to ensure it is ready for the 2020 Census. 

One of the major enterprise initiatives supporting the 2020 Census is the Census Enterprise Data Collection and Processing initiative, what we call CEDCaP. The CEDCaP initiative aims to create 

an integrated and standardized suite of systems that will provide 

shared data collection and processing solutions across all Census 

Bureau operations. As the Census Bureau proceeds, it is working 

to ensure that it strikes the right balance between commercial offthe-shelf solutions and custom-developed solutions. 

In terms of mobile solutions, the Census Bureau is exploring a 

mix of Device as a Service and Bring Your Own Device for the 2016 

Census Test. The test results will inform subsequent decisions on 

which mobile devices are leveraged in support of the 2020 Census. 

In either mobile scenario defined, Census data will be protected at 

rest and in motion. 

The Census Bureau is also exploring cloud computing technology. 

Various tests are underway to explore processing and storing data 

in some combination of various cloud infrastructures. For the 2016 

Census Test, the Census Bureau will deploy the Internet response 

option in a secure, FedRAMP-certified, commercially provided private cloud. 

The Census Bureauis further exploring how to best employ features like auto-scaling to meet performance demands of the 2020 

Census, particularly for systems such as the Internet self-response 

option that must scale to meet the short-term anticipated demand 

of millions of users. 

In support of this work, the Census Bureau has awarded an initial cloud computing services contract. This contract will also allow 


AKING-6430 with DISTILLER
15 

the Census Bureau to gain essential skills and knowledge to be applied during all phases of delivering the 2020 Census. 

Obviously, securing confidential data is a major concern for the 

Census Bureau. The Census Bureau uses an enterprise layered defense strategy to protect its data and systems. For example, the 

Census Bureau relies on the Department of Homeland Securitymanaged Einstein program to protect external Internet traffic, and 

the Census Bureau’s internal network is segmented to isolate the 

systems that are Internet accessible. 

The Census Bureau has also worked closely with NIST to implement a risk management framework for all of its systems. Each 

system also undergoes continuous monitoring to maintain its authorization. This monitoring consists of both automated and manual assessments. 

Finally, the Census Bureau continues to work with my office in 

their implementation of the Department of Homeland Security’s 

Continuous Diagnostics and Mitigation program and our continuing ongoing cyber sprint effort. 

Based on my observations to date, the Census Bureau is well positioned to take advantage of early planning, testing, and operational designs. The 2020 Census program is also poised to leverage enterprise initiatives to realize significant efficiencies. However, to adequately implement these strategies and meet the challenges will require the best efforts of the Census Bureau and continued congressional support. 

I am deeply grateful for this opportunity to testify before this 

committee and share these observations, and I’m pleased to answer 

any questions you may have. Thank you. 

[Prepared statement of Mr. Cooper follows:] 


AKING-6430 with DISTILLER
16 


AKING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 6 here 22362.006

Written Testimony 

of 

Steven Cooper 

Chief Information Officer, Department of Commerce 

Before the U.S. House of Representatives 

Subcommittee on Government Operations 

and the 

Subcommittee on Information Technology 

of the Committee on Government Oversight and Reform 

November 3, 2015 

Mr. Chairman and Members of the Subcommittees, I am Steve Cooper, Chiefinformation 

Officer for the Department of Commerce. 

It is my pleasure to appear before the Subcommittees, and I wish to thank the Chairman and 

Members for providing me the opportunity to update you on our work for the 2020 Census, and 

the readiness and security of the information technology at the Census Bureau to effectively 

support the successful operation of the 2020 Census. 

The Census Bureau continues to work to ensure the necessary information technology is in place 

to support a successful 2020 Census operation and that the critical testing has been conducted or 

is planned each year leading up to the 2020 Census. This testing ensures the necessary 

information security controls are in place to protect citizen and household data during data 

collection and processing. 

The Census Bureau faces an increasing set of challenges as it begins preparation for the 2020 

Census. Declining survey participation rates, funding constraints, cybersecurity threats, and 

increased survey costs per household all create risk to the Census Bureau's ability to deliver high 

quality, timely, relevant, and cost-effective information. To address these risks, the Census 

Bureau has developed a multi-faceted change strategy that will address these challenges, 

transform the business model, and modernize 2020 Census operations. The modernized 2020 

Census requires an information technology architecture and infrastructure that is agile, flexible, 

scalable, and able to accommodate innovations and advances in technology. 
17 


AKING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 7 here 22362.007

Testimony of Steven Cooper 

November 3, 2015 

Effective application of technology plays a key role in the Bureau's strategy and enables the 

rethinking and reengineering of existing business processes. Technology also serves as a change 

catalyst for developing enterprise capabilities that will create new architectures and modernize 

data and systems management for the 2020 Census and all Census Bureau censuses and 

surveys- from data collection and processing to data dissemination. 

Since 2009, the Department of Commerce and the Census Bureau have focused on the 

application of lessons learned and fostering of strategic alignment with Government IT initiatives 

beginning with the 25 Point Implementation Plan to Reform Federal Infonnation Technology 

(IT) Management. The Census Bureau continues to align its IT goals with subsequent initiatives, 

including those found in Memorandum M-11-29, Chief Information Officer Authorities: 

Memorandum M-J 2-10, Implementing Portfolio Stat: and now the Federal IT Acquisition 

Reform Act (FITARA) in support of Memorandum M-15-14, Management and Oversight of 

Federal IT. Common themes in all of these directives, and thereby the Census Bureau's IT 

strategies, include IT transformation, improving operating efficiencies, leveraging shared 

services, and increasing Chief Information Officer (CIO) accountability. 

More recently, the Census Bureau has made a number of its major design decisions for the 2020 

Census. These decisions have been documented in the 2020 Census Operational Plan, which the 

Census Bureau issued last month- three years earlier than tor the 20 I 0 Census, and is grounded 

in the Census Bureau's Enterprise IT Strategy. The effort included developing the operating plan 

for the IT Infrastructure Operation and Decennial Service Center Operation, as well as reviewing 

all of the IT capabilities required by the remaining operations identified in the 2020 Census 

Operational Plan. 

As the focus of the 2020 Census Program shifts from planning to execution, our collective 

attention must include IT Readiness for the 2020 Census. The Information Technology 

Directorate, under leadership of the Acting Census Bureau CIO, continues to align the enterprise 

IT Roadmap with the 2020 Operational Plan to ensure IT readiness for the 2020 Census, as well 

as all of the testing leading up to the 2020 Census. The IT Directorate has defined and provided 

enterprise guidelines to evaluate and ensure systems readiness, and has imbedded a Chief 

Solutions Architect, ChiefProgram Engineer, Chief Security Architect and other systems 

engineers within the 2020 Systems Engineering and Integration (SE&I) Team. 

The Census Bureau also has made significant progress in process improvements, IT governance, 

and closing the systems engineering IT skills gap to ensure IT Readiness for the 2020 Census. 

This progress includes: 

• Implementing and improving standard processes and support resources for portfolio 

management, program management, and project management; 

• Establishing and updating the Enterprise Systems Development Lifecycle (ESDLC) to 

include agile software development in addition to the traditional waterfall method; 

2 of7 
18 


AKING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 8 here 22362.008

Testimony of Steven Cooper 

November 3, 2015 

• Establishing the Office of Systems Engineering that has defined standard engineering 

processes, artifacts and reviews aligned to the program-level and project-level phases and 

governance process; 

• Increasing expertise and centralized support resources in the areas of project 

management, schedule management, requirements development and management, 

solution design and analysis of alternatives, and testing; and 

• Working closely with the Strategic Workforce Planning Initiative to ensure that proper IT 

skills are available when needed as identified by the various Census Bureau directorates. 

To support these efforts, the Census Bureau engaged General Service Administration's 18F 

experts about the use of Schedule A hires for 2-year term appointments that fill critical gaps in 

technical areas, including cloud computing, and security. 

In order to streamline the acquisition of needed contract resources, the Census Bureau 

successfully completed contract awards for the Systems Engineering & Integration Enterprise 

Solutions Framework (ESF) for use by all directorates acquiring SE&I services and solutions. 

This allows for a standard and streamlined process for acquiring SE&I services with up to a 

$2.5B IT Investment Authority through 2022. Other Department of Commerce (DOC) Bureaus 

can leverage the SE&I ESF and several bureaus have already expressed interest in doing so. The 

Census Bureau has already awarded Initial Work Orders. 

One of the major enterprise initiatives providing support to the 2020 Census is the Census 

Enterprise Data Collection and Processing (CEDCaP) initiative. The CEDCaP initiative aims to 

create an integrated and standardized system of systems that will offer shared data collection and 

processing across all Census Bureau operations. CEDCaP will yield the following benetlts: 

• Creation of an enterprise-wide data collection shared service that provides the functional 

capabilities to meet requirements across the Census Bureau, including the Decennial 

Census, under a single, integrated and centrally managed program; 

• Ability to reengineer current business processes, such as the implementation of an 

adaptive design methodology, across all surveys and censuses to increase efficiencies in 

data collection and processing; 

• Realization of cost savings through the prevention of the initiation of single-use survey 

specific systems and retirement of unique, survey-specific systems and redundant 

capabilities; 

• Reduction of risks for the 2020 Census by providing an integrated, proven solution well 

in advance of the Decennial Census; and the 

• Realization of the Census Bureau's Information Technology Guiding Principles to 

simplify, innovate, and engage by looking to the cloud tlrst and emphasizing standardbased, commercial off-the-shelf (COTS) solutions over custom development. 

3 of7 
19 


AKING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 9 here 22362.009

Testimony of Steven Cooper 

November 3, 2015 

In terms of governance, the CEDCaP program achieved the DOC Milestone 2 Review Approval 

from the Deputy Secretary of Commerce in July 2015. The CEDCaP Program follows the 

Program LifeCycle (PgLC) Framework, based on DOC's Acquisition Framework, and Enterprise 

Systems Development LifeCycle to manage program requirements, development, and execution. 

Program phase gate reviews are approved by the Program LifeCycle Investment Review Board 

(PLIRB) governance process to include phase gate reviews. The Census IT Directorate Project 

Review (CIPR) board approves project phase gate reviews. 

To ensure that the agency strikes the right balance between COTS and custom-developed 

solutions, the Census Bureau is comparing in-house custom solutions with COTS solutions 

specifically focusing on internet and mobile data collection, dynamic case management, and dash 

boarding to finalize build/buy decisions for the enterprise and 2020 Census, scheduled for 

October 2016. 

Carnegie Mellon's Software Engineering Institute is independently evaluating the CEDCaP 

program's process for analyzing and assessing build versus buy decisions and performing an 

independent assessment of the custom and COTS products, also scheduled for October 20 I 6. 

In terms of mobile solutions, the Census Bureau is exploring the technology it will employ to 

enable data collection in the field and will be using a mix of Device as a Service (DaaS) and 

Bring Your Own Device (BYOD) for the major 2016 in-field test. The Census Bureau will 

award a DaaS contract to provide hardware, wireless service, and accessories. The vendor will be 

responsible for ensuring adequacy of the wireless service coverage employed in a given location. 

Although the Census Bureau has not made a final determination on specific make/model/form 

factor of data collection devices for the 2020 Census, the Census Bureau is developing field data 

collection applications to work on multiple form factors (tablet/smartphone) and multiple 

operating systems (Android/iOS) to be flexible and allow for BYOD use. The results of the 

2016 Census Test will inform subsequent decisions on which mobile devices are leveraged in 

support of the 2020 Census. 

In both scenarios, census data will be protected "at rest" and "in motion." The Census Bureau 

will use FIPS 140-2 encryption algorithms for the data "at rest" and a combination of the Mobile 

Device Management (MOM), Mobile Application Management (MAM), and virtual private 

network (VPN) protections for "in motion." In addition, the Census Bureau further protects the 

application with a username and password, required each time a Census Bureau field staff 

accesses the applications. The Census Bureau is working on secure implementation of derived 

credentials, which would provide for multi-factor identification based on PIV. 

4 of7 
20 


AKING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 10 here 22362.010

Testimony of Steven Cooper 

November 3, 2015 

Another key technology the Census Bureau is exploring is Cloud Computing. The Census 

Bureau has approval through its Data Stewardship Executive Policy Committee to host 

confidential census data in FedRAMP certified clouds that meet legal and security requirements 

and is exploring the process and of storing other titled data (e.g. Title 26) in the cloud. Various 

tests are underway to process and store data both in FedRAMP certified commercially-provided 

private clouds, a virtualized Census Bureau private cloud, and potential use of hybrid cloud 

infrastructures. In the 2016 Census Test, the intent is to deploy the internet data collection 

instrument in a FedRAMP-certified commercially provided private cloud. 

The Census Bureau adheres to all NIST requirements and guidance as required under the Federal 

Information Security Management Act (FISMA). For security for the Census Bureau's cloud 

initiative the Census Bureau relies on the GSA FedRAMP process, as well as mapping the 

security information provided by the cloud vendors to the Census Bureau's internal Risk 

Management Framework security profile so that the CIO can have a consistent understanding of 

the security posture of all IT systems supporting the Census Bureau mission. Testing and 

experimentation in cloud deployments began in Summer 2015 using Amazon Web Services to 

include taking advantage of auto-scaling to the provision of computing resources to match the 

demand required to meet specified performance at minimum cost. The 2016 Census Test will 

take advantage ofFedRAMP Certified Commercial Cloud services and will provide cost basis 

estimates as well as allow the Census Bureau to acquire hands-on learning in migration, 

integration, operation, monitoring, and maintenance of services within a cloud model. 

Census will determine how best to employ features like auto-scaling to meet performance 

demands of the 2020 Census, particularly for systems such as the internet self-response 

capability that must scale to meet the short-term anticipated demand of millions of users, while 

containing costs. The Census will acquire on-demand infrastructure, to the greatest extent 

possible, through the FedRAMP cloud. The goal of the Census Bureau is to satisfy the scale and 

resources required by the Census Bureau while minimizing the impact on its own internal 

footprint. In continuing support of this work, the Census Bureau has awarded a Cloud Enterprise 

Solution Framework for Cloud Computing Services contract, established as the initial move into 

cloud computing. This contract allows the Census Bureau to begin migration of services into 

FedRAMP-certified commercial clouds and gain essential skills and knowledge. 

Obviously, security of confidential data is a major concern for the 2020 Census, as well for all of 

the Census Bureau's other censuses and surveys. The Census Bureau uses an enterprise layered 

defense strategy to protect its data and systems. They are protected by the DHS managed 

Einstein program. In addition to this, the Census Bureau uses a cloud service provider to provide 

protection from Distributed Denial of Service (DDoS) attacks. The Census Bureau also has 

security at the perimeter of the network through routers and firewalls and further has its own 

Intrusion Detection Systems and Intrusion Prevention Systems (IDS/IPS) in place. They have a 

segmented network to isolate the internal network from systems that are Internet accessible. 

5 of? 
21 


AKING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 11 here 22362.011

Testimony of Steven Cooper 

November 3, 2015 

Further, they have implemented a Risk Management Framework (RMF), based on NIST Special 

Publication 800-37 rev.!. The Census Bureau worked with NIST in the development of the 

RMF, and the resulting framework has been recognized by NIST as being very solid and meeting 

all the intentions of Publication 800-37 revl. All of the Census' systems are fully assessed and 

have current Authorizations to Operate. Each of them undergoes continuous monitoring to 

maintain the authorization. This monitoring consists of both automated and manual assessments. 

Finally, the Census Bureau, in alignment with the DOC, has implemented the Department of 

Homeland Security (DHS) Continuous Diagnostics and Mitigation (COM) tools under Phase I 

and is currently working with the Department and DHS to implement additional tools under 

Phase 2c of the CDM program. The Census Bureau has also reviewed all available information 

concerning the OPM hack and is making changes to our program, as needed, based on what we 

have learned. The Census Bureau has also worked closely with DOC on the on-going cyber 

sprint effort and strengthening our entire IT Security Program, which includes support for the 

2020 Census. 

The Census Bureau continues to work with the Government Accountability Office (GAO) to 

close all the findings ofthe 2013 audit report. As of October 19,2015, GAO has closed 65 ofthe 

115 recommendations and referred 19 back to the Census Bureau for additional information. 

Thirty-one of our original responses are still pending review at GAO. The Census Bureau 

communicates with GAO on a bi-weekly basis to provide the additional information as the 

Census gathers it and to check on the status of additional GAO findings. 

Finally, during this period of IT leadership transition, the Census Bureau has continued to 

effectively and securely deliver the solutions needed across all directorates, achieving and even 

exceeding its IT goals, including: 

• Effective support for the Decennial 2015 National Content Test and preparing for the 

Field IT Infrastructure in support of the 2016 Census Test; 

• Timely delivery of Census Enterprise Data Collection and Processing (CEDCaP) Product 

Sub-Releases and Releases and associated system components within budget to support 

the production needs of the Demographic, Economic, and Decennial directorates; 

• Successful contract awards for initial Cloud Services Enterprise Solutions Framework 

(ESF) to five (5) Service Disabled, Veteran-Owned Businesses (SDVOB); 

• Alignment with the Federal Information Technology Acquisition Reform Act (FITARA); 

and 

• Establishment of, and update to, the Enterprise Systems Development Lifecycle 

(ESDLC) to support agile software development methodologies. 

6 of7 
22 


AKING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 12 here 22362.012

Testimony of Steven Cooper 

November 3, 2015 

Based on my observations, the Census Bureau is well positioned as compared with prior decades 

to take advantage of early planning, testing, and operational designs, The 2020 Census program 

is also well positioned to leverage enterprise initiatives to realize significant efficiencies, 

Innovations in cloud computing and mobile technologies show great promise for enhancing ITbased solutions in support of the 2020 Census, To adequately implement these strategies and 

meet the challenges listed above will require the best efforts of the Census Bureau and continued 

Congressional support, 

I am deeply grateful for this opportunity to testify before this committee and share these 

observations, and I am pleased to answer any questions you may have, 

7 of7 
23 

Mr. MEADOWS. Thank you, Mr. Cooper. 

Mr. Goldenkoff. 

STATEMENT OF ROBERT GOLDENKOFF 

Mr. GOLDENKOFF. Chairmen Meadows and Hurd, Ranking Members Connolly and Kelly, and members of the Government Operations and IT Subcommittees, thank you for the opportunity to be 

here today to discuss the progress the Census Bureau is making in 

controlling the cost of the 2020 enumeration. 

The Bureau’s goal is to conduct the Census at a lower cost per 

household than the 2010 Census, adjusted for inflation, while 

maintaining accuracy. This would mean less than around $94 per 

household. It’s an extremely difficult task as the population is 

growing steadily larger, more diverse, increasingly difficult to find, 

and less willing to participate in the head count. Moreover, the 

Census is conducted on a tight schedule with little room, if any, for 

slippage. 

The Bureau plans to hold down costs in part by expanding its 

use of data that has already been collected by other government 

agencies in the course of administering their programs. Known as 

administrative records, such information can help improve accuracy and reduce the need for labor-intensive field operations, especially during one of the most expensive of all Census activities, 

Nonresponse Followup. The Bureau has used administrative 

records in previous decennials, but not to the same extent as that 

planned for 2020. 

In my remarks today, which are based on a report we issued last 

month, I will describe the opportunities and challenges the Bureau 

faces in using administrative records and the steps it needs to take 

going forward to help ensure they produce the desired results. 

The Bureau estimates it can save up to $1.4 billion compared to 

traditional census-taking methods by using administrative records 

for three purposes during Nonresponse Followup. They include 

identifying and removing vacant and nonexisting housing units 

from the follow-up workload before Census workers start knocking 

on doors. Second, enumerating non responding occupied housing 

units if the information meets a certain quality threshold. And 

third, predicting the best times to visit a household. 

Using administrative records for these activities can greatly improve productivity. For example, in a test conducted in Arizona’s 

Maricopa County earlier this year, the Bureau reduced the followup workload by 11 percent by removing vacant and nonexistent 

households. 

The Bureau is also exploring nine additional applications of administrative records that may help reduce cost or improve quality 

still further. The Bureau currently has access to data held by the 

U.S. Postal Service, IRS, and Selective Service System, among 

other agencies. It’s also considering other data sets, such as the 

National Directory of New Hires. The Bureau believes the NDNH 

and other records could improve its ability to find historically hardto-count populations, such as certain minority groups and young 

children. However, the Bureau still needs to secure statutory access to the NDNH. 


AKING-6430 with DISTILLER
24 

The Bureau’s planned use of administrative records is commendable, but much work remains. For example, in our October report 

we recommended that the Bureau set deadlines to decide which, if 

any, of the nine additional uses of administrative records still 

under consideration will be used in 2020. This will help ensure the 

Bureau has sufficient time to review the data sets, determine their 

fitness for use, and fully test them. 

Final decisions are needed by the end of fiscal year 2017 in order 

to be included in the Bureau’s full end-to-end test in 2018. However, these deadlines do not appear in schedule documents. 

The Bureau must also continue to address challenges to using 

administrative records, such as protecting confidential information 

and ensuring congressional and public acceptance of the Bureau’s 

plan to share personal data across government agencies. Fully implementing our prior recommendations to strengthen the security 

of its information systems and developing a congressional outreach 

strategy could help address these challenges. 

In summary, the bureau has made noteworthy progress in expanding its use of administrative records. Going forward, though, 

perhaps one of the biggest risks the Bureau faces is the ticking 

clock. Any delays could have serious implications for downstream 

activities. As a result, continued congressional attention will be 

needed to help ensure that the Bureau, one, stays on schedule; two, 

sets deadlines for key go/no-go decisions on additional uses of administrative data; and three, fully implements our prior recommendations. 

This concludes my remarks, I’ll be happy to answer any questions that you may have. 

[Prepared statement of Mr. Goldenkoff follows:] 


AKING-6430 with DISTILLER
25 


AKING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 13 here 22362.013

lnMMfi.MjWNF 

2020 CENSUS 

Progress Report on Using Administrative Records to 

Control Enumeration Costs 

What GAO Found 

The U.S. Census Bureau (Bureau) estimates that it can save around $1.4 billion 

using administrative records, compared to relying solely on traditional 

enumeration methods. While the Bureau has made some limited use of 

administrative records during past decennials, it plans to use them much more 

extensively in 2020 to achieve these savings. 

For example, the Bureau plans to use administrative records to reduce the field 

work required for its most expensive census operation-nonresponse follow-upwhen temporary Bureau employees knock on doors across the country to obtain 

information from people who did not respond to the census, or who were missed 

by census mailings. According to the Bureau, using administrative records to (1) 

identify vacant housing units; (2) identify and enumerate occupied non responding 

housing units when the records meet a certain quality threshold; and (3) predict 

the best times to visit a household can generate substantial cost savings. The 

Bureau is also exploring the feasibility of nine additional uses of administrative 

records that could reduce costs and improve the quality of the census still further. 

The Bureau already has access to nearly all of the data sources it needs to 

achieve the desired cost savings. It is also working to gain access to additional 

databases that could help improve its ability to find historically hard-to-count 

populations, such as certain minority groups and young children. While the 

Bureau is to be commended for its efforts to expand its use of administrative 

records, going forward, it will be important to set deadlines to help ensure it 

makes timely decisions on these other databases and uses of administrative 

records. According to Bureau officials, final decisions on the use of 

administrative records are needed by the end of fiscal year 2017 so the records 

can be adequately tested in the Bureau's full end-to-end test in 2018. However, 

these deadlines do not appear in schedule documents. 

It will also be important for the Bureau to address key challenges to using 

administrative records, including (1) ensuring the quality of the records it receives 

from other government agencies; (2) protecting confidential data; and (3) 

ensuring congressional and public acceptance of the Bureau's plan to share 

personal data across government agencies. The Bureau's ongoing research and 

testing efforts can help with the first challenge. Fully implementing our prior 

recommendations to strengthen the security of its information systems and to 

develop a congressional outreach strategy could help address the second and 

third challenges. 

Key assumptions the Bureau used in estimating potential cost savings from 

administrative records are logical, and the Bureau plans to provide additional 

support for them. For example, the Bureau's assumption that it could reduce its 

follow-up workload follows clearly from the Bureau's use of administrative 

records to remove vacant units from among those housing units needing followup because people did not respond to the census, reducing that workload by 

11.6 percent. The Bureau released an updated life-cycle cost estimate in October 

2015, and GAO anticipates reviewing its reliability after the Bureau makes 

support for the estimate available. 

-------------United States Government Accountability Office 
26 


AKING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 14 here 22362.014

Chairmen Meadows and Hurd, Ranking Members Connolly and Kelly, 

and Members of the Subcommittees: 

I am pleased to be here today to discuss the U,S, Census Bureau's 

(Bureau) efforts to control the cost of the 2020 Census by making greater 

use of information already provided to federal and state governments as 

they administer other programs-what is referred to as "administrative 

records: With a life-cycle cost of about $13 billion, the 2010 Census was 

the most expensive U,S, census in history and was 56 percent more 

costly than the $8,1 billion 2000 Census (in constant 2010 dollars), Given 

budgetary realities, that cost growth is simply unsustainable, Beginning in 

1990, we reported that rising costs and difficufiies in securing public 

participation, among other challenges, required a new approach to taking 

the census, 1 Part of the Bureau's response is its planned use of 

administrative records, The Bureau estimates their use could generate as 

much as $1 A billion in cost savings compared to traditional census taking 

methods, 

Today's hearing is timely, as our past reviews of prior decennials have 

underscored the importance of (1) early and ongoing congressional 

oversight to keep census preparations on track, and (2) congressional 

acceptance of the Bureau's overall approach, From the very beginning of 

the 2020 life cycle, we have been reporting on the Bureau's progress in 

re-engineering the census, including its planned design and operational 

changes, as well as its Information Technology (IT) management, the 

latter of which my colleague is addressing in her statement 2 In my 

remarks today, I will describe the opportunities and challenges the 

Bureau faces in using administrative records as well as the key 

assumptions supporting the Bureau's related estimated cost savings, 

My testimony is based on our review of the Bureau's plans to use 

administrative records in the 2020 Census that we issued last month, and 

includes an update to some estimated cost data obtained from the 

1

See for example, GAO, 2000 Census: Progress Made on Design, but Risks Remain, 

GAO/GGD-97-142 (Washington, D,C,: July 14, 1997), and Decennial Census: Preliminary 

1990 Lessons Learned Indicate Need to Rethink Census Approach, GAOrr -GGD-90-18 

(Washington, D!C,: Aug. 6, 1990), 

2

GAO, 2020 Cehsus: Key Information Technology Decisions Must be Made Soon, 

GA0-16-205T (Washington, D,C,. Nov, 3, 2015), 

Page 1 GA0-16-206T 
27 


AKING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 15 here 22362.015

Background 

Bureau. 3 For that work, we reviewed Bureau planning documents and test 

plans, our prior reporting on decennial census planning, interviewed 

Bureau officials, and relied on our Schedule Assessment Guide. 4 We did 

not assess the reliability of the Bureau's estimated cost-savings 

discussed in today's statement because the Bureau released an update 

in early October, which we will be reviewing soon. The work on which this 

statement is based was conducted in accordance with generally accepted 

government auditing standards. Those standards require that we plan 

and perform the audit to obtain sufficient, appropriate evidence to provide 

a reasonable basis for our findings and conclusions based on our audit 

objectives. We believe that the evidence obtained provides a reasonable 

basis for our findings and conclusions based on our audit objectives. 

We, the Bureau, and others have observed that some of the information 

the Bureau collects during the census has already been gathered by 

other government agencies in the course of administering their programs. 

Accessing that information could provide the Bureau with data to help 

conduct the census and, in some cases, complete census forms that 

have missing data. Such uses of administrative records have the potential 

to reduce the cost of the decennial census because, for example, the 

Bureau would need to hire fewer temporary workers and acquire less 

office space and equipment to support fieldwork. Moreover, some of the 

information collected through administrative records could be more 

accurate than information the Bureau collects through traditional door-todoor follow-up methods, such as when the Bureau's enumerators need to 

interview neighbors or other "proxy" respondents because they cannot 

reach a household member to collect needed information. 

While the Bureau has made some limited use of administrative records 

during past decennials, it plans to use them much more extensively in 

2020. In its first operational plan for the 2020 Census (released October 

6, 2015), the Bureau reported design decisions including the use of 

administrative records to identify vacant addresses in advance of followup field work and to enumerate nonresponding households when possible 

3

GAO. 2020 Census: Additional Actions Would Help the Bureau Realize Potential 

Administrative Records Cost Savings, GA0-16-48 (Washington, D.C.: Oct. 20, 2015). 

4

GAO, GAO Schedule Assessment Guide: Best Practices for Project SchedulesExposure Draff, GA0-12-1200 (Washington, D.C.: May 30, 2012). 

Page 2 GA0-16-206T 
28 


AKING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 16 here 22362.016

in order to reduce the need for repeated contact attempts during its 

nonresponse follow-up operation (NRFU). The Bureau also updated the 

life-cycle cost estimate for the 2020 Census to $12.5 billion (in constant 

2020 dollars). 5 This is slightly lower than the Bureau's prior life-cycle cost 

estimate of $12.7 billion. We plan to assess the reliability of the new cost 

estimate and examine the practices the Bureau used to produce it after 

the Bureau makes the model and its supporting documentation available. 

As part of the operational plan, the Bureau also released an update of 

how much its fundamental redesign of the census would reduce costs in 

four major design areas compared to the cost of a 2020 Census 

conducted using the methods of the 2010 Census. Table 1 below 

compares the cost reduction in those four areas. 

Table 1: The Census Bureau's Cost Estimates Show Redesign to Cost Less Than 

Traditional Census 

Key design area 

Reengineering address canvassing 

Optimizing self-response 

Using administrative records 

Reeng!neering field operations 

Total savings compared to Bureau's 

projected cost of 2020 Census using 

traditional approach and methods 

(in 2020 constant dollars) 

Source GAO anatys1s of Census Bureau data I GA0-16-206T 

August 2014 

estimated savings 

$1 billion 

$548 million 

$12 billion 

$2.3 billion 

$5.1 billion 

October 2015 

estimated savings 

$900 million 

400million 

1.4 billion 

2.5 billion 

$5.2 billion 

The operational plan describes over 100 other preliminary design 

decisions related to the Bureau's efforts to build an address list and 

collect census responses. Its release marks a critical turning point in the 

decade-long countdown to the next decennial, as the Bureau completes 

its early research and testing plan, and pivots toward developing 

operations and systems and testing them to refine the census design. 

5

ln GA0-16-48 we reported a different number because the paper version of the Bureau's 

Operational Plan for the 2020 Census originally provided to us, reported a !lfe~cycle cost 

estimate of $12.3 billion, which was in current dollars. 

Page 3 GA0-1S-20ST 
29 


AKING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 17 here 22362.017

Administrative 

Records Can Reduce 

2020 Fieldwork, but 

the Bureau Will Need 

to Better Define 

Milestones and 

Deadlines to Help 

Manage Risks 

Bureau officials have said they hope to use administrative records to 

reduce the field work involved in the most expensive census operationNRFU, when Bureau staff traditionally knock on doors across the country 

at homes of people who did not respond to the census, or who were 

missed by census mailings. The Bureau has reported that the following 

three uses are key to potentially saving up to $1.4 billion compared to 

using traditional census methods. 

Identify vacant housing units. The Bureau incurs a large part of its 

census cost while following up at residences that did not return a census 

questionnaire. However, during the 2010 Census, of the 48 million 

housing units enumerators visited for follow up, about 14 million were 

vacant. One of the largest efficiency gains to the census may come 

simply from using administrative records to remove these vacant units 

from the follow-up workload. In a test in Arizona earlier this year, this use 

of administrative records enabled the Bureau to reduce the NRFU 

workload by 11 percent. 6 Since we completed our audit work, the Bureau 

announced that it would still send a reminder post card to units it 

identified as vacant, which will cost more, but will provide any missed 

household one more opportunity to respond to the census. 

Identify and enumerate occupied nonresponding housing units. 

During the 2015 Census Test, the Bureau demonstrated it could use 

administrative records to accurately count some nonresponding occupied 

households if the household had administrative records meeting a certain 

quality threshold, without attempting any visits. In the test, the Bureau 

used this approach to reduce the NRFU workload by about 20 percent. 

Since we completed our audit work, the Bureau announced that before 

using administrative records to enumerate such households in 2020, it will 

still attempt one visit to the household. Attempting a visit will add costs, 

but will also provide the household one more opportunity to respond to 

the census. 

Predict the best times to complete NRFU. One of the challenges the 

Bureau faces when knocking on doors is reaching a household when 

someone is home. In the 2015 Census Test, the Bureau used 

6Earlier this year in Maricopa County, Arizona, the Bureau conducted its 2015 Census 

Test to see how we!! it can use administrative records to reduce fieldwork and increase 

productivity for NRFU. The test also included a new field management structure and an 

enhanced Operations Control System supporting daily reassignments of cases. 

Page4 GA0·16-206T 
30 


AKING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 18 here 22362.018

The Bureau Plans 

Additional Opportunities 

for Using Administrative 

Records in the 2020 

Census 

demographic information, such as age, from administrative records 

sources in addition to information about how households had responded 

to other Bureau surveys in order to help determine the contact strategy 

for deciding if and when to interview a household. 

The Bureau tested each of these uses during its 2015 Census Test and 

plans further testing of them to refine the methods, but the Bureau has 

already decided to use them. 

In addition to the three uses the Bureau has committed to, the Bureau 

has identified nine additional uses of administrative records that may help 

further reduce cost or improve the quality of the census (see figure 1). 

The Bureau has not separately estimated cost savings for these nine 

uses, but has begun researching the feasibility of most of them. 

Figure 1: The Census Bureau Has Identified Nine Additional Opportunities for Administrative Records In 2020 Census 

Activities 

When activity occurs 

relative to data collection 

2020 Census Activity (as of August 2015) Before During After 

Validate and update address list v 

Identify and target outreach to group quartersa v v ~·~-· -~ " ' - Quality control v 

Non-10 processing - Locate respondents' addressesb v 

Non-10 processing- Validate responsesb v 

ln:~ute occ~~~~o/. status for unresolved households v 

• Impute count of previously unresolved households v . ~-~ 

• l~p~te. ~~ge/sexlrace/ethnicity of previously unresolved households v 

Evaluate Census accuracy 

Souree: U.S C.nsus 8llf'eau. 1 GA0.16-200T 

v 

aGroup quarters consist of college dormitories, prisons, nursing homes, and other facilities typically 

owned or managed by an entity providing housing, services, or both for the residents. 

bNon·lD processing accommodates certain self·responses the Bureau may receive from households 

that may have lost or never received mailings or other advance communication with an ID number 

from the Bureau, determining where to count them {locate them) and attempting to reduce their 

duplication and falsification (validate the responses). 

As shown in the figure, these uses would occur during various points 

relative to data collection. 

Page 5 GA0·16-206T 
31 


AKING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 19 here 22362.019

Before data collection. The Bureau is already using administrative 

records to validate and update the address list. The Bureau is drawing on 

address lists and map information from state, local, and tribal 

governments, in addition to information obtained from commercial 

sources, to update its own address list continuously throughout the 

decade, reducing the need for a more costly door-to-door canvassing 

during the 2 years prior to the census, as was done for the 2010 Census. 

In addition, Bureau officials reported research is about to begin on how to 

better use records to identify group quarters, such as dormitories, prisons, 

nursing homes, and homeless shelters, and to target outreach, that is, 

encourage cooperation of staff at these locations with the census. The 

Bureau historically uses special procedures to enumerate at these places, 

and administrative records could potentially jump start the time and effort 

spent getting ready for them. 

During data collection. The Bureau is considering using administrative 

records in lieu of some follow-up visits for the purpose of quality control of 

field work. In past decennials, the Bureau has called or sent enumerators 

to re-interview some respondents. Relying on administrative records 

could reduce fieldwork and respondent burden, or enable the Bureau to 

better target re-interviews of respondents. The Bureau is also researching 

how administrative records can be used to help process responses that 

do not have a census ID number on them (this activity is called non-ID 

processing). The Bureau may receive such responses from households 

that lost or never received mailings or other advance communication with 

an ID number from the Bureau. A test in 2015 in the Savannah, Georgia, 

media market area demonstrated that a large collation of administrative 

records from many sources was effective in helping the Bureau correct or 

fill in missing address information. This enabled the Bureau to better 

locate where those responses should be counted. The Bureau is also 

researching how other records may help it validate responses or the 

identities of those who submit responses as part of this processing. 

After data collection. When the Bureau still does not have information 

on a housing unit after collecting data during field operations, it will 

attempt to impute the data-as it has done since 1970. According to 

Bureau officials, in 2020 the Bureau will use administrative records to 

help improve how it imputes three related types of data: (1) whether or 

not a unit is occupied, (2) how many people live in the unit, and (3) the 

residents' demographic characteristics, such as sex, race, and ethnicity. 

Finally, the Bureau is considering how administrative records might help it 

evaluate census accuracy. 

Page 6 GA0·16-206T 
32 


AKING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 20 here 22362.020

The Bureau Has Identified 

Potential Sources for Most 

of the Administrative 

Records It Hopes to Use 

for the 2020 Census 

The Bureau has identified and obtained access to nearly all of the 

sources that it believes it needs in order to leverage all of the 

opportunities it has identified (see figure 2). 

Figure 2: The Census Bureau Obtained Access to and Tested Sources of Administrative Records 

In addition to the records already obtained, the Bureau is working to gain 

access to the National Directory of New Hires (NDNH), a national 

database of wage and employment information used for child support 

enforcement, and Kidlink, a database from the Social Security 

Administration that links parent and child Social Security numbers for 

children born after 1998 in U.S. hospitals. Both of these databases would 

help the Bureau improve its ability to find historically "hard-to-count" 

groups, such as certain minority groups or young children. 

Bureau officials stated that they are examining ways to quantify the 

potential effect that their access to these additional sources could have 

Page7 GA0-16-206T 
33 


AKING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 21 here 22362.021

Setting Deadlines Would 

Help the Bureau Ensure It 

Makes Timely Decisions 

on Administrative Records 

on the 2020 Census. But they point out that there is value in accessing 

these records for the Bureau's other statistical surveys as well, and that 

even if they are unable to obtain the additional records in time for the 

2020 Census, they would continue pursuing them for these other 

purposes, as well as for use in future censuses. 

While the Bureau is to be commended for its efforts to expand its use of 

administrative records to control costs and increase accuracy, we 

identified actions the Bureau could take to increase its chances of 

success. 7 First, as of August 2015, the Bureau had not set deadlines to 

determine which of its identified uses of administrative records it will or 

will not implement for the 2020 Census, nor had it set deadlines for 

determining exactly which records from which sources it will tap in 

support of each use it implements. Moreover, the Bureau had no 

deadlines against which to measure progress for obtaining access to 

additional sources or scheduled milestones for when key steps may need 

to be taken in order to integrate them within 2020 preparations. For 

example, the Bureau will need time to review files in order to ensure their 

fitness for use before the Bureau can integrate them into the census 

design. Earlier in October the Bureau announced time frames for several 

decisions related to uses of administrative records and explained that the 

decisions are not yet included in its integrated schedule of activities. 

According to our scheduling guide, assurance of program success can be 

increased when management relies on credible schedules containing the 

complete scope of activities necessary to achieve established program 

objectives• 

Bureau officials have stated that final decisions on the use of 

administrative records are needed by the end of fiscal year 2017 in order 

to be included in the Bureau's 2018 full end-to-end test However, these 

deadlines do not appear in schedule documents. We recommended that 

the Census Director ensure that resources focus on activities with 

promise to reduce cost by documenting milestones related to deciding 

which records to use, particularly for purposes not yet demonstrated as 

7 GAO, Information Security: Actions Needed by Census Bureau to Address Weaknesses, 

GA0-13-63 (Washington, D.C.: Jan. 22, 2013). Another version of this report was issued 

for limited distribution. 

8

GA0-12-120G. 

Page 8 GA0-16-206T 
34 


AKING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 22 here 22362.022

The Bureau Is Taking 

Steps to Address 

Challenges to Using 

Administrative Records for 

the 2020 Census; 

Implementing Our 

Previous 

Recommendations Could 

Help 

feasible or involving records it does not already have access to, such as 

NDNH and Kidlink. The Department of Commerce-the Bureau's parent 

agency-concurred with our recommendation. Deadlines for deciding on 

all potential uses-either committing to move forward with them or 

abandoning them as possibilities for 2020-and for deciding how all other 

records will be used would help to ensure the Bureau is using its 

resources cost-effectively. 

The Bureau is taking steps to address challenges it faces in using 

administrative records to control costs and improve the quality of the 2020 

Census. 

One challenge facing the Bureau is ensuring the quality of the records it 

receives from other agencies and levels of government. To meet this 

challenge, the Bureau has processes in place and is conducting research 

and testing to ensure quality of records. For example, to ensure accuracy, 

the Bureau routinely screens address and map files provided by state, 

local, and tribal governments to determine if they satisfy preset minimum 

quality standards for completeness of address information. This helps to 

improve the master list of addresses. The Bureau plans comprehensive 

testing of all records during an end-to-end test of its 2020 Census design 

(to be conducted in 2018). The Bureau plans additional testing of 

administrative records for the 2016 Census Test in the Los Angeles and 

Houston metro areas, a large test of address canvassing for 2016, and an 

additional site test in 2017 at an undetermined location. 

The Bureau reported it will review imputation models it used during prior 

censuses to determine how it can integrate information from 

administrative records into them in fiscal year 2016. Tests will be included 

in the 2016 Census Test. 

A second challenge involves protecting confidential data. We have 

previously reported that until the Bureau implements a complete and 

comprehensive security program, it will have limited assurance that its 

information and systems are being adequately protected against 

unauthorized access, use, disclosure, modification, disruption, or loss. In 

January 2013, we made over 100 recommendations aimed at addressing 

Page 9 GA0-16-206T 
35 


AKING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 23 here 22362.023

weaknesses in that program. 9 The Bureau agreed and Bureau officials 

state that the Bureau has taken action on all 115 of our recommendations 

to improve its security program. In assessing the Bureau's reported 

actions, we have reviewed documentation pertaining to 97 of the 

recommendations-66 of which we have confirmed have been addressed 

and 31 that require additional actions and/or documentation from the 

Bureau. We are currently analyzing the extent to which the remaining 18 

recommendations have been addressed by the Bureau and expect to 

complete that review by the end of 2015. My colleague is further 

addressing the security challenge in her statement. 10 Bureau officials 

pointed out that the Bureau is well positioned to prevent disclosure of 

administrative records, as it has long-standing experience in collecting 

data from other agencies and reporting on them. Furthermore, the Bureau 

and the agency providing the data agree to data safeguards during 

negotiations for access. 

A third challenge concerns public acceptance and attitudes about sharing 

of personal data across government agencies for the purposes of the 

census. We have previously reported on the need within the federal 

statistical system for broader public discussion on balancing trade-offs 

among competing values, such as quality, cost, timeliness, privacy, and 

confidentiality. 11 The public has related concerns involving trust in the 

government and perceptions about the burden on respondents as well the 

social benefits of agencies sharing data. We recommended in 2012 that 

the Bureau develop and implement an effective congressional outreach 

strategy, particularly on new design elements the Bureau is researching 

and considering as well the cost-quality trade-offs of potential design 

decisions. 12 The Bureau agreed with the recommendation and, in 

November 2014, it provided us with a congressional engagement plan. 

The four-page plan brings together in one place a summary of the 

Bureau's ongoing activity in this area, yet, by itself, lacks goals or 

9

GAO, Information Security: Actions Needed by Census Bureau to Address Weaknesses, 

GA0-13-63 (Washington, D.C.: Jan. 22, 2013). 

10GA0-16-205T. 

11GAO, Federal Stat;st;cal System: Agencies Can Make Greater Use of Existing Data, but 

Continued Progress Is Needed on Access and Quality Issues, GA0~12-54 {Washington, 

D.C.: Feb. 24, 2012). 

12GAO, 2020 Census: Additional Steps Are Needed to Buifd on Early Planning, 

GA0-12-626 (Washington, D.C.: May 17, 2012). 

Page 10 GA0-16-206T 
36 


AKING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 24 here 22362.024

Key Assumptions for 

Estimated Cost 

Savings from 

Administrative 

Records Are Logical; 

the Bureau Will 

Continue to Validate 

the Assumptions 

strategies for attaining them, or accountability for who will work to 

implement them or when. We will continue monitoring the Bureau's efforts 

to address this recommendation, particularly as these efforts may depend 

on scheduling of activities the Bureau may yet set related to making final 

decisions about administrative records. 

As part of our recently released review, we determined that key 

assumptions in the Bureau's administrative records cost area made 

sense. 13 Table 2 shows the results of our analysis. 

Table 2: The Census Bureau•s Key Assumptions for Estimated Cost Savings from 

Administrative Records Are Logica1 and the Bureau Is Taking Steps to Validate 

Them Further 

-:K::-e..:y_a_s--:su_m7p:..t_io_n-c---:--S=-u...:p..:p_o7rt_and planned,_n_e_xt7s_t•...:Pc..•_......,. __ c-:-"_-:--:--

Removal of vacant and Percentage reduction based on research examining match 

non~residential units wm rates of records to vacant units in prior census. 

reduce the total 2015 Census Test successfully demonstrated the ability to 

Nonresponse Follow-up remove 1 1.6 percent of NRFU workload as vacant, 

(NRFU) workload corroborating this assumption. 

Next step: Methods for removing vacant and non-residential 

units will be tested again in the 2016 Site Test and other 

tests. 

Reduced workload will Early 2020 planning documents presented a case for 

reduce the total number reducing the number of field offices. 

of field offices needed The 2015 Census Test demonstrated reduction in NRFU 

workload, which drives the number of offices needed. 

On October6, 2015, the Bureau announced its decision to replace the 494 field offices in 2010 Census with up to 250 

offices in 2020. 

Next step: The Bureau will test the scale of operations in 

future tests, including in 2016. 

Maximum number of The 2010 Census experiments indicated a reduction in visits 

NRFU visits per housing might be possible without reducing quality of data. 

unit will be reduced from 

6 to 3 visits 

Page 11 

During the test, on multiple occasions, we observed Bureau 

employees visiting households many more times than the 

maximum allowed. This calls into question the Bureau's ability 

to control the number of visits. 

Next step: Bureau plans to continue testing controls on and 

impacts of the number of visits during future tests, such as 

the 2016 Census Test 

GA0·16-206T 
37 


AKING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 25 here 22362.025

Key assumption 

Ellmination of the 

Vacant/Delete Check 

(VDC) operation' 

Elimination of the 

Coverage Follow-up 

(CFU) operation' 

Support and planned next steps 

The Bureau's 2010 assessment ofVDC found the operation 

had redundancies with NRFU. 

The 2015 Census Test demonstrated success at identifying 

vacant and non-residential units, which Bureau officials cite 

as evidence that this follow-up operation is no longer needed. 

Next step: Ongoing research to determine the effects of 

eliminating VDC. 

Administrative records design for 2020 uses administrative 

records before and during enumeration, rather than after 

enumeration, as was done with CFU 2010. 

NeXt step: Ongoing research to determine the effects of 

eliminating the CFU operation. 

Source US Census Bureau documents I GAO·i8·206T 

aln the 2010 Vacant/Delete Check operation, enumerators verified the Census Day status of vacant 

and deleted (nonexistent) housing units. VDC also attempted to enumerate late additions to the 

Bureau's address file. 

11During 2010 CFU, a contractor telephoned certain households in an attempt to determine if someone 

had been miscounted. 

While we were reviewing these cost assumptions, the Bureau did not 

always have documentation readily available, and Bureau reporting on 

one of the assumptions needed to be corrected. We were able to identify 

the needed support, and Bureau staff said that they will change the 

methodology for future reporting on the cost estimate to involve more 

factors and variables, such as the ratio of field workers to supervisors 

they would need in 2020 in addition to the NRFU workload assumption. 

This change will help demonstrate the reliability of the estimates as well 

as ensure effective communication with others about them. 

Since we released our report. the Bureau provided an updated estimate 

of the total2020 Census life-cycle cost of $12.5 billion, as well as updated 

estimates of how much less in four major cost areas its 2020 plan would 

cost compared to a cost of the a 2020 Census conducted using the 2010 

Census approaches and methods. We expect soon to begin reviewing the 

Bureau's new cost model and its assumption. Bureau officials have told 

us that although the model has been updated, the key assumptions within 

the administrative records cost area are largely the same. 

Bureau officials told us that the revised life-cycle cost estimate the Bureau 

released on October 6, 2015 was developed with leading practices from 

our cost estimating and assessment guide. After the Bureau releases the 

underlying model, methodology, and supporting documents for the 

estimate, we anticipate reviewing them to assess their reliability. 

Continued oversight efforts, such as this hearing, will be helpful to ensure 

Page 12 GA0-16-206T 
38 


AKING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 26 here 22362.026

GAO Contacts and 

Staff 

Acknowledgments 

(100397) 

that the Bureau's efforts remain on track and focused on those most 

promising to result in a cost-effective 2020 Census. 

If you have any questions on matters discussed in this statement, please 

contact Robert Goldenkoff at (202) 512-2757 or by e-mail at 

goldenkoffr@gao.gov. Other key contributors to this testimony include Ty 

Mitchell, Assistant Director; Brett Caloia; Robert Gebhart; Richard Hung; 

Andrea Levine; Donna Miller; Tamara Stenzel; and Timothy Wexler. 

Page 13 GA0-16-206T 
39 

Mr. MEADOWS. Thank you. 

Ms. Cha. 

STATEMENT OF CAROL R. CHA 

Ms. CHA. Chairmen Meadows and Hurd, Ranking Members Connolly and Kelly, and members of the subcommittees, I would like 

to thank you for inviting me to testify today. It’s your continued 

oversight in hearings like these that are vital to ensuring that the 

2020 Census is effectively managed. 

The Bureau will rely on an enterprise-wide IT initiative called 

CEDCAP to deliver the systems and infrastructure needed to carry 

out its redesigned operations. For example, CEDCAP is planning to 

deliver an 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 fieldwork, as well as test the use of mobile devices for field 

data collection. 

Based on our work to date, I’d like to highlight two key challenges regarding the Bureau’s plans for 2020. First, the deferral of 

key IT decisions in the face of time constraints. By August of 2017, 

the Bureau intends to begin preparations for end-to-end testing to 

validate that CEDCaP systems are ready to go live on Census Day. 

This gives the Bureau less than 2 years to develop and integrate 

planned systems. 

While the Bureau has made many key decisions about its redesigned Census as described in its October plan, there are critical 

IT decisions that have not yet been made, including whether the 

Bureau will build or buy the needed systems. 

This lack of prioritization of IT decisions has been a continuing 

trend, which we have reported on over the past few years. Most recently, in February we reported that the Bureau had not determined how key research questions would be answered, such as the 

expected rate of respondents using the Internet survey or the IT 

infrastructure needed to support this option. As such, we made recommendations to improve the Bureau’s ability to answer these 

questions in time to make those decisions in October. However, this 

has not happened yet. 

Furthermore, the Bureau does not intend to make these decisions 

and other key ones until 2016 through 2018. Among other things, 

the build-or-buy decisions won’t be made until next June at the 

earliest. Based on the current sequencing of planned decisions, the 

Bureau will have about a year to develop and then integrate these 

systems and then have them ready for end-to-end testing. Further, 

the mobile device strategy for fieldwork is not expected until 2 

months after the start of this testing. 

Unless the Bureau makes these key decisions soon, it will likely 

run out of time to put CEDCaP systems in place. And I can refer 

you to the screen shot above, which shows examples of deferred 

2020 decisions overlaid on top of the Census schedule. 

[Slide.] 

Ms. CHA. And, again, if you look from left to right, the first one, 

the build-or-buy decisions, June 2016 at the earliest, and then we 

come up on Census end-to-end testing, which preparations begin in 


AKING-6430 with DISTILLER
40 

August of 2017. So, again, there’s very limited time to integrate 

and implement these systems in time for those tests. 

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

credit, important progress has been made to strengthen and institutionalize selected IT management areas, such as governance and 

requirements management. However, critical IT leadership gaps 

exist. Most notably, the Bureau is without a permanent chief information officer. Other key vacancies include the chief of the Office 

Information Security and chief cloud architect. The Bureau is aggressively working to close these gaps. But if they do remain open, 

its ability to effectively deliver CEDCaP will be hampered. 

In addition, the Bureau still has work remaining to fully address 

our recommendations to improve information security. In January 

2013, we made 115 recommendations to address control deficiencies, such as access control to protect its systems from intrusion. As of today, the Bureau has fully addressed 66 of them. The 

remaining open recommendations, of those, 30 require additional 

actions by the Bureau and the other 19 are under review. Continued focus on completing this effort must be a high priority to ensure that sensitive information collected during the Census is adequately secure. 

In summary, with the deferral of key IT decisions, the Bureau 

is running out of time to implement the systems needed to support 

the redesign and achieve its projected $5.2 billion in cost savings. 

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 plan and realize savings. 

That concludes my statement. I look forward to addressing your 

questions. 

[Prepared statement of Ms. Cha follows:] 


AKING-6430 with DISTILLER
41 


AKING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 27 here 22362.027

2020 CENSUS 

Key Information Technology Decisions Must be Made 

Soon 

What GAO Found 

GAO has previously reported that the U.S. Census Bureau (Bureau) faces a 

number of critical challenges in developing and deploying the information 

technology (IT) systems and infrastructure it plans to rely on to conduct the 

significantly redesigned 2020 Census. Specifically, the Bureau has a major IT 

program under way to modernize and consolidate the multiple, duplicative 

systems it currently uses to carry out survey data collection and processing 

functions; however, with less than 2 years before preparations begin for end-toend testing of all systems and operations to ensure readiness for the 2020 

Census, there is limited time to implement it While the Bureau documented 

many key decisions about the redesigned 2020 Census in the 2020 Census 

Operational Plan, released in October 2015, several key IT-related decisions 

have not been made. Specifically, the Bureau has not yet made decisions about 

the projected demand that the IT infrastructure would need to meet or whether it 

will build or buy the needed systems. 

This lack of prioritization of IT decisions has been a continuing trend, which GAO 

has previously identified. For example: 

In April 2014, GAO reported that the Bureau had not prioritized key IT 

research and testing needed for its design decisions. Accordingly, GAO 

recommended that the Bureau prioritize its IT-related research and testing 

projects. The Bureau had taken steps to address this recommendation, such 

as releasing a plan in September 2014 that identified research questions 

intended to inform the operational design decisions. 

In February 2015, however, GAO reported that the Bureau had not 

determined how key IT research questions that were identified in the 

September 2014 plan would be answered-such as the expected rate of 

respondents using its Internet response option or the IT infrastructure that 

would be needed to support this option. GAO recommended that the Bureau, 

among other things, develop methodologies and plans for answering key ITrelated research questions in time to inform design decisions. However, this 

has not yet happened. 

In addition, while the Bureau has made improvements in some key IT 

management areas, it still faces challenges in the areas of workforce planning 

and information security. Specifically: 

It has taken steps to develop an enterprise-wide IT workforce planning 

process, as GAO recommended in 2012. However, the Bureau has yet to fill 

key positions. Most concerning, it is currently without a permanent chief 

information officer. 

The Bureau has taken steps to implement the majority of the 115 

recommendations GAO made in 2013 to address information security 

weaknesses; however, completing this effort is necessary to ensure that 

sensitive information it will collect during the census is adequately protected. 

With the deferral of key IT-related decisions, the Bureau is running out of time to 

develop, acquire, and implement the systems it will need to deliver the redesign 

and achieve its projected $5.2 billion in cost savings. 

-------------United States Government Accountability Office 
42 


AKING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 28 here 22362.028

Background 

Chairmen Meadows and Hurd, Ranking Members Connolly and Kelly, 

and Members of the Subcommittees: 

I am pleased to be here today to discuss the U.S. Census Bureau's 

(Bureau) preparations to implement information technology (IT) solutions 

for the 2020 Census. On October 6, 2015, the Bureau released the first 

version of its 2020 Census Operational Plan, which is intended to outline 

the design decisions that drive how the 2020 Census will be conducted. 

These design decisions are expected to significantly transform how the 

Bureau conducts the Decennial Census in an effort to save approximately 

$5.2 billion. The redesign largely depends on implementing new 

technology and systems to modernize and automate many parts of the 

Decennial Census. Accordingly, concurrent with the overhaul of the 2020 

Census, the Bureau is also significantly redesigning the IT systems that 

support each of its surveys, including the Decennial Census. 

With less than 2 years remaining for the Bureau to put all systems and 

operations place to prepare for end-to-end testing, this hearing is timely. 

My statement today will describe critical challenges the Bureau faces in 

successfully delivering the needed IT systems for the 2020 Census. 

The information in this testimony is based primarily on our previous 

reports on the Bureau's planning efforts for the 2020 Census. More detail 

on our scope and methodology is provided in each published report cited 

in this testimony. We also obtained and reviewed information on the 

Bureau's actions in response to our previous recommendations. 

The work on which this statement is based was conducted in accordance 

with generally accepted government auditing standards. Those standards 

require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain sufficient, appropriate 

evidence to provide a reasonable basis for our findings and conclusions 

based on our audit objectives. We believe that the evidence obtained 

provides a reasonable basis for our findings and conclusions based on 

our audit objectives. 

As you know, the cost of the Decennial Census has steadily increased 

during the past 40 years, in part because the nation's population has 

steadily grown larger, more diverse, and increasingly difficult to 

enumerate. For example, at about $13 billion, the 2010 Census was the 

costliest U.S. census in history and was 56 percent more costly than the 

$8.1 billion 2000 Census (in constant 2010 dollars). 

Page 1 GA0-16-205T 
43 


AKING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 29 here 22362.029

To help save costs, in preparing for the 2020 Census, the Bureau has 

been researching and testing new methods and technologies to redesign 

the Census to more cost-effectively count the population while 

maintaining high-quality results. 

The Bureau's research and testing has focused on four redesign areas: 

Reengineering address canvassing: This involves reengineering 

processes for updating the Bureau's address list and maps of the 

nation to reduce the need for employing field staff to walk every street 

in the nation to verify addresses. 

Optimizing self-response: Includes efforts to maximize the selfresponse of households by, among other things, offering an Internet 

response option. As we have previously reported, to deliver the 

Internet response option, the Bureau would need to, among other 

things, design and develop an Internet response application, develop 

and acquire the IT infrastructure to support a large volume of data 

processing and storage, and plan communication and outreach 

strategies to motivate households to respond via the Internet.' 

Using administrative records: This includes expanding the use of 

data previously obtained by other federal and state government 

agencies and commercial sources to reduce the need for costly and 

labor-intensive follow-up work. My colleague will address the Bureau's 

progress on using administrative records in his statement, today2 

Reengineering field operations: This includes reducing the number 

of visits to households, automating the management of enumerator 

work to conduct non-response follow-up, and automating and 

optimizing case assignment and routing for enumerators to reduce the 

staffing, infrastructure, and field offices required for the 2020 Census. 

The Bureau has conducted several major field tests to examine the 

potential for each of these redesign areas: 

In mid-2014 the Bureau conducted the 2014 Census Test in the 

Maryland and Washington, D.C., areas to test new methods for 

conducting self-response and non-response follow-up. 

1

GAO, 2020 Census: Key Challenges Need to Be Addressed to Successfully Enable 

Internet Response, GA0-15-225 (Washington, D.C.: Feb. 5, 2015). 

2

GAO, 2020 Census: Progress Report on Using Administrative Records to Control 

Enumeration Costs, GA0-16-206T (Washington, D.C.: Nov. 3, 2015) 

Page 2 
44 


AKING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 30 here 22362.030

In early 2015 the Bureau completed the Address Validation Test, 

which was used to examine new methods for updating the Bureau's 

address list. 

In mid-2015 the Bureau conducted the 2015 Census Test in Arizona 

to test, among other things, the use of a field operations management 

system to automate data collection operations and provide real-time 

data and the ability to reduce the non-response follow-up workload 

using data previously provided to the government, as well as enabling 

enumerators to use their personally owned mobile devices to collect 

census data. 

Also in mid-2015, the Bureau conducted an optimizing self-response 

test in Savannah, Georgia, and the surrounding area, which was 

intended to further explore methods of encouraging households to 

respond using the Internet, such as using advertising and outreach to 

motivate respondents, and enabling households to respond without a 

Bureau-issued identification number. 

More recently, the Bureau began its National Content Test, which is 

currently ongoing and intended to, among other things, continue to 

test self-response modes and contact strategies and refine estimates 

of national self-response and Internet response rates. 

These tests were intended to inform the first version of the Bureau's 2020 

Census Operational Plan, which is intended to outline design decisions 

that drive how the 2020 Census will be conducted. As part of these 

decisions, the Bureau has committed to aspects of the 2020 Census 

redesign. The operational plan articulated 326 total design decision 

points, which vary widely in their complexity, importance, and urgency. 3 

As of October 6, 2015, the Bureau had made decisions for about 47 

percent of them related to each of the four redesign areas. For example, 

the Bureau has decided to 

conduct 100 percent of address canvassing (i.e., identifying all 

addresses where people could live) in the office, and target a subset 

of up to 25 percent for in-the-field address canvassing; 

offer an Internet self-response option, as well as alternative response 

options via telephone and paper for limited circumstances; 

25 decisions in the Program Management operational area because they 

are related to management of the program rather than design elements of the 2020 

Census operations. 

Page3 GA0-1 S-205T 
45 


AKING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 31 here 22362.031

allow people to respond without a unique census identification 

number; 

use mobile devices for enumerators to conduct field data collection; 

use administrative records to enumerate vacant units; 

use enterprise solutions to support the 2020 Census, when 

practicable; and 

reduce the field footprint by half in comparison to the 2010 Census 

(e.g., 6 regional census centers instead of 12 and up to 250 field 

offices instead of nearly 500). 

Figure 1 provides an overview of the Bureau's current plans and 

assumptions for the 2020 Census, resulting from the October 2015 

operational plan. 

Page4 GA0-16-205T 
46 


AKING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 32 here 22362.032

Figure 1: Overview of the Census Bureau's Plans and Assumptions for the 2020 Census, as of October 6, 2015 

communleations and 

partnen~llip campaign 

As a result of these decisions, the Bureau estimates saving $5.2 billion. 

Specifically, the Bureau estimated that repeating the design of the 2010 

Census for 2020 would cost approximately $17.8 billion (in constant 2020 

dollars}, while successfully implementing the four redesign areas is 

expected to result in an overall 2020 Census cost of $12.5 billion (in 

PageS GA0·16-205T 
47 


AKING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 33 here 22362.033

constant 2020 dollars). Table 1 illustrates the estimated cost savings 

associated with each redesign area. 

Table 1: 2020 Census Redesign Areas and Estimated Savings as of October 6, 2015 

_B.~engineering addr~-~~­

Optimizing self-response 

Utilizing administr~tive records 

Reengineering field operations 

Total 

Source. Census Bureau I GA0-16-205T 

$1.4 

$2.5 

$5.2 

Moving forward, the Bureau plans to conduct additional research and 

testing and further refine the design through 2018. By August 2017, the 

Bureau plans to begin preparations for end-to-end testing, which is 

intended to test all systems and operations to ensure readiness for the 

2020 Census. Figure 2 shows the timeline for planned 2020 Census 

research and testing. 

Page6 GA0-16-205T 
48 


AKING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 34 here 22362.034

Figure 2: 2020 Decennial Census Planned Research and Testing Schedule 

Fiscal year 

Soorce: GAOanaJy$isofcet~WsBureauda1a. 1 GA0·16-205T 

Note: The Census Bureau had planned to complete the preliminary operational design decisions by 

September 30, 2015, but they were released on October 6, 2015. 

Concurrent with redesigning the decennial census, the Bureau has also 

begun a significant effort to modernize and consolidate its survey data 

collection and processing functions. This is being undertaken through an 

enterprise-wide IT initiative called Census Enterprise Data Collection and 

Processing (CEDCAP). This initiative is a large and complex 

modernization program intended to deliver a system-of-systems for all the 

Bureau's survey data collection and processing functions-rather than 

continuing to rely on unique, survey-specific systems with redundant 

capabilities. 

For the 2020 Census, CEDCAP is expected to deliver the systems and IT 

infrastructure needed to implement the Bureau's redesign areas. For 

example: 

To reengineer field work, CEDCAP is expected to implement a new 

dynamic operational control system to track and manage field work. 

This system is to be able to make decisions about which visits 

enumerators should attempt on a daily basis using real-time data, as 

Page7 
49 


AKING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 35 here 22362.035

well as provide automated route planning to make enumerator travel 

more efficient CEDCAP also includes testing the use of mobile 

devices, either government-furnished or employee-owned, to 

automate data collection in the field. 

To maximize self-response with the Internet response option, 

CEDCAP is responsible for developing and testing a web-based 

survey application and exploring options for establishing the IT 

infrastructure to support the increased volume of data processing and 

storage that will be needed. 

CEDCAP consists of 12 projects that are to deliver capabilities 

incrementally, over the course of at least 10 releases. The Bureau plans 

to roll out capabilities for the 2020 Census incrementally through 6 of 

these releases, while also deploying capabilities for other surveys such as 

the American Community Survey and Economic Census. The Bureau 

expects to reuse selected systems, make modifications to other systems, 

and develop or acquire additional systems and infrastructure. As of 

August 2015, the CEDCAP program was projected to cost about $548 

million through 2020. 

However, the Bureau's past efforts to implement new approaches and 

systems have not always gone well. As one example, during the 2010 

Census, the Bureau planned to use handheld mobile devices to support 

field data collection for the census, including following up with 

nonrespondents. However, due to significant problems identified during 

testing of the devices, cost overruns, and schedule slippages, the Bureau 

decided not to use the handheld devices for non-response follow-up and 

reverted to paper-based processing, which increased the cost of the 2010 

Census by up to $3 billion and significantly increased its risk as it had to 

switch its operations to paper-based operations as a backup. 4 

Bureau Faces Critical Challenges in Delivering IT Systems Needed 

to Support Redesign Areas 

last month's issuance of the 2020 Census Operational Plan, which 

documents many key decisions about the redesign of the 2020 Census, 

represents progress; however, the Bureau faces critical challenges in 

4

GAO, 2010 Census: Preliminary Lessons Learned Highlight the Need for Fundamental 

Reforms, GA0-11-496T (Washington, D.C.: Apr. 6, 2011): and Information Technology: 

Census Bureau Testing of 2010 Decennial Systems Can Be Strengthened, GA0~09-262 

(Washington, D.C.: Mar. 5, 2009). 

Page 8 
50 


AKING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 36 here 22362.036

delivering the IT systems needed to support the redesign areas. 

Specifically, with preparations for end-to-end testing less than 2 years 

away, the window to implement CEDCAP, which is intended to be the 

backbone of the 2020 Census, is narrow. Additionally, while the Bureau 

has demonstrated improvements in IT management, as we have 

previously reported, it faces critical gaps in its IT workforce planning and 

information security. Until it takes actions we have previously 

recommended to address these challenges, 5 the Bureau is at risk of cost 

overruns, schedule delays, and performance shortfalls, which will likely 

diminish the potentially significant cost savings that it estimates will result 

from redesigning the census for 2020. 

Timeframe to Implement the Large and Complex IT Systems Needed for 2020 Census 

Redesign Is Narrow 

The Bureau has not prioritized key IT-related decisions, which is a trend 

we have reported for the past few years. Specifically, in April 2014, we 

reported the Bureau had not prioritized key IT research and testing 

needed for the design decisions planned for the end of 2015. 6 In 

particular, the Bureau had not completed the necessary plans and 

schedules for research and testing efforts and had not prioritized what 

needed to be done in time for the 2015 design decisions-a milestone 

that had already been pushed back by a year (see fig. 3). We concluded 

that, given the current trajectory and the lack of supporting schedules and 

plans, it was unlikely that all planned IT-related research and testing 

activities would be completed in time to support the 2015 design 

decisions-which ultimately came to fruition (discussed later). 

5

GAO, lnformaUon Technology: Census Bureau Needs to Implement Key Management 

Practices, GA0-12-915 (Washington, D.C.: Sept 18, 2012); and Information Security: 

Actions Needed by Census Bureau to Address Weaknesses, GA0-13-63 (Washington, 

D.C.: Jan. 22, 2013). Another version of this report was issued for limited distribution. 

GAO, 2020 Census: Prioritized Information Technology Research and Testing Is Needed 

for Census Design Decisions, GA0-14-389 (Washington, D.C.: Apr. 3, 2014); GA0-15-

225. 

6GA0-14-389. 

PageS GA0-16-205T 
51 


AKING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 37 here 22362.037

Figure 3: Original and Revised Schedules for 2020 Decennial Census Design Decision 

Fiscal year 

Source· GAO anal'{$1$ of C<m$U& Sureau data, I GA0-16-205T 

I Census Pay AprU 1, 20:20 

Note: The Census Bureau had planned to complete design decisions by September 2015, but the 

decisions were released on October 6, 2015. 

In light of these ongoing challenges, we recommended in our April 2014 

report that the Bureau prioritize its IT-related research and testing 

projects that need to be completed to support the design decisions and 

develop schedules and plans to reflect the new prioritized approach. The 

Bureau agreed with our recommendations and has taken steps to 

address them. For example, in September 2014, the Bureau released a 

plan that identified inputs, such as research questions, design 

components, and testing, that were needed to inform the operational 

design decisions expected in the fall of 2015. 

However, as we reported in February 2015,7 the Bureau had not yet 

determined how key IT research questions that had been identified as 

critical inputs into the design decisions-estimating the Internet selfresponse rate and determining the IT infrastructure for security and 

scalability needed to support Internet response--were to be answered. 

We therefore recommended that the Bureau, among other things, 

develop methodologies and plans for answering key IT-related research 

questions in time to inform key design decisions. 

Page 10 GA0-16-205T 
52 


AKING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 38 here 22362.038

While the recent 2020 Census Operational Plan documents many key ITrelated decisions about the redesign of the census, other critical 

questions, including the ones identified in our February 2015 report, 

remain unanswered. Of greater concern, the Bureau does not intend to 

answer these and other questions until 2016 through 2018. Specifically, 

there are several significant IT decisions that are being deferred, which 

have implications on the CEDCAP program's ability to have productionready systems in place in time to conduct end-to-end testing. For 

example, the Bureau does not plan to decide on 

the projected demand that the IT infrastructure and systems would 

need to accommodate or whether the Bureau will build or buy the 

needed systems until June 2016, at the earliest; 

• the high-level design and description of the systems (referred to as 

the solutions architecture) until September 2016-leaving about a 

year to, among other things, build or acquire, integrate, and test the 

systems that are intended to serve as the backbone to the 2020 

Census before preparations for end-to-end testing begins in August 

2017; and 

the strategy for the use of mobile devices for field work until October 

2017. 

Figure 4 illustrates several key IT-related decisions that have been 

deferred which will impact preparations for the end-to-end test and 2020 

Census. Unless the Bureau makes these key decisions soon, it will likely 

run out of time to put CEDCAP systems in place. 

Page11 GA0·16-205T 
53 


AKING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 39 here 22362.039

Figure 4: Examples of Deferred 2020 Census~related IT Decisions Impacting CEDCAP 

Source: GAO anatysi$ or Cei'ISU$ Bureau data. 1 GA0·16-20ST 

Census Bureau Has Demonstrated Improvements in IT Management, but Faces 

Critical Gaps in IT Workforce and Information Security 

Institutionalizing key IT management controls, such as IT governance, 

system development methodology, and requirements management 

processes, helps establish a consistent and repeatable process for 

managing and overseeing IT investments and reduces the risk of 

experiencing cost overruns, schedule slippages, and performance 

shortfalls, like those that affected the previous census. 

However, in September 2012,' we reported that the Bureau lacked a 

sufficiently mature IT governance process to ensure that investments are 

properly controlled and monitored, did not have a comprehensive system 

development methodology, and continued to have long-standing 

challenges in requirements management. We made several 

recommendations to address these issues, and the Bureau took actions 

to fully implement each of the recommendations. For example, the 

Bureau 

addressed gaps in policies and procedures related to IT governance, 

such as establishing guidelines on the frequency of investment review 

Page 12 
54 


AKING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 40 here 22362.040

board meetings and thresholds for escalation of cost, risk, or impact 

issues; 

finalized its adoption of an enterprise system development life-cycle 

methodology, which included the short incremental development 

model, referred to as Agile, and a process for continuously improving 

the methodology based on lessons learned; and 

implemented a consistent requirements development tool that 

includes guidance for developing requirements at the strategic 

mission, business, and project levels and is integrated with its 

enterprise system development life-cycle methodology. 

As a result, the Bureau has established a consistent process for 

managing and overseeing its IT investments. 

IT Workforce Planning Has Improved, but Critical Gaps Continue to Exist 

Effective workforce planning is essential to ensure organizations have the 

proper skills, abilities, and capacity for effective management. While the 

Bureau has made progress in IT workforce planning efforts, many critical 

IT competency gaps remain to be filled. In September 2012 we reported, 

among other things, that the Bureau had not developed a Bureau-wide IT 

workforce plan; identified gaps in mission-critical IT occupations, skills, 

and competencies; or developed strategies to address gaps9 

Accordingly, we recommended that the Bureau establish a repeatable 

process for performing IT skills assessments and gap analyses and 

establish a process for directorates to coordinate on IT workforce 

planning. In response, in 2013 the Bureau completed an enterprise-wide 

competency assessment and identified several mission-critical gaps in 

technical competencies. In 2014, the Bureau established documents to 

institutionalize a strategic workforce planning process, identified actions 

and targets to close the competency gaps by December 2015, and 

established a process to monitor quarterly status reports on the 

implementation of these actions. 

However, as we reported in February 2015, while these are positive steps 

in establishing strategic workforce planning capabilities, the Bureau's 

workforce competency assessment identified several mission-critical gaps 

that would challenge its ability to deliver IT-related initiatives, such as the 

IT systems that are expected to be delivered by CEDCAP. 1

° For example, 

9GA0-12-915. 

10GA0-15-225. 

Paga13 GA0·16-205T 
55 


AKING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 41 here 22362.041

the Bureau found that competency gaps existed in cloud computing, 

security integration and engineering, enterprise/mission engineering lifecycle, requirements development, and Internet data collection. The 

Bureau also found that enterprise-level competency gaps existed in 

program and project management, budget and cost estimation, systems 

development, data analytics, and shared services. 

The Bureau has taken steps to regularly monitor and report on the status 

of its efforts to close competency gaps and has completed several 

notable actions. For example, in August 2015, the Bureau filled the 

position of Decennial IT Division Chief and in September 2015, awarded 

an enterprise-wide IT services contract for systems engineering and 

integration support. 

However, more work remains for the Bureau to close competency gaps 

critical to the implementation of its IT efforts. Most significantly, in July 

2015, the Chief Information Officer resigned. As of October 2015, the 

Bureau was working to fill that gap and had an acting Chief Information 

Officer temporarily in the position. 

Additionally, there are other gaps in key positions, such as the Chief of 

the Office of Information Security and Deputy Chief Information Security 

Officer, Big Data Center Chief, and Chief Cloud Architect, and the 

CEDCAP Assistant Chief of Business Integration, who is responsible for 

overseeing the integration of schedule, risks, and budget across the 12 

projects. According to Bureau officials, they are working to address these 

gaps. 

More Work Remains to Address Information Security Weaknesses 

Critical to the Bureau's ability to perform its data collection and analysis 

duties are its information systems and the protection of the information 

they contain. A data breach could result in the public's loss of confidence 

in the Bureau, thus affecting its ability to collect census data. To ensure 

the reliability of their computerized information, agencies should design 

and implement controls to prevent, limit, and detect unauthorized access 

to computing resources, programs, information, and facilities." 

Inadequate design or implementation of access controls increases the 

risk of unauthorized disclosure, modification, and destruction of sensitive 

information and disruption of service. 

include those related to ( 1) protection of system boundaries, (2) 

and authentication, (3) authorization, (4) cryptography, (5) audit and 

monitoring, and (6) physical security. 

Page 14 
56 


AKING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 42 here 22362.042

In January 2013, we reported on the Bureau's implementation of 

information security controls to protect the confidentiality, integrity, and 

availability of the information and systems that support its mission." We 

concluded that the Bureau had a number of weaknesses in controls 

intended to limit access to its systems and information, as well as those 

related to managing system configurations and unplanned events. We 

attributed these weaknesses to the fact that the Bureau had not fully 

implemented a comprehensive information security program, and made 

115 recommendations aimed at addressing these deficiencies." The 

Bureau expressed broad agreement with the report and said it would 

work to find the best ways to address our recommendations. 

As of October 29, 2015, the Bureau had addressed 66 of the 115 

recommendations we made in January 2013. Of the remaining open 

recommendations, we have determined that 30 require additional actions 

by the Bureau, and for the other 19 we have work under way to evaluate 

if they have been fully addressed. The Bureau's progress toward 

addressing our security recommendations is encouraging. However, more 

work remains to address the recommendations. 

A cyber incident recently occurred at the Bureau, and while it appears to 

have had limited impact, it demonstrates vulnerabilities at the Bureau. 

Specifically, in July 2015, the Bureau reported that it had been targeted 

by a cyber attack aimed at gaining access to its Federal Audit 

Clearinghouse, which contains non-confidential information from state 

and local governments, nonprofit organizations, and Indian tribes to 

facilitate oversight of federal grant awards. According to Bureau officials, 

the breach was limited to this database on a segmented portion of the 

Bureau's network that does not touch administrative records or sensitive 

respondent data protected under Title 13 of the U.S. Code, and the 

hackers did not obtain the personally identifiable information of census 

and survey respondents. 

Given that the Bureau is planning to build or acquire IT systems to collect 

the public's personal information for the 2020 Census in ways that it has 

not for previous censuses (e.g., web-based surveys, cloud computing, 

and enabling mobile devices to collect census data), continuing to 

12GA0-13-63. Another version of this report was issued for limited distribution. 

13Thls included 13 public recommendations and 102 recommendations for limited 

distribution. 

Page 15 GA0·16·205T 
57 


AKING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 43 here 22362.043

implement our recommendations and apply IT security best practices as it 

implements CEDCAP systems must be a high priority. 

As a result of the Bureau's challenges in key IT internal controls and 

looming deadline, we identified CEDCAP as an IT investment in need of 

attention in our February 2015 High-Risk report14 We recently initiated a 

review of the CEDCAP program for your subcommittees, and expect to 

issue a report in the spring of 2016. 

In conclusion, the Bureau is pursuing initiatives to significantly reform its 

outdated and inefficient methods of conducting decennial censuses. 

However, with less than 2 years remaining until the Bureau plans to have 

all systems and processes for the 2020 Census developed and ready for 

end-to-end testing, it faces challenges that pose significant risk to 2020 

Census program. These include the magnitude of the planned changes to 

the design of the census, the Bureau's prior track record in executing 

large-scale IT projects, and the current lack of a permanent Chief 

Information Officer, among others. Moreover, the Bureau's preliminary 

decision deadline has come and gone, and many IT-related decisions 

have been deferred to 2016 through 2018. Consequently, it is running out 

of time to develop, acquire, and implement the production systems it will 

need to deliver the redesign and achieve its projected $5.2 billion in cost 

savings. 

The Bureau needs to take action to address the specific challenges we 

have highlighted in prior reports. If these actions are not taken, cost 

overruns, schedules delays, and performance shortfalls may diminish the 

potentially significant cost savings that the Bureau estimates will result 

from redesigning the census for 2020. 

Chairmen Meadows and Hurd, Ranking Members Connolly and Kelly, 

and Members of the Subcommittees, this completes my prepared 

statement I would be pleased to respond to any questions that you may 

have. 

14Every 2 years at the start of a new Congress, GAO ca!!s attention to agencies and 

program areas that are high risk due to their vulnerabilities to fraud, waste, abuse, and 

mismanagement, or are most in need of transformation. As part of a new entry into the 

February 2015 update to our High~ Risk Series focused on improving the management of 

IT acquisitions and operations, CEOCAP was identified as an example of an IT 

investment-among others across the federal government-in need of the most attention. 

See GAO, High-Risk Series: An Update, GA0-15-290 (Washington, D.C.: Feb. 11, 2015). 

Page 16 GA0·16-205T 
58 

Mr. MEADOWS. Thank you so much. 

The chair recognizes the chairman of the Subcommittee on Information Technology, Mr. Hurd, for 5 minutes for a series of questions. 

Mr. HURD. Thank you, Chairman. 

And thank you all for your testimony today. 

And, Ms. Cha, I want to thank you for your written statement. 

It was very good in helping to explain some of the unique challenges that we’re having to provide oversight on. 

My first question, I guess, is first to you, Director Thompson. 

We’ve talked about the lack of a permanent CIO. We talked about 

the lack of a chief of the business integration, which is managing 

the CEDCaP program. What are the plans to fill those spots? What 

are the challenges that you’re facing in getting people there? And 

who is filling that role as a temporary basis? 

Mr. THOMPSON. Thank you, Congressman. 

So the job announcement for the CIO is out and available now. 

CIO Cooper and I have been widely circulating it so that we can 

be sure that we get a good number of applicants. Harry Lee, sitting 

behind me, has done an excellent job in the interim. He’s the deputy CIO. And he’s been doing a great job filling the vacancy in the 

absence, and we’ve made a number of accomplishments in the IT 

area. 

Mr. HURD. How long have these spots been open? 

Mr. THOMPSON. It became open in July. 

Mr. HURD. Okay. And we have applicants putting information in 

or submitting resumes or whatever the process is? 

Mr. THOMPSON. So I don’t know that I can talk about the applicants at this point in the process. 

Mr. HURD. Mr. Cooper, did you have something to add? 

Mr. COOPER. Yes. With the position open, it will remain open for 

30 days. Our human resources group will do the initial processing 

of those applicants and those who are well qualified will be passed 

to the appropriate review panel. We’ll then make that ultimate decision about selecting a CIO. 

Mr. HURD. Because my concern is—— 

Mr. COOPER. So we have not yet seen any of the responses. I 

don’t have any information on that. 

Mr. HURD. Thank you. My concern is with the lack of an identified leader in managing this process, if CEDCaP is going to be the 

process, and we have less than 2 years, we need to make sure that 

that person is in place. 

My next set of questions is there was 115 recommendations, as 

Ms. Cha pointed out in her written and verbal testimony. We have 

information that 19 of those 115 have been addressed and work 

has started on 66, or 66 of those have been addressed. Can you 

give me an update? 

Mr. THOMPSON. Certainly. So last April, when we received—well, 

last April we responded to all 115 recommendations that the GAO 

made, and we’ve been working with the GAO since that point. To 

date, we believe that they have closed 65 of them. We believe that 

they referred 19 back to us. And based on our discussions, we’re 

still waiting to hear from them on about 30 more. So that’s the current status from our records. 


AKING-6430 with DISTILLER
59 

Mr. HURD. Ms. Cha, do you have any insights or comments on 

that? 

Ms. CHA. Sure. So as of today, 66 have been closed out. But I 

believe Director Thompson has those numbers transposed. There 

are 19 that are currently under review and there are 30 remaining 

recommendations that still require additional actions by the Bureau. 

Mr. HURD. What’s the biggest priority one of those 30 that require action? 

Ms. CHA. Sure. So in terms of the open recommendations, they 

relate to the identification and authentication types of controls. So 

that would be like password controls, unsecured system accounts 

and access, as well as configuration management. So that would be 

like—— 

Mr. HURD. All the things that have led to a number of breaches 

not only in the private sector, but in the Federal Government. 

Ms. CHA. That’s correct. 

Mr. HURD. And I’m going to address this to you, Mr. Cooper, 

since this falls in your bailiwick. What’s being done to address that, 

on the authentication and the patch management programs? 

Mr. COOPER. Okay. We’ve taken a couple steps proactively following the recent OMB 30-day cyber—— 

Mr. HURD. Let me rephrase the question. When is this going to 

be completed? 

Mr. COOPER. I wish I could give you an exact date. We have initiated a whole series of activities that are targeted for completion by 

31 December of this fiscal year—I’m sorry, this calendar year. That 

does include the open actions from the GAO report. 

We’ve also taken an additional step, and that is that we’ve created internal cross-bureau teams of our cyber experts, and we are 

bringing those to bear to assist all of our bureaus but, in this case 

the Census Bureau, in helping close these actions. So in addition 

to the Census Bureau’s cyber experts, we’ve brought additional expertise from within the Department. We believe that that will help 

us both meet our target deadline and bring additional skills and 

expertise objectively to bear on these open items. 

Mr. HURD. Thank you. 

And my last question to you, Director Thompson, and I’m running out of time, I’ve run out of time, if you realize savings from 

using new technology or a different process, are you able to use 

that savings within the calendar or the fiscal year on other 

projects? 

Mr. THOMPSON. Congressman—— 

Mr. HURD. And that’s not a trick question. 

Mr. THOMPSON. No, no, I know—— 

Mr. HURD. Because I’m trying to figure out, if you’re doing 

things, you’re realizing savings, I want you to be able to use those 

savings to go back in to do your work. 

Mr. THOMPSON. So we are not going to be asking for anything 

more than the money we need to do the Census, and we believe 

that we are going to avoid $5.2 billion in costs. In saying that, we 

also plan to make sure that we have the right resources in the 

right areas to make sure we count everyone as well. 


AKING-6430 with DISTILLER
60 

Mr. HURD. Mr. Chairman, I apologize, I yield back the time that 

I do not have. 

Mr. MEADOWS. No, I thank the gentleman for his insightful questions. 

The chair recognizes the gentleman from the 11th District of Virginia, Mr. Connolly. 

Mr. CONNOLLY. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And I want to point 

out I think three of our witnesses are Virginians and all three confirmed under oath that they voted. 

Now, Mr. Thompson, where are you from. 

Mr. THOMPSON. I’m from Old Town Alexandria. 

Mr. CONNOLLY. All right. So you’re a Virginian. All right. All 

four. Bless them. Wonderful people doing wonderful work, let’s just 

be honest. 

Anyway, thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

First of all, I want to say to all of you on the panel, you’ve got 

four people up here who actually care about the mission and are 

focused on it and not allowing a lot of extraneous issues to get in 

our way of trying to be supportive in a rational way. 

And I would just note that, because I really appreciate my 

friends, Ms. Kelly and Mr. Meadows and Mr. Hurd, for really being 

in a collaborative spirit, and we’re collaborating on especially a lot 

of other IT issues too. I just want to say that because it doesn’t 

happen as often as we’d like up here and it hardly ever gets recognized when it does. And so I hope we can take this as a magic moment and try to work together with the executive branch on the 

Census. 

Yeah, that’s right. 

Director Thompson, help us understand, how much money do you 

believe the Census requires to undertake its mission this next 

time? We’re trying to follow the numbers. 

Mr. THOMPSON. So we estimate that we’re going to, for the full 

cycle cost of the Census’ interoperational plan, we’re going to require $12.3 billion. 

Mr. CONNOLLY. $12.3. And is that what you requested in the 

budget? 

Mr. THOMPSON. Well, we request the budget on a yearly basis. 

Mr. CONNOLLY. I know. 

Mr. THOMPSON. We are moving towards that with our request for 

fiscal year 2016. 

Mr. CONNOLLY. And what do you project right now the shortfall 

between the request—I think I cited $375 million, but that’s probably just for 1 year—what is the shortfall between what you need 

and so far what has been appropriated or what you project to be 

appropriated? 

Mr. THOMPSON. Congressman, I think you hit the number on the 

head when you mentioned the shortfall that we initially saw for fiscal year 2016. However, we haven’t seen the final appropriation—— 

Mr. CONNOLLY. We haven’t either. 

Mr. THOMPSON. —for fiscal year 2016. 

Mr. CONNOLLY. We haven’t either. 

Are you able to disaggregate for the purposes of funding the Census what you think you would get appropriated pursuant to the 


AKING-6430 with DISTILLER
61 

new budget agreement we passed last week? We increased domestic discretionary investments by roughly $25 billion for this next 

fiscal year in that budget agreement, 25 for defense, 25 for domestic. Any idea how much of your projected shortfall, in an ideal 

world, I know it’s hard because we haven’t appropriated it yet, but 

any sense of whether that would help the funding shortfall? 

Mr. THOMPSON. Congressman, the only numbers I’m familiar 

with are the President’s budget and the actions that have taken 

place. 

Mr. CONNOLLY. Okay. Well, I think it’s going to be really important to follow that and have better answers. I can’t ask you to have 

a better answer yet. We don’t either. But if the four of us are going 

to be helpful and supportive—— 

Mr. THOMPSON. Right. But we are preparing to work with the 

Congress to explain exactly how we’ll spend every dollar that we 

get—— 

Mr. CONNOLLY. There was a method to my madness in telling 

you you’ve got four people here who actually want to get something 

done and be productive. And part of that is the budget. But we got 

to know—we’ve all got to be on the same page in terms of those 

projected numbers. 

Mr. Cooper, thank you for your leadership as CIO. Would that 

we could replicate you in lots of other Federal agencies. Help us 

have confidence. In 2010, we had a handheld device meltdown. 

We’re doubling down on those devices for this next go-round. What 

makes us confident that we’re, in fact, going to make it work and 

save money, as opposed to another meltdown, only double? 

Mr. COOPER. Okay. The first observation would be that in 2010— 

and I was not part of the Department in 2010, so the information 

I’m sharing is information I’ve gained since coming onboard. If I 

don’t get something exactly right or if you need more detail, I’m 

more than happy to come back up, set up briefings, fill in the details. But based upon what I’ve investigated and what I’ve kind of 

been involved and learned, the first important difference, the technology that was used or attempted to be used in 2010 was very 

specific, specialized, proprietary technology. 

Now, compare and contrast that. In 2020, we’re using commercially available solutions. They’re off the shelf. They’ve been proven 

in industry. We’re talking about smartphones, old devices. I think 

probably every one of us in this room carry some type of phone, 

smartphone type of device. We may carry a tablet, that type of 

thing. So a huge difference. This is not unproven, single-use, proprietary technology. 

What also comes with that? Industry itself, all of the carriers, 

major telecom carriers, as well as the device providers, have invested significant amounts of expertise, research and development 

dollars into helping secure those devices. 

So, again, this is not something where the Census Bureau by 

itself takes the lead responsibility along with its industry partners. 

That’s a huge, important, significant difference in my ability to say 

to you with confidence we’re not repeating a similar type of scenario. We’re using proven technology, well understood, well proven 

in the marketplace. We are then, additionally, applying our own 

NIST-driven security protocols, risk framework, cybersecurity 


AKING-6430 with DISTILLER
62 

framework, GAO recommendations, IG recommendations all come 

into play, so that we have a significantly higher degree of confidence in being able to use those platforms in field operations. 

Mr. CONNOLLY. Thank you very much. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. MEADOWS. The chair recognizes the gentleman from Iowa, 

Mr. Blum, for 5 minutes of questioning. 

Mr. BLUM. Thank you, Chairman Meadows. 

Thank you to the panel today for sharing your insights with us. 

They say that genius is the ability to reduce the complicated to 

the simple. And it would be great to have a little genius in the Federal Government. So toward that end, Mr. Cooper, do we have a 

database of all the addresses in the United States of America. 

Mr. COOPER. My understanding is the closest we have to that in 

the Census Bureau is the Master Address File. I believe that in addition to that there are supplemental databases, also administrative records that the Director has talked about in some of the earlier GAO testimony. Therefore, I’m going to say, but I’m going to 

ask for help from my fellow panelists, I don’t believe that there’s 

a single master file of every housing unit in the United States. 

But is that in the Master Address File? 

Mr. BLUM. Would the Postal Service have that? 

Mr. THOMPSON. Can I respond? 

Mr. BLUM. Absolutely. 

Mr. THOMPSON. We maintain a master address list that we try 

to make as accurate as possible, that contains every address in the 

United States, both mailable addresses and those that aren’t mailable. And we are in the process now of continuously updating it. 

So we work with the States and localities that want to participate 

and take their lists and put into it. Twice a year at least we get 

a feed from the post office and they give us updates to their delivery sequence file. So we try to maintain this address list and make 

it as accurate as possible so that when we take the Census we have 

every housing unit in there. 

Mr. BLUM. Safe to say we have 99 percent of the addresses in 

the country in the Postal System’s database? Ninety-eight percent? 

High percentage? 

Mr. THOMPSON. So we actually believe that we have an address 

list that is a little more complete than the post office’s list because 

we actually go into structures that don’t receive mail and list the 

addresses. And part of what we’re going to do before the next Census in about 25 percent of the country is actually go knock on 

doors, ask if there are hidden addresses, to make sure that we get 

every address in the country where someone can reside, whether 

or not they get mail at that address. 

Mr. BLUM. And your job is to count the number of people living 

at each address, correct, simply put? 

Mr. THOMPSON. Yes. 

Mr. BLUM. I just want to make sure. Maybe I’ll ask Mr. Cooper 

this. Do you think we’re unnecessarily complicating this? I come 

from the high-tech industry, the private sector. I know how this 

can go. 

Mr. COOPER. My direct answer would be no, sir, I don’t believe 

that we are overly complicating it. But here is what’s going on. 


AKING-6430 with DISTILLER
63 

We’re moving from pencil-and-paper processing to leveraging technology in a more fully automated way. So the transition is complicated, complex, and we need to manage that extremely well and 

extremely rigorously and thoroughly. But I do not believe that we 

are making it more complicated than it needs to be. 

Mr. BLUM. Mr. Cooper, I think it’s called CEDCaP? 

Mr. COOPER. Yes, sir. 

Mr. BLUM. I read there was a mention of the last Census, I believe we had over 100 duplicative systems? To me, that’s, A, amazing, and, B, a recipe for disaster. How are we changing that this 

Census? 

Mr. COOPER. CEDCaP, I admit, Congressman, I don’t know the 

exact numbers. So I accept the numbers that you’re saying on what 

did exist and the number of duplicative systems. 

Here’s the really good news. CEDCaP, in fact, is being 

architected, engineered, and it is well on the way to replace all of 

those, at least as many as are appropriate to the 2020 decennial 

and the concomitant operations, to replace that with a single 

architected, well understood, not complicated environment ecosystem, if you will, that will serve all data collection and all operational processing of that data in the conduct of the 2020 decennial. 

Mr. BLUM. The last thing, my time is running short, as I was 

reading, it seems to me the largest savings is in the Nonresponse 

Followup organization, $2.5 billion in savings, which would be fantastic. The wording in there said that we’ve developed or are developing a prototype system that incorporates commercial off-the-shelf 

technology, which I think is great, rather than developing it custom. Can you talk to me about that? 

Mr. COOPER. As much as I have been fully briefed and I understand what I’ve been told, which are two different things, the fact 

that we are using commercial off-the-shelf solutions is certainly 

something that I, in my CIO role, are fully supportive of. Based on 

your reflection on your background, I fully concur with you. 

By using commercially proven off-the-shelf software, same thing 

that I testified just briefly about, the mobile devices, mobile technology, that type of thing, those same benefits apply, okay? We 

have proven technology. We’ve got a lot of additional expertise that 

has been brought to bear. It usually incorporates architected security features that we then can take advantage of. They’re well 

known, well proven across the industry. 

Wherever we can, and it’s in the operational plan that was recently shared with Congress and released publicly, we are 

leveraging commercial off-the-shelf software and solutions. 

Mr. BLUM. Excellent. 

And I’ll yield back the time I do not have, Chairman Meadows. 

Mr. MEADOWS. I thank the gentleman. 

The chair recognizes the gentlewoman from Illinois, Ms. Kelly, 

for 5 minutes. 

Ms. KELLY. Thank you, Mr. Chair. 

The CEDCaP program is intended to help the cost-saving efforts 

for 2020. Mr. Cooper, your written testimony for today notes that 

CEDCaP, ‘‘aims to create an integrated and standardized systemof-systems that will offer shared data collection and processing 


AKING-6430 with DISTILLER
64 

across all Census Bureau operations,’’ and you seem very positive 

about the program. 

Ms. Cha, what steps should the Bureau take to ensure that 

CEDCaP systems are ready for planned end-to-end testing. 

Ms. CHA. Sure. So with CEDCaP, the system-of-systems approach, there are 12 projects underneath it. And what we find 

across the Federal Government with these troubled or failed IT 

projects, the common thread behind all of these is that they’re simply too large in scope. And so, obviously, with FITARA and the best 

practices that GAO endorses, going incremental is the right approach. You want to chunk out these large scope efforts into these 

smaller pieces that are more manageable in nature. 

So in looking at the scope of CEDCaP itself, it’s simply too large 

given the time remaining. And the concern that we have from 

GAO’s perspective is we’re getting to a point where time is going 

to drive the technology that can be delivered for 2020, as opposed 

to business requirements. So the absolute first thing that the Bureau should be doing is to make these key IT decisions as soon as 

possible. 

Ms. KELLY. And what would be the effect if the Bureau does not 

have that CEDCaP systems in place before end-to-end testing begins? 

Ms. CHA. Right. Well, the end-to-end testing is absolutely critical 

ensuring that—in terms of an effect, you know, most recently the 

most high profile effect that we have seen is healthcare.gov, where 

they gave short shrift to that end-to-end testing. And so if the 

schedules keep compressing and move to the right, then we very 

could well could have another healthcare.gov on our hands. 

Ms. KELLY. Mr. Thompson, do you disagree with that? 

Mr. COOPER. First, overall, we absolutely concur with our GAO 

colleagues. We are doing some very specific things, including applying learning from healthcare.gov. I would agree with Ms. Cha that 

a significant failure was the lack of comprehensive end-to-end testing. 

We are doing, I think, exactly the right type of approach and it 

does accommodate the recommendations coming from GAO. First, 

one way to think about how we are going at CEDCaP is it’s a 

building block approach. I mean, playfully think Legos. We’re creating modules and we are thoroughly both planning the integration, rigorous architecture around each of those modules. Those 

modules or building blocks are then being brought together. But we 

know where the integration of these building blocks occurs, we 

have both unit testing and system testing for each of these building 

blocks, and they are being tested again. 

So we have full-time. I admit we have to stay on schedule. If we 

slip schedule, that’s a risk. And I can share what we’re doing to 

prevent that and to accommodate it if it should occur. But most important, we’ve built into our plan a very aggressive and rigorous 

iterative approach, agile approach, so that we’re not building out 

the entire solution before we test anything. We’re testing as we go. 

The likelihood that we will miss any fatal error becomes significantly reduced by this approach. 

Then, when we kind of add and test, add and test, add and test— 

and when I say add, it’s additional functionality, additional capaVerDate Sep 11 2014 14:08 Jan 04, 2017 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00070 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 F:\22362.TXT APRIL

AKING-6430 with DISTILLER
65 

bility—what we end up with is significantly reduced risk as we 

move toward our end-to-end testing. 

Ms. KELLY. Okay. Mr. Thompson, any other comments? 

Mr. THOMPSON. No, I agree with Mr. Cooper. We enjoy the relationship we have with the Department of Commerce and the governance process that we have in place. 

I would say one thing, that I was fortunate enough to have been 

the career person in charge of the 2000 Census. And we successfully delivered a number of very, very complicated IT systems that 

were state of the art at the time. 

When I went to NORC in Chicago we also put in place some 

very, very sophisticated IT systems. So I have a lot of experience 

in working with creating IT systems that work. And that’s one of 

the reasons I came back to the Bureau, because I saw an opportunity to realize technology to save the government a significant 

amount of money and improve accuracy. 

Ms. KELLY. According to the operational plans, the Bureau will 

begin preparations for end-to-end testing of all systems and operations August 17. Is that accurate? 2017. 

Mr. THOMPSON. That’s accurate. We refer to it as the 2018 test 

because the Census Day is April 1, 2018, but we have to start in 

preparations in 2017. 

Ms. KELLY. Okay. I yield back also the time I don’t have. 

Mr. MEADOWS. I thank you. 

Mr. Cooper, let me follow up on you indicated that one of your 

concerns was that it was a proprietary technology, the handheld 

technology of our previous fiasco, I guess is how I would characterize it, and that somehow because we now have smartphones that 

that’s going to fix the problem. 

We had smartphones in 2008, at least we did in North Carolina. 

I assume you did here in Virginia. So if that’s the case, it’s not 

really a hardware problem, it’s something a lot more significant 

than that. 

Mr. COOPER. I would agree with you. What I meant by a proprietary solution was is that we were building an integrated hardware 

platform that was—— 

Mr. MEADOWS. Who was building it? 

Mr. COOPER. Census Bureau and—— 

Mr. THOMPSON. Harris. 

Mr. COOPER. Harris Corporation was the prime contractor on 

that integrated solution. 

Mr. MEADOWS. So when it failed, who pointed the finger at 

whom? 

Mr. COOPER. I would have to defer to my colleagues. I was not 

present in the Department of Commerce at the time and I don’t 

know the answer. 

Mr. MEADOWS. If I see somebody smiling behind you maybe you 

can ask him. 

Oh, you’ve got that Director Thompson. 

Mr. THOMPSON. So I actually was involved in the issue. I was 

called by Secretary Gutierrez to be on the special panel that give 

him recommendations, so I did look at it. And it seemed like that 

there was a lot going on on both sides in terms of defining and 

agreeing on what the specifications should have been. But the big 


AKING-6430 with DISTILLER
66 

problem was they were trying to invent a software—a hardware 

technology that just didn’t exist. 

Mr. MEADOWS. But aren’t we trying to do—we’re trying to develop an app now for an iPhone? I don’t want to say iPhone. Android. Whatever it is. I mean, I can see that the endorsement 

comes. Is that what we’re trying to do, is develop an app? 

Mr. COOPER. Yeah, the difference—— 

Mr. MEADOWS. Because here’s my concern. We’re talking about 

all this testing that’s going on. How do we test something that we 

haven’t even decided what the design is all about. I mean, I don’t 

buy that, that we’re testing. 

Mr. COOPER. That’s fair. In this case what we are already operationally field testing is the following: We are using a well-proven—my remarks—a well-proven platform. Think of this—— 

Mr. MEADOWS. So we’re using the smartphone. 

Mr. COOPER. All right. We have developed, it’s already developed, 

we have a developed application—— 

Mr. MEADOWS. You’ve got an app. 

Mr. COOPER. Yes, sir. 

Mr. MEADOWS. So I could download the app on my phone today. 

Mr. COOPER. Yes, sir. Yes, sir. 

So the field testing, most recently in Scottsdale, Arizona, and it’s 

planned now for several additional broader locations, the application rides on a proven platform rather than that integrated, single 

hardware integrated with proprietary software that we did in 2010. 

A very different approach, architected very different. 

It allows us to do a couple very important things. First of all, 

with a proven technology platform, what we are really focused on 

is, as best we are able to, industry plus best practice, industry best 

practice, our best practices, secure the platform itself. More importantly, the application is about collecting the data. We now have 

the ability to separately go after securing the application, access to 

the application—— 

Mr. MEADOWS. And I get all that. Let me cut to the chase. 

Mr. COOPER. Please. 

Mr. MEADOWS. Here is my concern. Looking at your time frame 

and how it’s already moved to the right, and looking at when we 

will be testing it and when you will go out with your RFP for 

whether you build it or somebody else builds it, we’re running out 

of time. And if we’re sitting there worried about how a handheld 

device is collecting the very simplest of data, and I come from 

where Google headquarters, all your data is stored in my district, 

and so if that’s what we are working on at this point, you know, 

that’s like saying we’re working on the steering mechanism for a 

car, believing that the car is going to work okay. It may steer okay, 

but it may not run. 

And so that may be a crude analogy, but we have to be a lot 

more end to end in terms of what we’re trying to do. And my concern is from a technology standpoint, we are nowhere near close, 

other than conceptual. And I see some heads shaking no, so they’re 

saying that that’s inaccurate. 

So go ahead, I’ll give you this chance to—I’m sorry, I keep reading body language behind you. But go ahead. 


AKING-6430 with DISTILLER
67 

Mr. COOPER. We don’t have the advantage of seeing behind, but 

I can see it in the reflection of my glasses. 

Mr. MEADOWS. You must not be a parent. We have eyes in the 

back of our heads. 

Mr. THOMPSON. I’m a parent, but my youngest kid is 30 years 

old. 

Mr. MEADOWS. Go ahead. 

Mr. THOMPSON. So we have already built a prototype system and 

tested it in the field and we are—— 

Mr. MEADOWS. For the data collection? 

Mr. THOMPSON. For the data collection and for the control. And 

we built that system using basically existing technology and existing software from vendors. We only put our parameters into it. We 

didn’t invent new software. 

The big decision we have to make is do we scale up this prototype to do the whole Census or do we buy a solution to scale it up. 

But we already have defined requirements for what we need, that’s 

the beauty of this prototype. So we have the requirements for what 

the device has to do, and we have engaged the Carnegie Mellon 

Software Engineering Institute to help us make the right build-orbuy decision and put that—— 

Mr. MEADOWS. But, Director, how is that different than what we 

had in 2008? Because we had a defined technology. It was proprietary given that, so maybe it was not proven. But how is it different than that? 

Mr. THOMPSON. So in 2008 they didn’t have the specifications. 

Mr. MEADOWS. So we designed something with not knowing? 

You’ve got to be kidding. 

Mr. THOMPSON. They were still trying to design the specifications. 

Mr. MEADOWS. Okay. All right. 

Ms. Cha, let me come to you. What am I missing here in terms 

of do you have concerns? 

Ms. CHA. We do have concerns. And, Chairman Meadows, to be 

clear, the systems that they’re talking about at this time are the 

applications. These are prototype systems. And, again, in terms of 

scaling it to the production needs for 2020, we do have concerns 

that given the available time remaining, that hardening those prototypes so that they meet 2020, that’s not an assumption—I think 

that’s a dangerous assumption to make, that these prototype systems will be in place. 

But I think for the key lesson learned from 2010, coming out of 

that, it’s that the Bureau underestimated the technical complexity 

associated with those handhelds. And so even though they are not 

developing new devices, that lesson is still important in looking at 

the total magnitude of what they are intending to do with the operational control system to manage the field work with the Internet 

response option, with the devices that ultimately will be deployed. 

When you look at this collectively in the remaining time, I think 

it’s fair for the Bureau to again make decisions now, take steps to 

reduce scope, take things off of the table so that they are positioned 

for success. 

Mr. MEADOWS. I’m out of time. Let me just share this. We want 

you to succeed. But the other thing that Mr. Connolly and I and 


AKING-6430 with DISTILLER
68 

Mr. Hurd and Ms. Kelly, we don’t want egg on our face. And there 

is no way I’m going to allow this to continue to progress without 

certainty. 

Mr. Cooper, one of the problems I see is the lack of specificity 

in terms of deadlines and what is to be accomplished by those 

deadlines. So I’d ask that you work with the committee on providing that. 

And ultimately you’re going to have four people, as Mr. Connolly 

said, willing to go and fight for appropriations and get you the 

tools, but lack of planning and lack of strategic implementation is 

something that we don’t want to find 6 months, 12 months from 

now where we are spending a lot of money going the other way. 

I’m going to recognize the gentleman from Missouri, Mr. Clay, for 

5 minutes. 

Mr. CLAY. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And hopefully I can take 

some liberties with the time just to share with you and the rest of 

the committee that for the 2010 Census I was sitting in your chair, 

I chaired the Oversight Committee. And when we ran into the 

issue with the handheld, it cost the taxpayers quite a bit. It doubled the cost of the 2010 Census compared to the 2000 Census. And 

it was a mistake that should have been avoided, but wasn’t. And 

so hopefully we have learned from that mistake. 

And according to GAO, fundamental weaknesses in key IT management practices contributed to the Bureau not being able to successfully deploy custom-developed handheld enumeration devices 

for Nonresponse Followup, which increased the cost of the Census 

by up to $3 billion. 

GAO has reported that the Bureau faces a number of challenges 

with, ‘‘developing and deploying the information technology systems and infrastructure it plans to rely on to conduct the significantly redesigned 2020 Census.’’ 

Ms. Cha, is that correct? 

Ms. CHA. That’s correct. 

Mr. CLAY. Mr. Cooper, what is your response to that assessment? 

Mr. COOPER. I think, as we have stated, first, we agree with the 

GAO recommendations. We are working diligently to respond to all 

of those recommendations. We’ve shared some of the numbers and 

the status with you. We’ll continue, you have my commitment, we’ll 

continue to keep all of you informed of this status as we move forward. 

I heard Chairman Meadows loud and clear over addressing the 

concern over lack of decision deadlines; same point made by GAO. 

I hear it. I will certainly personally take the commitment to address it, working with my Census Bureau colleagues. 

I think that’s the quick summary of the approach, and I’m more 

than happy to come back, dive into detail, and add any additional 

information that would be helpful. 

Mr. CLAY. All right, okay. 

Now, let me address the next one to Mr. Cooper. And let me preface this by saying this is 2015, and if I’m correct, this is the time 

to ramp up, to get ready for the 2020 Census. And, Mr. Thompson, 

I heard you loud and clear that this is not the time for Congress 

to be playing tricks and using smoke and mirrors with the Census 

Bureau’s budget because this is ramp-up time, this is time for you 


AKING-6430 with DISTILLER
69 

to be prepared to eventually get to 2020 and conduct the Census 

successfully and to eliminate the undercounts and the overcounts. 

But, Mr. Thompson, in April 2014, GAO reported that the Bureau had not prioritized key IT research and testing needed for its 

design decisions. How do you respond to that? 

Mr. THOMPSON. So what we have done is we have been working 

very diligently to do research and testing. We started in 2013 when 

the Bureau—that’s before I got there, the Bureau had some budget 

cuts, and they reprioritized their whole, entire research program. 

And importantly, they established the key milestone, which was for 

the beginning of fiscal year 2016, this past September, that they 

would release an operational plan that did two things. It laid out 

as many key decisions as could be made and, importantly, laid out 

a process for making the remaining decisions. 

And we have at the Bureau done that. We released an operational plan. It lays out a schedule. It lays out a schedule for making our key decisions, leading up to an integrated end-to-end task 

in 2018—well, Census Day is 2018, it starts in 2017. 

Mr. CLAY. Sure. 

Mr. Chairman, may I talk to Mr. Goldenkoff, because he and I 

were involved in the 2010 Census. 

Do you see anything we need to be watching out for going from 

this time line forward that are similar to what we experienced in 

the 2010 Census? 

Mr. GOLDENKOFF. Yes. I think that both the Census Bureau, the 

Department of Commerce, and both subcommittees need to be extremely sensitive to the early warning signs. And I think that some 

of those early warning sides were not heeded back in the lead-up 

to the 2010 Census. For example, GAO had pointed out a number 

of issues with the handheld device beginning, I believe, in 2006. 

There were yellow flags being raised all over the place. And there 

was just a tendency, I think, for the Census Bureau to perhaps discount some of those concerns. 

I think the environment is much better now, the Census Bureau 

is much more responsive to recommendations from us, to your oversight, from the IG’s office, but we just need to be sensitive to those 

early warning signs. Delays, you know, concerns about the lack of 

time, they’re starting to crop up. So funding issues, need to make 

sure that the Census Bureau has reliable funding throughout the 

course of the decade. It is not only the actual amount of the money 

that they get, obviously that’s important, but uncertainty is also an 

issue too. 

So those are some things that right now, while there’s still time, 

we all need to be sensitive to. 

Mr. CLAY. Thank you. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. MEADOWS. I thank the gentleman for his insightful questions. 

And the chair recognizes Mr. Grothman, the gentleman from 

Wisconsin. 

Mr. GROTHMAN. Thank you. I have a couple of questions here. 

Over time I think, you know, insofar as a garden variety legislator who calls about the Census, it’s about some of the questions 

that are asked. Not about the Census every 10 years, but, I don’t 


AKING-6430 with DISTILLER
70 

know what you call them, these more broad questionnaires that get 

sent out, correct? What do they call them, the broader—— 

Mr. THOMPSON. Are you referring to the American Community 

Survey? 

Mr. GROTHMAN. Yeah. How long do you retain the information on 

those surveys? 

Mr. THOMPSON. Since they are part of the decennial Census, we 

retain a permanent record of them. And 72 years after they’re collected then they can be made available to the American public. 

Mr. GROTHMAN. You mean, you’re even going to make those 

available sometime, even 72 years? 

Mr. THOMPSON. In 72 years, yes, sir. 

Mr. GROTHMAN. What are we doing to make sure? I mean, some 

of those things when I get questions they wonder why is it any of 

the government’s business. And while it hasn’t necessarily been 

your organization, certainly other government organizations have 

not been able to protect their data. Maybe that’s an impossible 

thing to do, but I am just saying you’ve got to realize that when 

you fill out a government form there’s a possibility that someday 

the whole country will know what’s on it. 

Are you doing anything—I’ll put it this way. On those community 

surveys, is there any reason why that stuff has to be held more 

than 3 or 4 years? 

Mr. THOMPSON. Yes, sir, it’s part of our national records program. And so as being part of the decennial Census we’re mandated to make those records available to the public for a number 

of important reasons, so people can look at—can do ancestor research, so people can understand how their ancestors were working. 

Mr. GROTHMAN. I understand it’s kind of cool that I can look up 

and find my, whatever, great-grandfather was living wherever in 

1880. But beyond that, there’s stuff here that people don’t want to 

have let out. So I’ll ask you again, why—given that I would assume 

sooner or later you’re going have a breach of your database, every 

other government agency seems to—is there any reason why you 

personally feel that if I fill out a form some information of which 

may be considered somewhat personal or at least they don’t want 

everybody to know, any philosophical reason why that stuff has to 

be kept around? 

Mr. THOMPSON. As I said, we at the Census Bureau believe it’s 

very important that we maintain a record of the Census and make 

that available in 72 years. 

Now, the Census Bureau takes security and privacy of our information very, very seriously, and we could go into great lengths 

about how we go about protecting the PII of our respondents and 

how we have a number of layers between that and any way to get 

to it. And so that’s job one. Plus, we have some really severe penalties in place if there is willful disclosure of any kind of information. 

Mr. GROTHMAN. Well, I’m sure that the IRS takes their responsibility seriously and whatever our equivalent of human resources is 

takes their responsibility seriously. And I realize we want to keep 

the bare bones minimum of the Census available out there. Like 

I said, we should maybe always know that Glenn Grothman in 


AKING-6430 with DISTILLER
71 

2020 is living in Glenbeulah, Wisconsin. But why are we keeping 

all this more personal stuff? What is the sense of keeping that 

available for either some hacker to get ahold of it or even some 

busybody to look at it in 70 years? 

Mr. THOMPSON. Congressman, we are actually mandated by 

law—and don’t ask me the specific cite, I’ll be happy to get it to 

you—to maintain those records as part of the decennial Census. 

Mr. GROTHMAN. Okay. But you don’t have an opinion on it personally? 

Mr. THOMPSON. My opinion is to do the Census as the Congress 

shall direct. So that’s basically my opinion. 

Mr. GROTHMAN. Okay. I’ll give you one more question here, 

which is kind of the parting question. We still don’t know whether 

you’re going to use the NDNH or the kids link sources. When are 

you going to decide whether you’re going to use those or not, or 

what is going to determine whether or not you’re going to use 

them, have access to them? 

Mr. THOMPSON. So we’re going to make our final decision on the 

exact administrative records we’ll use, which will be in 2018, and 

that would include whatever we’ve been able to put together, and 

that’s what we’re going to go forward with. We’re not going to 

change after that point. 

Mr. GROTHMAN. Thank you. 

Mr. MEADOWS. I thank the gentleman. 

The chair recognizes the gentlewoman from New York, Mrs. 

Maloney, for 5 minutes. 

Mrs. MALONEY. I thank the gentlemen and ranking member for 

calling this important hearing and all of the participants today. 

The Census is mandated in the United States Constitution. It’s a 

requirement illustrated right in the Constitution. And historians 

constantly refer to it, documents refer to in it ways that help us 

understand our history and understand our country. And I’m glad 

that we’re focusing on it, because if we don’t have good data, if we 

don’t have a good Census, then we don’t have good policy. 

I would also say the Census is relied on more and more by businesses and others to understand our country, where we are, where 

we’re going, what our needs are. And I would say the allocation of 

Federal funds is dependent on Census data, as is oftentimes public 

policy in general, and it’s incredibly important. 

But that said, I want to really associate myself with the comments of the prior speaker on the importance of keeping it confidential, that this is a critical trust that this be kept confidential 

until 70 years later. And I do want to cite that there happens to 

be a Broadway play playing right now in New York on a violation 

of the Census data during World War II, where the Census data 

was used to round up Japanese Americans and place them in detention camps. It’s probably the worst chapter of the Census in the 

history of our country, that our sacred data that we pledge will be 

confidential was violated. So that was a bad, bad, bad era. 

But I do want to go back to cybersecurity and that we have to 

take the cybersecurity seriously. And I want to say that in light of 

a recent cyber incident at the Bureau, I want to better understand 

the data controls currently in place. I don’t believe that the Census 

would ever give up data in this day and time, you know, willingly. 


AKING-6430 with DISTILLER
72 

I don’t believe that at all. I think it’s totally confidential. But I am 

concerned about a cyber incident. 

And I’d like to ask Mr. Thompson, the Director, on July 24 you 

issued a statement confirming that the Bureau, and I am quoting 

from you, ‘‘experienced an attack to gain access to the Federal 

Audit Clearinghouse.’’ And can you first explain to us what is the 

Federal Audit Clearinghouse? And your statement went on to say, 

‘‘While our IT forensics investigation continues, I want to assure 

you that at this time every indication is that the breach was limited to the this database and that it did not include personally 

identifiable information provided by people responding to our Census and surveys.’’ 

So your comment please on that. 

Mr. THOMPSON. Thank you. So that is a database—what we call 

a Web-facing database that we maintain that sits between our firewall and the outside. And so that database was maintained for people to put certain types of information in which is nonsensitive information and that’s the database that, unfortunately, got 

breached. We’ve taken steps since then, which Mr. Cooper could explain better than I can because he’s more of an IT person, to rectify 

that problem. 

But importantly, we also have safeguards that will not let anything past our firewall which will get to the personally identified 

information at the Census Bureau, and that was not breached in 

that circumstance. 

Mrs. MALONEY. Okay. Can you share with us the results from 

the forensic investigation, Mr. Cooper? 

Mr. COOPER. Yes, ma’am, I can. 

Mrs. MALONEY. And what steps have you taken to prevent a 

similar cyber incident in the future? 

Mr. COOPER. Okay. First what our forensic analysis has shown 

to date is that gives us the time line of the attack and the source 

addresses from which the attack was launched, both—— 

Mrs. MALONEY. Where do you think it came from? Where do you 

think the attack came from? 

Mr. COOPER. In this environment, could I maybe follow up and 

get with you all in a different physical environment to discuss that 

with you please? 

Mrs. MALONEY. Okay. Thank you. 

Mr. COOPER. If you’d allow me to do that. 

Now, we’ve also worked very, very closely with our colleagues at 

the FBI and with the Department of Homeland Security, so that 

that becomes part of the intelligence community environment, that 

helps us at the Census Bureau, it helps our colleagues across the 

Federal Government. So there’s the first part that I can answer in 

this setting today. 

Second part. We have indeed installed new security measures, 

and let me give you a quick summary of those. 

First of all, we have—we’re in the process of implementing Web 

application scanning capability that we did not have broadly in 

place at the time of that breach. We’ve also included funding in our 

fiscal year 2016 budget to bring the cybersecurity company we used 

in fiscal year 2015, ‘‘we’’ in this case being the Census Bureau, 

back to do another scan. 


AKING-6430 with DISTILLER
73 

And I have instituted as the CIO regular scanning. We have 

reached out to some other Federal departments to assist us with 

what’s called blue team assessments, blue team attacks, which are 

friendly attacks against our environment to help identify threats 

and vulnerabilities that we may not have uncovered ourselves. 

We’re also actively engaged with our colleagues at the Department of Homeland Security. We have fully implemented all available Einstein precautions to enhance and strengthen our cyber 

scanning capability to identify threats and critical vulnerabilities. 

We’re working very closely with the Department, Department of 

Homeland Security, to implement as part of what’s known as phase 

two of the Continuing Diagnostics and Mitigation program of DHS. 

We are now working and we will be deploying additional CDM capability, more scanning and software tools, sensors, in our networks. 

All of this strengthens our environment and enhances our capability from the time of the breach even till now, and will continue 

to do that going forward. 

Mrs. MALONEY. Well, my time has expired, but possibly you 

could get back to us in writing the controls the Census Bureau has 

in place to protect this collected data. 

Mrs. MALONEY. I think it’s very important. And people want to 

know that their data is protected, as the gentleman mentioned earlier. 

I thank you and I yield back. 

Mr. MEADOWS. I thank the gentlewoman. 

Just for planning purposes, we’re going to have a very brief second round of questions, and by very brief only a few members, I 

think, are going to participate in that. 

So the chair will recognize the chairman of the subcommittee, 

Mr. Hurd, for a series of questions. 

Mr. HURD. Gene Dadaro is going to get mad at me for asking this 

question, but, Ms. Cha, I hear there is a position available at the 

Bureau, the Census Bureau, for chief of business integration. 

Would you be interested in taking a sabbatical to take that position? I think you would be well-positioned for that. 

But, Mr. Cooper, Mr. Thompson, if I understand this correctly, 

you’re basically crowdsourcing people to answer some—you know, 

to get better information, have them get that information into you. 

We didn’t even get to ask many questions. Not knowing how many 

people you expect to respond to that, that’s going to drive your 

technology decisions and the infrastructure. Two years out, that’s 

difficult. 

But let me understand this bring your own device or buying a 

new device. Are we talking about having—buying actual 

smartphones that have the app already on there with the security 

systems established or are we talking about a new designed device 

that’s not a smartphone but it’s used specifically for you all? I’m 

confused. 

Mr. COOPER. Okay. In this case it would be the former of your 

two scenarios. 

Mr. HURD. Okay. So it’s a smartphone that everyone is going to 

use. And when are you going to make the decision—— 


AKING-6430 with DISTILLER
74 

Mr. COOPER. That would be option one, and that would be a government-furnished device. Options two would be bring your own 

device and we will then load the—— 

Mr. HURD. And when are you making this decision on which? 

Mr. COOPER. September 2016. 

Mr. HURD. September—how many months is that? 

Mr. COOPER. It’s about not quite a year from now. 

Mr. HURD. Why 12 months, why that long to make a simple decision that’s going to base—that’s going to drive your entire plan? 

Mr. COOPER. That allows us to complete the planned and already 

in motion, in process set of field operation tests so that we can 

make both an economic-based determination as well as a securitybased determination and include privacy and functionality. 

Mr. HURD. I recognize the privacy and security concerns of having people bringing their own device and uploading that information onto some system or server that touches all of your databases. 

But this is not a new technology, right? Everybody on this platform 

have probably block walked at some point in time and this is just 

block walking on steroids. 

And I represent a very rural part of Texas that doesn’t have cell 

phone service and we would still be able to do that. So the necessity to have a year of testing a technology and a process that is 

used pretty significantly is shocking to me. And that’s something 

that I’d love to continue to talk about another time. 

I have two final questions, a separate issue. It is my understanding that missionaries and other individuals temporarily overseas with a clear intent to return would not be included in the Census. Is this correct? 

Mr. THOMPSON. Congressman, we are in the process right now of 

determining the residence rules that we will use for the 2020 Census. Recently we sent out the rules that we use for where to count 

people, who to count in 2010 for public comment. We received a 

number of comments, and we are now in the process of responding 

to those comments, and we will then issue our plan for 2020. In 

the last Census, if someone was permanently away from the United 

States we did not count them in the United States. 

Mr. HURD. Okay. We would welcome your documentation in writing on this process, it is important to a number of members. 

Mr. HURD. And also, in the 112th Congress, Senator Hatch and 

Representative Bishop introduced companion bills requiring that 

all citizens of the United States temporarily living abroad at the 

time of the Census be counted and attributed to the State they had 

most recently lived in. This legislation also provided for the use of 

administrative records to assist in the count. Can you describe any 

concerns you have with this legislation? And we would love to see 

that in writing if you all haven’t done the analysis of that. 

Mr. THOMPSON. At this point I’d have to respond to you in writing. 

Mr. HURD. Thank you very much. 

I yield back, Chairman. Thank you. 

Mr. MEADOWS. I thank the gentleman. 

The chair recognizes the ranking member, Mr. Connolly, for a series of questions. 

Mr. CONNOLLY. Thank you. 


AKING-6430 with DISTILLER
75 

Mr. Cooper, these are, I hope, brief answers to brief questions. 

Following up on Mrs. Maloney’s questioning, you mentioned Einstein. Part of the problem with the breach at OPM was Einstein 

3, I believe, was not yet fully implemented. Are we at Einstein 3 

for the Census? 

Mr. COOPER. We are where our telecom providers have already 

put the Einstein 3 capabilities in place. 

Mr. CONNOLLY. Good. 

Mr. COOPER. There is one telecom provider that is not quite at 

Einstein 3. 

Mr. CONNOLLY. Okay. Good to know. 

Mr. COOPER. The answer is yes. 

Mr. CONNOLLY. Secondly, in response to, I think, Mr. Blum’s 

questioning, I think you acknowledged that there could be roughly 

100 different systems—I guess at Census or Commerce? 

Mr. COOPER. That would be Census. 

Mr. CONNOLLY. Census. Presumably some of these are legacy 

systems. 

Mr. COOPER. Absolutely, yes. I don’t know the quantitative 

breakout. I can follow up and—— 

Mr. CONNOLLY. Some of those systems do not lend themselves as 

a result to encryption. Is that correct? 

Mr. COOPER. That is correct, in some cases. 

Mr. CONNOLLY. So that makes them more vulnerable, not less 

vulnerable to hacking. 

Mr. COOPER. It’s my understanding—and I’m going to defer, I’m 

going to ask over my shoulder to kind of make sure I don’t misstate 

this—it is my understanding that while we do have legacy systems 

involved somewhere in that 112, it’s my understanding that we 

don’t have a situation where a legacy system that’s directly involved in supporting Census operations leading to the 2020 decennial is not able to be encrypted. 

Is that a valid statement? 

Okay. Yes. So that would not be a situation we would run into 

in support of the 2020 Census. 

Mr. CONNOLLY. Okay. Thank you. 

I think that’s it for now, thank you very much. 

Mr. MEADOWS. Well, I want to close by thanking each of the witnesses here. I guess the most important thing, I was talking to the 

ranking member, what we would like to do is not in a hearing setting, but necessarily in a briefing setting is set some regular updates of which actually all four of you would be welcome for those 

regular updates. I think over the next 12 months I see that as a 

critical window. And as much as we want to talk about 2020, I 

think the next 12 to 18 months is our go-or-no-go timeframe. And 

so in doing that, to have quarterly briefings as to where we’re making progress and where we’re not. 

Is everybody okay with doing that? 

I see—let the record show everybody nodded in the affirmative. 

And, Director Thompson, Mr. Cooper, thank you, thank your 

staff for the work. I mean, sometimes it is only thought about when 

we get the results or when we have someone knocking at our door. 

There is obviously years of planning that go ahead of that time to 


AKING-6430 with DISTILLER
76 

make sure that it’s done seamlessly. And we’re going to count on 

2020 being done seamlessly. And so I would do that. 

I would also be remiss in saying that many of the recommendations that the GAO are making are raising concerns. If they’re not 

happy, I’m probably not going to be happy. And so I just want to 

stress that, that it is critical that we work hand in glove together, 

because failure is not an option. 

And with that, thank each you for your testimony here today. 

If there is no further business, without objection, the subcommittee stands adjourned. 

[Whereupon, at 4:16 p.m., the subcommittees were adjourned.] 


AKING-6430 with DISTILLER
(77) 

APPENDIX 

MATERIAL SUBMITTED FOR THE HEARING RECORD


AKING-6430 with DISTILLER
78 


AKING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 44 here 22362.044

Question f(x the Record 

Submittod by: Congresswoman Plaskett 

Hearing on "Preparing for the 2020 Census: \Vill the Technology be Ready?" 

Importance of Securing Accurate Census Data From All US 

Territories Through The American Community Survey 

Thank you, to our witnesses for being here today. You play an important role in 

ensuring the successful accounting for all people within this country. 

While every ten years, key data is collected from our nation's population through 

the Census, the American Community Survey provides vital information on a 

yearly basis about our nation and its people. Information from the survey 

generates data that help determine how more than $400 billion in federal and state 

funds are distributed each year. That infonnation is used to make critical decisions 

affecting the operation of our government and private industry. 

My district along with Guam, American Samoa, and the Northern Mariana Islands 

are not included in the American Community Survey and without it, there is a 

misrepresentation about jobs, occupations, educational attainment, veterans, home 

ownership, and economic growth in our districts. 

With the closure of HOVENSA refinery, thousands of citizens have left the US 

Virgin Islands, economic development projects stalled and broader boarders 

stunned; my district has sufTered a major economy downturn. 

This single company closure has led to millions of federal dollars leaving the 

Virgin Islands and an increase in local poverty numbers. 

With such key decisions riding on the accuracy of Census data, it is critical the 

Bureau work with my office to find ways to increase funding so that all te1Titories 

are included in the American Community Survey or develop a separate survey 

specific to the US Territories. 

With all the fore mentioned stated, Mr. Thompson, 

Q: As the Director of the Census Bureau, what can you do to assist the US 

Virgin Islands in being included in the American Community Survey? 

Q: Do you agree that including some territories (Puerto Rico and the District of 

Columbia) and not all is a disservice to some US populations? 

Your testimony states that funding is of major concern at the Bureau 

Q: Can you explain how I might be able to work with my colleagues in 

Congress to assure that your Bureau's funding is not cut? 
79 


AKING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 45 here 22362.045

Questions for The Honorable John H. Thompson 

Director 

U.S. Census Bureau 

Questions from Chairman Mark Meadows 

Subcommittee on Government Operations 

Hearing:" Preparing for the 2020 Census: Will the Technology be Ready?" 

J. In October 2015, the Bureau released its Operational Plan for the 2020 Census. 

o Can you describe specific steps the Bureau plans to take from here on out to improve the 

Bureau's scheduling practices and to meet the 2018 "dress rehearsal" deadline? 

The Census Bureau is fully committed to ensuring that the 2020 Census planning and 

development process is on time and on budget. To that end, we have taken or are taking a 

number of actions, including delivery of our operational plan three years earlier than we 

didfor the 2010 Census. The 2020 Census Operational Plan outlines 350 major design 

decisions for the next census, 168 of which have already been made. It puts into place a 

process to make remaining decisions that will allow for adequate testing and time to 

prepare for the 2018 Census End-to-End Test. More details about each of these decisions 

can be found in the Operational Plan at this link: http://www.census.govlprogramssurveys/decennial-census/2020-census/planning-management/planning-docs/operationalplan.html The dates for making these decisions are included in both the operational plan 

and the 2020 Census Lifecycle Schedule. This integrated master schedule facilitates the 

integration and coordination across census tests and operations. Additionally, by the end of 

March 2016, the Census Bureau will baseline the integrated schedule for the 2018 Census 

End-to-End Test. 

The Census Bureau has a number of program management efforts underway for the 2020 

Census program that also will help ensure readiness for the 2018 Census End-to-End Test. 

For example,, the 2020 Census Program has categorized the work of the 2020 Census in 

alignment with the enterprise work breakdown structure that is currently being developed 

by the Census Bureau. The 2020 Census Program work breakdown structure is as .follows: 

1. Program Management 

2. Census and Survey Engineering 

3. Frame 

4. Response Data 

5. Publish Data 

6. Test and Evaluation 

7. Infrastructure 

The 2020 Census Program will ensure that scope definition, cost estimation, budget 

formulation and execution, and schedule development and management, are conducted 

using these categories to organize work. This follows best practices outlined by the 
80 


AKING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 46 here 22362.046

"Government Accountability Office Cost Estimating and Assessment Guide: Best Practices 

for Developing and Managing Capital Program Costs" and the "Government 

Accountability Office Schedule Assessment Guide. " 

The 2020 Census Program has successfully used this model to conduct the 2020 Census 

Research and Testing Program over the past four years, including the following tests: 

• 2012 National Census Test; 

• 2013 National Census Contact Test; 

• 2013 Census Test; 

• 2014 Census Test; 

• LUCA Focus Groups; 

• 2014 Human-in-the-Loop Simulation; 

• 2015 Address Validation Test; 

• 2015 Optimizing Self~ Response Test; 

• 2015 Census Test; and 

• 2015 National Content Test. 

To support the 2020 Census schedule development and maintenance, the Census Bureau 

has an office devoted to this work. This staff includes a chief and four federal employees. 

Through a schedule support contract, we also have 15 contractors certified in schedule 

development, two consultants, and two certified business analysts. All of these schedulers 

are embedded within the 2020 Census Program project teams to create the schedule, status 

the schedule, evaluate the impact of change requests on the schedule, and monitor progress 

on a regular basis. The Decennial Census Management Division managers meet weekly to 

ensure the schedule is on track. Additionally, this entire group is working closely with the 

2020 Census Program budgeting staff and the Census Bureau's Office of Cost Estimation, 

Analysis, and Assessment, to ensure a fully integrated schedule and budget system. 

We also have a formal and rigorous risk management process in place at the program and 

project level, which takes into account both schedule and budget. This includes developing 

mitigation plansfor all risks, and contingency plans where appropriate. This includes 

mitigation plans for several rish that relate to the possibility of delays, late design 

changes, and major budget shortfalls. 

Finally, to ensure transparency within the 2020 Census Program, there are several 

mechanisms used to keep stakeholders informed, such as a Quarterly Program 

Management Review to brief both internal and external stakeholders, which we began 

webcasting at the beginning of this year. Additionally, we brief the Department of 

Commerce, ()ffice of Management and Budget, the Government Accountability Office, the 

Office of the inspector General, and Congress, on a regular basis. 

All of these are important steps to ensure we stay on schedule in preparing for the 2018 

Census End-to-End Test, andfor the 2020 Census itself 

2 
81 


AKING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 47 here 22362.047

o What is the number of major decisions you need to make and how many of these have 

you made? Ifthere are decisions yet to be made, why is this the case? 

The 2020 Census Operational Plan outlines 350 major design decisions for the next census, 

I 68 of which already have been made. These decisions were data driven, based on 

information collected during the 2020 Census Research and Testing Program, spanning 

from Fiscal Year 20I 2 through 2015 and from the American Community Survey. During 

this period, we conducted several tests, including the: 

• 20 I 2 National Census Test; 

• 2013 National Census Contact Test; 

• 20 I 3 Census Test; 

• 2014 Census Test; 

• LUCA Focus Groups; 

• 2014 Human-in-the-Loop Simulation; 

• 2015 Address Validation Test; 

• 2015 Optimizing Self-Response Test: 

• 2015 Census Test; and 

• 2015 National Content Test. 

The focus of these tests was concentrated on the four key innovation areas associated with 

the reengineered concept of operations for the 2020 Census-- Reengineering Address 

Canvassing, Optimizing Self-Response, Utilizing Administrative Records, and 

Reengineering Field Operations. 

There are 182 decisions that still need to be decided, 167 prior to the 2018 Census End-toEnd Test. We have carefully planned the dates for making each of the decisions, with the 

goal of conducting a successful end-to-end test. The dates for these forthcoming decisions 

are detailed in the operational plan which lays out the path to the end-to-end test and to the 

2020 Census. More details about each of these decisions can be found in the Operational 

Plan at this link: http:/lwww.census.gov/programs-surveys/decennial-census/2020-

census/planning-management/planning-docsloperational-plan. html These decisions will 

also be data driven, based on information collected from upcoming tests and operations, 

including the: 

• 2016 Census Test; 

• 2016-2019 annual Master Address File (MAF) Coverage Study; 

• Address Canvassing Test; 

• 20I7 Census Test; and 

• Several specialized tests focused on Puerto Rico, group quarters, and coverage 

measurement. 

The focus of these tests will move from researching and testing prototypes and proofs of 

concept, to operationalizing and implementing an integrated suite of operations and 

systems. These tests are critical to finalizing the detailed operational plans for the 2020 
82 


AKING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 48 here 22362.048

Census prior to the 2018 Census End-to-End Test. 

Examples of questions to be answered include: 

1. How will the field reengineered concepts tested for NRFU be used for In-Field Address 

Canvassing? This will be tested and answered as part of the 2016 Census Test and will be 

answered by January 2017. 

2. What ore the optimal designs for the questionnaires (including size and page layout) 

and non-questionnaire materials for the 2020 Census? This will be tested as part of the 

2016 and 2017 Census Tests and initial decisions will be made October 2017 and final 

decision in August 2018. 

o Please add perspective by comparing your current state of preparation for the upcoming 

census to past censuses, and please provide supporting documentation that is relevant. 

In 2013, in response to funding constraints, we reprioritized the 2020 Census Research and 

Testing Program. At that point, we established the end of Fiscal Year 2015 as a key 

milestone for releasing the 2020 Census Operational Plan. On November 3, 2015, Director 

Thompson informed the Subcommittees that we had met that goal, and had publically 

released the plan on October 6, 2015; three years earlier than for the 2010 Census cycle. 

In comparison to last decade, we released this plan three years earlier than the 

corresponding plan for the 2010 Census. Releasing our plans now enables us to 

communicate our plans and decision-making process to Congress and other stakeholders 

three years earlier as well. In addition, the operational plan defines 34 operations critical 

to success. For each of those operations, the operational plan documents the purpose, a 

description of the operation, lessons learned from the 2010 Census, opportunities to 

innovate, work completed (decisions made), decisions yet to be made, cost and quality 

impacts, and risks. As related to schedule, the operational plan highlights key milestones 

for each operation, in alignment with the 2020 Census Lifecyc/e Schedule. As related to 

budget, the operational plan documents a lifecycle cost estimate of$12.5 billion, avoiding 

over $5.2 billion in costs as compared to conducting the 2020 Census using the same 

methodology as was used in the 2010 Census. 

On a quarterly basis. the Census Bureau conducts a publicly available Program 

Management Review where the .focus is on the scope, schedule, resources and status of the 

2020 Census program. All o.fthis information, including the 2020 Census Operational 

Plan and other supporting documentation, is available on our website at this link: 

http://www.census.gov/2020census 

2. In Ms. Cha's statement, she states that by August 2017, the Bureau intends to begin 

preparations lor end-to-end testing to validate that CEDCAP systems are ready to go live on 

Census Day. She states there are critical IT decisions yet to be made, including whether the 

Bureau will build or buy the needed systems. What is the Bureau doing to offset the risk Ms. 

4 
83 


AKING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 49 here 22362.049

Cha laid out of potentially not having all systems in place in time for end-to-end system and 

operations testing? 

The Census Bureau has an extensive risk mitigation strategy. We have a schedule of when 

critical IT decisions need to be made for the 2020 Census. The schedule for the 2020 

Census has been integrated with the CEDCAP schedule to assure that the criticaljimctions 

needed to support the Census are delivered on time. A key part of our risk mitigation 

strategy has been to build working prototypes and test them throughout the decade. This 

process allows us to ensure that capabilities and requirements are identified and 

documented early. We have successfully fielded several modules ofCEDCAP, and 

CEDCAP modules are in production in other Bureau programs. In addition, as stated in 

the 2020 Census Operational Plan, we are making innovative use of existing technology 

and software instead of inventing on our own. We developed a working prototype for the 

2020 Census that we successfully tested in 20I 5. Based on this prototype, we have 

incorporated most of the 2020 Census Program specifications into the next iteration. We 

will finish this work based on the results of tests in 2016 and 2017 in lime for the 2018 Endto-End Test. 

Recognizing the need for timely decisions on which Census Enterprise Data Collection and 

Processing (CEDCaP) systems we need to build internally, and which we need to buy from 

external sources, we have engaged the Carnegie Mellon Software Engineering Institute to 

guide us and to ensure that the decision making process is successful. We created a 

technical design decision framework that determines key design capabilities based on 

business capabilities already identified in the 2020 Census Operational Plan, and helps 

conduct Capability Analysis and Assessment of in-house and Commercial-Off-The-Shelf 

(COTS) solutions. 

Based on our review of the GAO concerns regarding the timing of our IT decisions, we 

conducted a baseline Fiscal Year 2016 assessment. The Fiscal Year 2016 System Readiness 

Baseline Assessment was completed on January 12, 2016. It was then presented to, and 

approved by Census Bureau executive leadershipon January 19, 2016. A summary of the 

review also was presented at the January 2016 Program Management Review, which was 

attended by GAO and other oversight groups and stakeholders. The changes to the 2016 

Census Test business and capability requirements resulting from the assessment were 

identified by the Census Bureau, and IT system teams are working to complete the 

implementation of the baseline of business and capability requirements. For the Address 

Canvassing Test, the 2017 Census Test, and the 2018 End to End Test, the Census Bureau 

also reviewed and updated the business and capability requirements . The Census Bureau 

then assessed existing systems for their ability to fulfill the business and capability 

requirements. 

The combination of the work that Carnegie Mellon is conducting, with the Capability 

Analysis and Assessment, will determine which systems will be built or bought, by March 

2016. We will build out the chosen systems (COTS solutions need customization) and test 

them (whether they are built in-house, or COTS, or a combination) in the 2017 Census Test 

and 2018 Census End-to-End Test. Following the 2017 Census Test, we will revise systems 
84 


AKING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 50 here 22362.050

as needed and use them in the 2018 Census End-to-End Test, implementing the planned 

census operations in real-time. This approach helps mitigate the risks detailed in Ms. Cha 's 

statement. 

3. Given the time remaining, has the Bureau considered removing any aspects of the redesign 

or future testing in order to improve the chances of successfully implementing the most 

critical aspects of the redesign, such as the operational control system? If so, when does the 

Bureau believe is the appropriate time to make those decisions? 

The Census Bureau has been working closely with GA 0 to understand and respond to its 

recommendations. In order to speed up decision making on certain remaining decisions, 

the Census Bureau conducted a careful assessment of scope related to the 2016 Census 

Test, Address Canvassing Test. 2017 Census Test, and most importantly, the 2018 Census 

End-to-End Test, following the release of the 2020 Census Operational Plan in October 

2015. We have reviewed the objectives and refined the scope o.f'each test to ensure that 

sufficient resources will be devoted to planning and implementing the operations and 

systems needed to successfully conduct the 2018 Census End-to-End Test. Towards 

reducing risks to operations and schedule, the Census Bureau then made several decisions 

regarding the scope a/the 2020 Census program. For example: 

I. We will move forward with the use o,jDevice as a ServicejiJr the 2016 Census Test and 

the 2020 Census. We have awarded a service contract for the 2016 Census Test that 

will acquire mobile devices (smart phones and tablet.s), determine the best solution for 

wireless services, and handle device management logistics. We will release an RFI.for 

Device as a Service in support o,lthe 2020 Census in the Spring of this year. We will 

not movejimvard with the use o.l Bring Your Own Device for the 2016 Census Test or 

the 2020 Census. While our testing proved that BYOD is technicallyfeasihle, we 

identified several significant risks that could impact the census. A good is example is 

having to manage updates to multiple mobile device operating systems days be.fiJre 

enumeration begins. 

2. We will move forward with the use of cascaded training for our field staff, meaning our 

supervisors will train their employees. We found that the use a/master trainers, people 

especially trained in delivering training, did not prove overly eff'ective during the 2015 

Census Test. Additionally, we believe that our .field staff will benefit/rom the face to 

face contact and interaction with their supervisors prior to conducting field work 

Using the refined scopes as a guide, we conducted the Fiscal Year 2016 System Readiness 

Baseline Assessment that was completed on January 12, 2016. It was then presented to, and 

approved by, the 2020 Census Program executive leadershipon January 19, 2016. A 

summary of the review also was presented at the January 2016 Program Management 

Review, which was attended by GAO and other oversight groups and stakeholders. The 

Census Bureau has identified the changes to the 2016 Census Test business and capability 

requirements resulting from the assessment, and IT system teams are working to complete 

the implementation o,/the baseline of business and capability requirements. for the 

Address Canvassing Test, the 2017 Census Test, and the 2018 End to End Test, the Census 

Bureau also reviewed and updated the business and capability requirements. The Census 

6 
85 


AKING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 51 here 22362.051

Bureau then assessed existing systems for their ability to fulfill the business and capability 

requirements. 

The combination oft he work that Carnegie Mellon is conducting, with the Capability 

Analysis and Assessment, will determine which systems will be built or bought, by March 

2016. We will build out the chosen systems (COTS solutions need customization) and test 

them (whether they are built in-house, or COTS, or a combination) in the 2017 Census Test 

and 2018 Census End-to-End Test. Following the 2017 Census Test, we will revise systems 

as needed and use them in the 2018 Census End-to-End Test, implementing the planned 

census operations in real-time. 

It is important to mention that all decisions are contingent upon the receipt of adequate 

.fimding. Otherwise, the Census Bureau will need to reprioritize our activities to ensure the 

systems are built. With the receipt of the Congressional budget each year, we will 

continually reassess and reprioritize. 

4. For the following key IT decisions, what is the Bureau doing to reassess and reprioritize the 

timing of these decisions to ensure that systems are in place for end-to-end testing, or to 

mitigate the risks associated with making these decisions later? 

a. The extent to which BYOD and Device-as-a-Service will be used to support field 

operations January 2016 

The Census Bureau's executive leadership recently made a decision that a Bring Your Own 

Device (BYOD) strategy for provisioning equipment to enumerators will not support the 

2020 Census. Instead, the Census Bureau will implement the Device as a Service strategy 

for provisioning equipment to enumerators in upcoming census test and in the 2020 

Census. 

Following the release of the 2020 Census Operational Plan in October 2015, the Census 

Bureau undertook a rigorous planning session to outline the execution details of the 

remaining tests and examine where operational risk could be reduced As part of this effort, 

the Census Bureau considered GAO's recommendations to examine whether any decisions 

could be made ahead of schedule to reduce risk. This most recent decision is the result both 

of responding to GAO's recommendation to focus the program, but also importantly 

because remaining open questions must resolved prior to the end-to-end test scheduled to 

begin in 20!7. We must prioritize areas in the 2016 and 2017 Census tests where test data 

is insufficient to make final decisions. 

The decision to narrow the focus to Device-as-a-Service is a risked-based decision that 

included a review of the experiences from prior tests in 2014 and 2015. While the use of a 

BYOD option did not generate any observable concerns from respondents during these 

tests, the program faced a number of challenges that present operational risk to the 2020 

Census: 
86 


AKING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 52 here 22362.052

• A BYOD option would have resulted in a diverse universe ofsmartphones that 

would have included numerous providers and operating systems over which the 

Census Bureau had no control. Managing updates to mobile device operating 

systems days before or during field operations (when hours of delay can cost 

millions of dollars of wasted productivity and reduce stakeholder confidence in 

mobile device data collection); 

• Development of an acceptable use policy that temporary employees would agree to 

would be difficult and time consuming; and 

• Development of a data charges reimbursement policy that would compensate 

temporary employees for additional costs related to their employment while 

preventing fraud Separating Census Bureau related charges from personal charges 

would have caused unreasonable time delays and increased paperwork processing 

for employees and the Census Bureau. 

We made this decision in January 2016. Documentation can be found here: 

http:llwww.census.gov/programs-surveys/decennial-census/2020-census/planningmanagement/memo-series/2020-memo-20 16 _ 01.html 

b. Plans for mobile devices use- January 2016 

As documented in the 2020 Census Operational Plan, the Census Bureau has already 

decided to use mobile devices during the 2020 Census in support of address listing, 

enumeration, work availability reporting, and time and expense reporting As mentioned 

just above, in January 2016 we made the decision to implement the Device-as-a-Service 

strategy for provisioning equipment to enumerators in upcoming census tests and in the 

2020 Census. We are currently documenting final decisions for planned uses of mobile 

devices. 

Completed in January 2016. 

c. Build or buy decisions for each 2020 capability - June20 16 

Recognizing the need for timely decisions on which Census Enterprise Data Collection and 

Processing (CEDCaP) systems we need to build internally, and which we need to buy from 

external sources, we have engaged the Carnegie Mellon Software Engineering Institute to 

guide us and to ensure that the decision making process is successful. We created a 

technical design decision framework that determines key design capabilities based on 

business capabilities already identified in the 2020 Census Operational Plan, and helps 

conduct Capability Analysis and Assessment of in-house and Commercial-Off-The-Shelf 

(COTS) solutions. 

We currently plan to make the decisions on build versus buy no later than March 31, 2016. 

d. Projccteddemand oniTinfrastructure-June20 16 
87 


AKING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 53 here 22362.053

Working with systems engineering experts from the MITRE Corporation, we are developing 

seven external demand models (highlighted in bold) that project volume and patterns of 

critical 2020 Census operations, including: 

• The number of applicants for management and field staff positions; 

• The on boarding of managers and field staff; 

The number offield staff requiring "help desk" support from the Decennial Service 

Center; 

• The number of tribal, state, and local government partners requiring "help desk" 

support from the Geographic Partnership Support Desk; 

• The number of respondents answering the 2020 Census questionnaire using the 

Internet Self-Response Option; 

• The number of respondents answering the 2020 Census questionnaire by phone 

using the Census Questionnaire Assistance Self-Response Option; and 

• The number of respondents answering the 2020 Census questionnaire using the 

Paper Self-Response Option, resulting in the need to conduct data capture 

operations. 

Additionally, as we learn from the census tests, we are designing our operations to help 

"smooth" or "even out" volume and patterns. For example, a key design decision 

documented in the 2020 Census Operational Plan is that when we invite the population to 

self-respond using the Internet, we will use a staggered mail approach The population will 

receive mailed invitation materials on a staggered basis instead of all at once. This will 

help us manage the call volume coming into Census Questionnaire Assistance. 

We currently plan to make the decisions on projected demand on IT Infrastructure by June 

2016. 

e. Solutions architecture for the 2020 census- September 2016 

The preliminary 2020 Census solutions architecture was delivered on September 30, 2015. 

This included the project-level business requirements and capability requirements, 

including the associated business process models, for the thirty 2020 Census operations 

(out of 34) that require solutions. 

Lessons learned during the 2016 Census Test will allow us to refine subsequent versions of 

the solutions architecture for the 2020 Census by September 2016. As with the 2020 Census 

Operational Plan, the solutions architecture will be continually refined throughout the 

census cycle. 

We currently plan to make the decisions on solutions architecture by September 2016. 

9 
88 


AKING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 54 here 22362.054

f. Methodology for conducting non-ID response validation- September 2016 

In the past year, we have tested two distinct methodsjor validating responses receivedfrom 

households or individuals that did not provide a Census ID. We recently received 

recommendations from the JASON Advisory Group about additional methods to explore, 

and we plan to test those over the next two years in order to determine what we will 

implement for the 2018 Census End-to-End Test and for the 2020 Census. 

Our 2020 Census Operational Plan provides additional details on these decisions planned 

for September 2016. 

g. Response rates for all self-response modes- October 2017 

As documented in the 2020 Census Operational Plan, we currently project a 63.5 percent 

overall self-response rate after six weeks of self-response. with 47 percent via Internet, 5.3 

percent via telephone, and 11.2 percent via paper. We are designing the Internet data 

collection system to handle this response load We will use results from the tests in 2016 

and 2017, plus information from external demand models, to refine these estimates if 

necessary. 

We currently plan to refine these estimates by October 2017. 

h. How the Bureau's address and geographic databases will be used to support 

reengineered field operations- October 2017 

As outlined in the 2020 Census Operational Plan, the Census Bureau's Master Address 

File/Topologically Integrated Geographic Encoding and Referencing (MAFITIGER) 

System will be used as the foundation to support the concept of reengineered field 

operations. These databases will serve as the base for our geospatial review during InOffice and In-Field Address Canvassing, key components of our reengineering efforts. Staff 

will validate and change addresses within the MAF as necessary, as well as add newly 

identified addresses. The 71GER spatial database will be used to depict the nefl.vork of 

streets, highways, railroads, streams, and political, administrative, and statistical 

boundaries. 

We will use information and lessons learned from the 2016 Census Test, the Address 

Canvassing Test, and the 2017 Census Test, to finalize how the MAFITIGER System will be 

used to support the reengineeredfield operations for the 2020 Census. 

We currently plan to make these decisions by October 2017. 

i. Expectcdscaleof2020censusnon-IDworkload- September2018 

While the 2013 2015 Census Tests have demonstrated that most people will respond using 

the unique Census identification code (Census ID) provided, the Non-ID Processing 

operation is focused on making it easy for people to respond to increase self-response 

10 
89 


AKING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 55 here 22362.055

rates. The operation accomplishes this by: 

• Providing response options that do not require a unique Census ID; 

• Maximizing real-time matching ofNon-ID respondent addresses to the Census 

Bureau's Master Address File; 

• Accurately assigning nonmatching addresses to census blocks; and 

• Conducting validation of all Non-ID responses. 

Results of the 2013-2015 Census Tests have informed the Census Bureau's projection that 

10 percent of the housing units, approximately 14 million, will respond via Non-ID. Future 

tests will give us a further set of data points for workload modeling efforts. By pursuing a 

cloud solution for real-time Non-ID processing (where the large majority ofNon-ID cases 

are processed), we can dynamically scale the processing to meet increased demand, thus 

addressing any potential risk of a larger-than-expected workload. Results from testing the 

cloud solution in 2016 and 2017 will provide us with sufficient information to inform IT 

infrastructure planningfor the 2018 Census End-to-End Test and for the 2020 Census. 

We currently plan to update our estimate of this workload by September 2018. 

5. Please describe your contingency plans if the IT systems have not been fully implemented or 

integrated in time for the 2020 Census. 

For the 2020 Census, is the Census Bureau has a risk management process in place that 

reduces the probability and consequences of events that could negatively affect the 2020 

Census programs ability to meet its objectives. The goal of the risk management process is 

to ensure a common, systematic, and repeatable assessment approach at both the program 

and project level so that risks can be effectively identified and managed, as well as clearly 

communicated to management, stakeholders, and executive level decision makers. Risk 

management is iterative and designed to be performed throughout the 2020 Census 

Program's research and testing, development, and implementation phases. 

Specifically related to IT ;ystems, the 2020 Census Program risk register includes risk 

mitigation strategies related to several risks: 

• Technological innovations surfacing after the 2020 Census design is finalized; 

• Cyber security incidents; 

• Public perception of ability to safeguard response data; 

• Funding requests not realized; and 

• Late operational design changes. 

Examples of mitigation strategies include: 

Build versatile operations and systems design; 

• Establish a change control management process to assess impacts of change 

requests to facilitate decision-making; 

II 
90 


AKING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 56 here 22362.056

• Prepare for rapid response to implemenr change based on the results of the change 

control process; 

J..1onitor system development efforts to ensure the proper security guidelines are 

followed; 

• Audit systems and check logs to help in detecting and tracing an outside infiltration; 

• Research other Census Bureau divisions, other government agencies, and the 

private sector to understand how they effectively mitigate the issue of public trust 

and IT security; and 

• Prioritizing research, testing, and implementation activities per fiscal year tofocus 

on those areas that can significantly impact cost and quality, and develop 

contingency plans to quickly respond to budget cuts. 

Also, recognizing the need for timely decisions on which Census Enterprise Data 

Collection and Processing (CEDCaP) systems we need to build internally, and which we 

need to buy from external sources, we have engaged the Carnegie Mellon Software 

Engineering Institute to guide us and to ensure that the decision making process is 

successful. We created a technical design decision framework that determines key design 

capabilities based on business capabilities already identified in the 2020 Census 

Operational Plan, and helps conduct Capability Analysis and Assessment of in-house and 

Commercial-Off~ The-Shelf (COTS) solutions. 

We conducted the Fiscal Year 2016 System Readiness Baseline Assessment that was 

completed on January 12, 2016. It was then presented to, and approved by, the 2020 

Census Program Executive Steering Committee on January 19, 2016. The changes to the 

2016 Census Test business and capability requirements resulting from the assessment have 

been identified, and the IT system teams are working to complete the implementation of the 

baseline of business and capability requirements. For the Address Canvassing Test, the 

2017 Census Test, and the 2018 End to End Test, the business and capability requirements 

also were reviewed and updated. Existing systems then will be assessed for their ability to 

ji1/fill the business and capability requirements. 

The combination of the work that Carnegie Mellon is conducting, with the Capability 

Analysis and Assessment, will determine which systems will be built or bought, by March 

2016. We will build out the chosen systems (COTS solutions need customization) and test 

them (whether they are built in-house, or COTS, or a combination) in the 2017 Census Test 

and 2018 Census End-to-End Test. Following the 2017 Census Test, we will revise systems 

as needed and use them in the 2018 Census End-to-End Test, implementing the planned 

census operations in real-time. 

Use of Administrative Records 

6. The Bureau's planned use of administrative records for the 2020 Census will rely on a large 

amount of data shared from one part of the federal government to another (the Bureau), most 

likely involving extremely large and repeated transfers of data across multiple systems. 

o Can you explain the specific steps the Bureau plans to take to secure the transfer of these 

12 
91 


AKING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 57 here 22362.057

data as the Bureau expands its reliance on them to carry out the decennial census? 

The Census Bureau has a long history of working with administrative data. The Census 

Bureau has safely received and used Federal tax infbrmation about both individuals and 

businesses in its non-decennial programs. It obtains Federal, state and commercial 

administrative data many times a year from a variety ofsources for its ongoing research 

and statistical programs beyond the decennial census. In addition, the Census Bureau has 

some administrative records experience specifically in the decennial program. For 

example, since 1970, it has securely made use of administrative records to help enumerate 

group quarters, such as college dormitories and prisons. More recently, the Census Bureau 

conducted limited experiments during the Census 2000 and.fimnd there was potential to use 

administrative records to assist withfbllow-up and other operations, but that further 

research would be needed. Additionally, since 2000, the Census Bureau has used addresses 

provided by the US. Postal Service (USPS) Delivery Sequence File (DSF) as a starting 

point to update its Master Address File, a datafile that contains a list C!(all known living 

quarters in the United States and Puerto Rico. For the 2010 Census, the Census Bureau 

used administrative records to help enumerate some group quarters and select casesfbr an 

operation thatfi>llowed up on potentially inaccurate census responses. Throughout the 

decades, the Census Bureau has used secure processes for receiving and processing these 

data. 

The Census Bureau has established data sharing agreements with key stakeholders, such as 

the Internal Revenue Service and the Social Security Administration. These formal 

agreements are developed in conjunction with the data provider and veffed by all required 

offices. This includes a legal review by both agencies to ensure that the tranc~fer is secure, 

and rhat the data will be protected ·within the Census Bureau network. In addition, the IRS 

conducts Safeguard Reviews on site at the Census Bureau at regular intervals to assure 

that its data are being handled securely and in accordance with IRS laws, rules. and 

regulations. 

Each agreement spells out the data transfer methods. These are mutually agreed upon by 

both agencies. All transfers of data are fitlly encrypted using approved NL'>T FIPS 140-2 

encryption. The exact systems and how the data are to be used are also spelled out in the 

agreement. In addition, an Inft>rmation Security Agreement is prepared, reviewed and 

signed by the appropriate management and designated points of contact at each agency. 

Once at the Census Bureau, the data will reside on systems that are .fully accredited 

according to NIST Special Publication 800-37rl and assessed against NISTSpecial 

Publication 800-53r4 on a continuous basis. 

o How can you be sure enumeration through imputation via administrative records will be 

as or more accurate than an in-person meeting with an enumerator? 

The Census Bureau has extensive experience using administrative data to improve the 

accuracy, comprehensiveness and overall usefulness of many Census Bureau statistical 

programs, such as the Economic Census, the Longitudinal Household Dynamics Program, 

13 
92 


AKING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 58 here 22362.058

the Small Area Income and Poverty Estimates program and more. These experiences give 

the Census Bureau familiarity with various administrative data files and with methods to 

assess accuracy and fitness for use. Infltct, the Census Bureau appreciates the confidence 

in its capacity to acquire and properly use administrative data for a variety of statistical 

purposes, as expressed in the President's FY 2016 budget proposal, adopted by the 

Congress, to expand this expertise to serve the needs of a broader set of Federal statistical 

and evaluation offices. 

Specific to the decennial census program, as outlined in the 2020 Census Operational Plan, 

after giving the population an opportunity to self-respond to the 2020 Census, the Census 

Bureau will use the most cost-effective strategy for contacting and counting people to 

ensure fair representation ofevely person in the United States. 

Addresses for which the Census Bureau did not receive a self-response will form the initial 

universe of addresses for the Nonresponse Followup (NRFU) operation. Prior to any 

fieldwork, vacant addresses will be removed from the NRFU workload using administrative 

records. Undeliverable-As-Addressed information j-am the USPS will provide the primary 

administrative records source for the identification of vacant units. Vacancy status will be 

confirmed with at least one other administrative record or third-party data source. For 

example, if another source such as the Internal Revenue Service Individual Tax Returns 

File includes a return for an address identified as vacant by the USPS, it will not be 

removed from the NRFU workload. 

After an initial attempt to contact nonresponding housing units, the NRFU workload will be 

fitrther reduced through the removal of cases where administrative records and third-party 

data are available and usable to enumerate the occupied housing units. We will only do this 

when we believe we have good quality administrative records information for a particular 

address. If we don't, we'll make additional efforts to contact the household in person. The 

Examples of sources of administrative records and third-party data used to enumerate 

occupied housing units include: Internal Revenue Service Individual Tax Returns, Internal 

Revenue Service Information Returns, and Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services 

Medicare Enrollment Database. The Census Bureau has decades of experience in 

acquiring and evaluating the quality of using these administrative records. 

Addresses removed from the NRFU workload as either vacant or occupied will receive a 

.final mailing that encourages occupants to self-respond to the 2020 Census. After each 

phase of the administrative records modeling, those addresses that are determined to be 

vacant will immediately be mailed afinalletter encouraging self-response; for those 

addresses that are determined to be occupied and are incomplete after one personal visit 

attempt, a final letter encouraging self-response will be mailed after seven days. 

Research from the 2014 Census Test, 2015 Census Test, the 2010 Census, and the 

American Community Survey has helped us estimate that using administrative records and 

third-party data will allow for the following during the 2020 Census: 

• To remove approximately 11 percent of vacant housing units from the Nonresponse 

Followup universe; and 

14 
93 


AKING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 59 here 22362.059

To enumerate approximately 16.5 percent of occupied nonresponding housing units 

ajier making one in-person visit. 

The analysis of the 2015 Census Test demonstrates that when using administrative records 

to enumerate nonresponding housing units after one NFR U visit, we are able to capture sex 

and age data I 00 percent of the time and race/Hispanic origin data 81.5 percent of the 

time. We will continue to evaluate these parameters as we progress with our research on 

the 2016 Census Test this fiscal year. 

Additionally, the 2020 Census Operational Plan contains a detailed discussion (in Section 

6. 8) of how we are examining the quality impacts.fi'om the use of administrative records 

and third-party data. This research includes comparisons of these data to actual2010 

Census responses from matching household>, and comparisons in our 2020 Census tests of 

the data qua/ityfrom test panels that use administrative records to the data qualityfor 

panels that use traditional methods (additional personal visits followed by proxy reporting 

or imputation as needed). Where high-quality administrative records are not available from 

trusted sources, we will continue in-person visits to reach nonresponding housing units. 

Our examination of data quality also includes research regarding race and Hispanic origin 

data from administrative records and third-party sources. 

To be clear, where high-quality administrative records are not available from trusted 

sources, we will continue in-person visits to reach nonresponding housing units. 

o What specific steps is the Bureau taking to ensure their use will not have unintended 

consequences on the quality of the census? 

As outlined in the 2020 Census Operational Plan, after giving the population an 

opportunity to selfrespond to the 2020 Census, the Census Bureau will use the most costeffective strategy for contacting and counting people to ensure fair representation of eve1y 

person in the United States. 

Where high-quality administrative records are not available from trusted sources, we will 

continue in-person visits to reach nonresponding housing units. Our examination of data 

quality also includes research regarding race and Hispanic origin data from administrative 

records and third-party sources. 

Researchfi·om the 2014 Census Test, 2015 Census Test, the 2010 Census, and the 

American Community Survey has helped us estimate that using administrative records and 

third-party data will allow for the following during the 2020 Census: 

• To remove approximately 11 percent of vacant housing units from the Nonresponse 

Followup universe; and 

• To enumerate approximately 16.5 percent of occupied nonresponding housing units 

after making one in-person visit. 

The analysis of the 2015 Census Test demonstrates that when using administrative records 

15 
94 


AKING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 60 here 22362.060

to enumerate nonresponding housing units after one NFRU visit, we are able to capture sex 

and age data IOO percent of the time and race/Hi.1panic origin data 81.5 percent of the 

time. Research will continue as we progress with the 20I6 Census Test this fiscal year. 

Additionally, the 2020 Census Operational Plan contains a detailed discussion (in Section 

6.8) o,lhow we are examining the quality impacts }rom the use oj'administrative records 

and third-party data. This research includes comparisons of these data to actual 2010 

Census responses from matching households, and comparisons in our 2020 Census tests (Jl 

the data quality }rom test panels that use administrative records to the data quality for 

panels that use traditional methods (additional personal visits followed by proxy reporting 

or imputation as needed). 

To be clear, where high-quality administrative records are not available from trusted 

sources, we will continue in-person visits to reach nonresponding housing units. 

7. The Bureau seeks to use additional sources it currently does not have access to, such as 

NDNH and KidLink. However, the Bureau needs to make a decision soon on whether or 

not to use these sources. When will these decisions be made? Will this help lower costs? 

As documented in the 2020 Census Operational Plan, the Census Bureau has already 

determined that the core set of administrative records data used to support the 2020 Census 

operations will include the following: 

• Internal Revenue Service Individual Tax Returns; 

• Internal Revenue Service Information Returns; 

• Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services Medicare Enrollment Database; 

• Indian Health Service Patient Database; 

• Social Security Number Identification File; 

• United States Postal Service Delivery Sequence File; 

• United States Postal Service Undeliverable-As-Addressed Inj'ormation; 

• 2010 Census Data; and 

• American Community Survey Data. 

The Census Bureau will decide the .final set of administrative records and third-party data 

Ia support/he 2020 Census no later than September 2018. We believe the use of 

information from other sources, like the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program or the 

National Directory of New Hires (NDNH), will help improve the overall completeness and 

quality o.l data for households enumerated through the use of administrative records or 

third-party data. 

Access to NDNH information, which would require a new statutory authority, would 

provide an important source ofrecordsfor the 2020 Census, and further enable the Census 

Bureau to implement important cost-saving design changes. The NDNH data, in 

particular, would provide confirmatory information that would facilitate the use of federal 

tax information, which cannot under current agreement between the Internal Revenue 

16 
95 


AKING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 61 here 22362.061

Service and the Census Bureau be used directly for enumeration. We believe that the value 

ofaccessing information in the NDNH and using it to corroborate data from the IRS, in 

conjunction with other administrative record and third-party data sources, would be 

approximately $150 million (using 2010 figures and dollars). In their Progress Report on 

Administrative Records to Control Enumeration Costs, the GAO has indicated that this 

estimate is reasonable and recommends that we establish clear deadlines for accessing 

information from the NDNH. 

The use of administrative records and third-party data will avoid over $1.4 billion in costs 

during the 2020 Census (or $9.80 per housing unit). For example, during the 2010 Census, 

the Census Bureau visited 14 million vacant housing units during Nonresponse Followup. 

By using information from the United States Postal Service, we will be able to remove 

approximately 11 percent, or 6 million vacant housing units from the workload during the 

2020 Census, avoiding considerable costs. 

8. In addition to NDNH and KidLink, there are nine additional sources the Bureau may use. 

When will the Bureau decide which database to use and again, what is the potential in 

lowering costs? 

As documented in the 2020 Census Operational Plan, the Census Bureau has already 

determined that the core set of administrative records data used to support the 2020 Census 

operations will include the following: 

• Internal Revenue Service Individual Tax Returns; 

• Internal Revenue Service Information Returns; 

• Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services Medicare Enrollment Database; 

• Indian Health Service Patient Database; 

• Social Security Number Identification File; 

• United States Postal Service Delivery Sequence File; 

• United States Postal Service Undeliverable-As-Addressed Information; 

2010 Census Data; and 

• American Community Survey Data. 

The Census Bureau will decide the final set of administrative records and third-party data 

to support the 2020 Cen.5us no later than September 2018. We believe the use of 

iriformation from other sources, like the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program or the 

National Directory ()/'New Hires (NDNH), will help improve the overall completeness and 

quality of data for households enumerated through the use of administrative records or 

third-party data. 

Access to NDNH iriformation, which would require new statutory authority would provide 

an important source ofrecordsfor the 2020 Census, andfurther enable the Census Bureau 

to implement important cost-saving design changes. The NDNH data, in particular, would 

provide confirmatory information that would facilitate the use of federal tax information, 

which cannot under current agreement between the Internal Revenue Service and the 

!7 
96 


AKING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 62 here 22362.062

Census Bureau be used directly for enumeration. We believe that the value of accessing 

information in the NDNH and using it to corroborate data _from the IRS, in conjunction 

with other administrative record and third-party data sources, would be approximately 

$150 million (using 2010 figures and dollar.\). In their Progress Report on Administrative 

Records to Control Enumeration Costs, the GAO has indicated that this estimate is 

reasonable and recommends that we establish clear deadlines for accessing information 

from the NDNH. 

The use of administrative records and third-party data will avoid over $1.4 billion in costs 

during the 2020 Census (or $9.80 per housing unit). For example, during the 2010 Census, 

the Census Bureau visited 14 million vacant housing units during Nonresponse Followup. 

By using information from the United States Postal Service, we will be able to remove 

approximately II percent, or 6 million vacant housing units jrom the workload during the 

2020 Census, avoiding considerable costs. 

18 
97 


AKING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 63 here 22362.063

Questions for The Honorable John H. Thompson 

Director 

U.S. Census Bureau 

Questions from Representative Ted Lieu 

Subcommittee on Government Operations 

Hearing: "Preparing for the 2020 Census: Will the Technology be Ready?" 

1. Please provide an update on what the Bureau is doing, both as part of the interagency 

working group, and on its own, to improve data collection on LGBT Americans. 

The Census Bureau is a member ofOMB 's Interagency Working Group on Measuring 

Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity (SOGI). Through our participation in this group, 

we are learning.from other Federal agencies about the current practices for collecting, 

editing, and reporting SOGI data. We are also gaining insight about the challenges and 

obstacles that agencies currently fielding SOGI questions have experienced, and 

benefiting.fi-om the technical solutions identified to address these issues. The lessons 

learned by our colleagues will be of critical importance should the Census Bureau be 

tasked with implementing SOGI questions in the decennial census or surveys, such as the 

American Community Survey (ACS). 

As part of the Census Bureau's effort to research methods of enhancing our census and 

survey data using administrative records, staff have evaluated changes to individuals' 

first names and sex-coding in files from the Social Security Administration to identifY 

people likely to be transgender. These data were then linked with 2010 Census data to 

evaluate demographic characteristics, residential patterns, and questionnaire response 

patterns. 

The Census Bureau continues to improve the quality of its estimates of same-sex couples 

through testing and implementation of a new relationship question. The new question 

expands the husband or wife and unmarried partner categories to distinguish between 

same-sex and opposite-sex relationships. The new relationship question is now used in 

the American Housing Survey, the Survey of Income and Program Participation, and is 

being phased into the Current Population Survey. This question will be tested in the ACS 

in 2016 and is planned for implementation in the ACS in 2019, once the content testing 

cycle is completed. We also continue to test and work toward inclusion of the new 

question in the 2020 Census. 

2. Please provide an update on what the Bureau is doing to improve data collection on gender 

identity, and transgender Americans, in particular. 

The Census Bureau has collaborated with the National Center for Health Statistics 

(NCHS) on the testing and implementation of questions on sexual orientation in the 

National Health Interview Survey (NHIS). The NHIS is sponsored by NCHS and 

administered by the Census Bureau. From 2011 to 2012, the Census Bureau administered 

field tests to determine the best mode for collecting information on sexual orientation due 
98 


AKING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 64 here 22362.064

to the sensitivity of the questions. The questions on sexual orientation were then fully 

implemented in the NHIS in 2013 and, to date, remain part of the survey. The measures 

of sexual orientation used in the NHIS are now used across several Federal agencies 

spanning several Federal departments. 

We are also collaborating with the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS) in the cognitive 

testing and planned implementation of SOG1 questions in the National Crime 

Victimization Survey (NCVS). The NCVS is sponsored by BJS and administered by the 

Census Bureau. BJS has proposed the introduction of questions on sexual orientation and 

gender identity in the NCVS in July 2016. Cognitive testing of these questions has 

recently concluded, and survey instruments are being finalized. 

As described above, the Census Bureau is harnessing administrative records to identifY 

potential trans gender Americans using changes to individuals '.first names and sexcoding in files from the Social Security Administration. 

3. Census Bureau data on same-sex couples only represents a subset ofLGB people (since not 

all LGB people are in couples). That is why we need a direct measure of sexual orientation 

too: What specifically is the Census Bureau doing to resolve any methodological issues it 

sees as obstacles to adding sexual orientation and gender identity measures to the American 

Community Survey and other surveys. 

The Census Bureau is committed to reflecting the information needs of our changing 

society and is constantly examining the effectiveness of census and survey data to collect 

accurate information on people and families. Gathering SOGI data more broadly will 

provide policymakers with a more accurate and comprehensive view of how LGBT 

Americans are faring in the United States today and how these trends change over time. 

Such information about the LGBT community's experiences with economic and social 

programs will prove useful not only to Federal policymakers but to all personsacademics. local decision-makers, and the general public-- concerned with the wellbeing of LGBT Americans. 

At the same time, it must be understood that there are challenges to collecting SOGI 

data, including social desirability bias and interviewer reticence. But these challenges 

are not new; Federal statistical agencies have a long history of working together to 

leverage their expertise and resources to the benefit of the American public. As described 

above, the Census Bureau is actively engaged in the OMB Interagency Working Group 

(IWG) on Measuring Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity. While the work of the IWG 

is not yet complete, it is clear that there are a number ofmethodological issues that will 

need to be resolved before improved and wider measurement can occur. For example, 

there is little research on the effect of proxy reporting has on the accuracy of SOGI 

measurement. Proxy reporting is the practice of asking one member of the household to 

respond on behalf of other members in the household-an established way of 

significantly reducing data collection costs and burden. If proxy reporting yields 

inaccurate SOGI data, or a policy determination is made that SOGI questions cannot be 

asked through proxy reporting, that will affect our ability to measure SOGI more widely 

in established Federal surveys and censuses. The IWG is examining this issue now, and 
99 


AKING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 65 here 22362.065

testing is being planned. The Census Bureau does not have plans to test questions about 

gender identity or sexual orientation for the 2020 Census or the American Community 

Survey (ACS). However, as is the case to ensure the continued relevance of all the survey 

and census data collected by Census, we will work with OMB and other federal agencies 

to examine the changing requirements and data recommended for program 

implementation and use established best statistical practice as our guide. 
100 


AKING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 66 here 22362.066

Questions for Mr. Steven I. Cooper 

Chief Information Officer 

U.S. Department of Commerce 

Questions from Chairman Mark Meadows 

Subcommittee on Government Operations 

Hearing: "Preparing for the 2020 Census: Will the Technology be Ready?" 

!. The Census Bureau released its first Operational Plan for the 2020 Census. Can you 

describe some specific steps the Bureau plans to take from here on out to improve the 

Bureau's scheduling practices and to meet the 2018 "dress rehearsal" deadline? 

The 2020 Census Operational Plan outlines 350 major design decisions for the next 

decennial census, 168 of which have already been made. There are 182 decisions that 

still need to be decided, 167 prior to the 2018 Census End-to-End Test. The decisions will 

be data-driven, based on information collected from upcoming tests and operations. The 

dates for making these decisions are included in both the operational plan and the 2020 

Census Lifecycle Schedule. More details about each of these decisions can be found in 

the Operational Plan at this link: http://www.census.gov/programs-surveysldecennialcensus/2020-census/planning-managementlplanning-docs/operational-plan.html The 

dates were determined to ensure adequate system testing and time to prepare for the 

2018 End-to-End Test. Additionally, by the end o_fMarch 2016, the Census Bureau will 

baseline the integrated schedule for the 2018 Census End-to-End Test. 

The Census Bureau has a number of program management efforts underway for the 2020 

Census program that also will help ensure readiness for the 2018 Census End-to-End 

Test. For example, the 2020 Census Program has categorized the work oft he 2020 

Census in alignment with the enterprise work breakdown structure that is currently being 

developed by the Census Bureau. Scope, budget, and schedule are managed using this 

structure. To support the 2020 Census schedule development and maintenance, the 

Decennial Census Management Division has an office devoted to this work Working 

closely with 2020 Census Program project teams, the office staff creates the schedule, 

routinely statuses activities on the schedule, evaluates the impact of change requests on 

the schedule, and monitors progress on a regular basis. The schedule includes both highlevel items that plan the hando_tf5 between the tests that precede the 2018 End-to-End 

Test and lower level items that plan requirements and system development tasks to ensure 

the ability to adequately test software before being used in each census test. 

Finally, within the formal program and project-level risk management process, the 

Census Bureau develops mitigation plans for schedule risks, and contingency plans 

where appropriate. They are currently tracking risks related to the possibility of delays, 

late design changes, and major budget shortfalls. 

2. Ms. Cha laid out several key IT decisions that have been deferred which may impact the 

Bureau's ability to have systems in place to implement the 2020 Census redesign. What 
101 


AKING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 67 here 22362.067

steps should the Bureau take to off-set this risk? 

The Census Bureau recognizes the need to plan our remaining software development 

using a timely and comprehensive approach. They have a schedule of when critical IT 

decisions need to be made for the 2020 Census, which has been integrated with the 

CEDCAP schedule to assure that the critical functions needed to support the 2020 

Census are delivered on time. 

To off-set risk, they have engaged the Carnegie Mellon Software Engineering Institute to 

guide and to ensure that the decision making process is successful. They created a 

technical design decision framework that determines key design capabilities based on 

business capabilities already identified in the 2020 Census Operational Plan, and helps 

conduct Capability Analysis and Assessment of in-house and Commercial-Off The-Shelf 

(COTS) solutions. 

We conducted the Fiscal Year 2016 System Readiness Baseline Assessment that was 

completed on January 12, 2016. It was then presented to, and approved by, the 2020 

Census Program Executive Steering Committee on January I 9, 2016. The changes to the 

2016 Census Test business and capability requirements resulting.from the assessment 

have been identified, and the IT system teams are working to complete the 

implementation of the baseline of business and capability requirements. For the Address 

Canvassing Test, the 2017 Census Test, and the 2018 End to End Test, the business and 

capability requirements also were reviewed and updated Existing systems then will be 

assessed for their ability to fulfill the business and capability requirements. 

The combination of the work that Carnegie Mellon is conducting, with the Capability 

Analysis and Assessment, will determine which systems will be built or bought, by March 

2016. 

Also, the Census Bureau has a formal, rigorous, and active risk management process in 

place at the program and project level, which takes into account both schedule and 

budget. This includes developing mitigation plans for all risks, and contingency plans 

where appropriate. This includes mitigation plans for several risks that relate to such 

things as the possibility of delays, late design changes, and major budget shortfalls. 

3. Ms. Cha testified that one of the key deferred decisions is whether the Bureau plans to 

build or buy the needed IT solutions-which the Bureau does not plan to make until June 

2016. Given there is now 14 months before preparations for end-to-end testing begins, is 

there enough time to build, test, integrate, scale, and secure systems in a 14 month period? 

In other words, is building a realistic option at this point? 

The Census Bureau has accelerated the date for making these decisions to March 2016. 

The Census Bureau is making innovative use of existing technology and software instead 

of inventing their own. They developed a working prototype for the 2020 Census that was 

successfully tested in 2015. Based on this prototype, they have incorporated most of the 

2020 Census Program specifications into the next iteration. They will .finish this work 
102 


AKING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 68 here 22362.068

based on the results of tests in 2016 and 2017 in time for the 2018 End-to-End Test. 

The Census Bureau has engaged the Carnegie Mellon Software Engineering Institute to 

guide and to ensure that the build-or-buy decision-making process is successful. They 

created a technical design decision framework that determines key design capabilities 

based on business capabilities already identified in the 2020 Census Operational Plan, 

and helps conduct Capability Analysis and Assessment of in-house and Commercial OffThe-Shelf (COTS) solutions. 

We conducted the Fiscal Year 2016 System Readiness Baseline Assessment that was 

completed on January 12, 2016. It was then presented to, and approved by, the 2020 

Census Program Executive Steering Committee on January 19, 2016. The changes to the 

2016 Census Test business and capability requirements resulting from the assessment 

have been identified, and the IT system teams are working to complete the 

implementation of the baseline of business and capability requirements. For the Address 

Canvassing Test, the 2017 Census Test, and the 2018 End to End Test, the business and 

capability requirements also were reviewed and updated. Existing systems then will be 

assessed for their ability to .fitlfill the business and capability requirements. 

The combination of the work that Carnegie Mellon is conducting and the assessment of 

~ystem readiness of in-house system development will determine which systems will be 

built or bought. 

4. In your capacity as the Department-level CIO, which has been recently heightened by 

FIT ARA, please describe the ways in which you have been involved with the CEDCAP 

program in order to mitigate the risk of being without a permanent CIO. 

Your Committee recently published the first Federal IT Acquisition Reform Act (FITARA) 

Implementation Scorecard, upon which the Department of Commerce (DOC) received 

the best overall grade in the Federal Government. 

The scorecard reflects the Department's progress in successfully establishing and 

implementing data center consolidation plans, IT portfolio review and savings, risk 

assessment transparency, and the maturation ofCIO authorities. The primmy reason we 

have been able to achieve these successes is our strategic alignment and adherence with 

previous Government IT initiatives like the 25-Point Implementation Plan to Reform 

Federal Information Technology (IT) Management; Qffice of Management and Budget 

(OMB) Memorandum M-11-29, Chief Information Officer Authorities; and OMB 

Memorandum M-12-10, Implementing PortfolioStat. 

Common themes of all of these directives are IT trans.f(;rmation, improvement of 

operating efficiencies, leveraging shared services, and increasing Chief Information 

Officer (CIO) accountability and responsibility for all IT spend FITARAfurther clarifies 

a CIO 's role, accountability, and relationships. FITARA also provides the tools that I can 

use to further mature the governance and oversight that we as an agency have already 

put in place. 
103 


AKING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 69 here 22362.069

The implementation of key information technology management processes including an 

enterprise systems developmentl!fecyc/e and program lifecyc/e used to govern the 

Census Enterprise Data Collection and Processing (CEDCaP) program have given 

myself, other managers, and oversight bodies the tools and data required to ensure 

alignment with our goals, priorities, and compliance with statutory requirements. They 

have also provided a timely, consistent, and transparent source for reliable cost, 

schedule, and performance status. In addition, I regularly engage with the Acting CIO of 

the U.S. Census Bureau, who is the accountable Associate Director for delivering the 

CEDCaP solution. The Acting CIO is also part of the DOC CIO Council, the body that is 

responsible for DOC's collective compliance with other memorandums and directives. 

CEDCaP is listed as a critical project as part of the Department of Commerce's 

Acquisition Framework and is a prime example of the successes the Department of 

Commerce and U.S. Census Bureau have collaboratively achieved in the adherence, 

alignment, and implementation of the objectives of these directives. 

Through coordinated efforts including my own oversight via the aforementioned 

processes and the Department's internal Information Technology Review Board, the 

CEDCaP program achieved the DOC M"ilestone 2 Review Approval fi"om the Deputy 

Secretary of Commerce in July 2015, and also has accomplished the following: 

• Product Release 1 - CAP! Tech Refi"esh complete; 

• CEDCaP Capabilities released to support CAP! Tech Refi"esh (ACS & DEMO); 

• Questionnaire Design and Metadata (Content Metadata - CoMet) release; 

• Address Listing and Mapping (LiMA) release; 

• Survey (and Listing) Interview Operational Control (Mobile Case ManagementMCM) release; 

• Dashboard.for Monitoring (Unified Tracking System- [lTS) release; 

• CoMet released to production in support of 2015 COSIASlvf; 

• Service Oriented Architecture (SOA) released to production; 

• Finalized Program-Level Systems Engineering Management Plan (SEMP) & Test 

and Evaluation Master Plan (TEMP); 

Finalized Segment Architecture and Transition Plans (second iterations); 

• Developed CEDCaP Program-level Test and Evaluation Management Plan 

(TEMP), CEDCaP Program-level Systems Engineering Management Plan 

(SEMP) and CEDCaP Program level End-to-End (e2e) Integration Testing 

Framework and Operational Model; 

• Implemented an enterprise lTAcquisitionfor Business Services Support (!TESS) 

Enterprise Service Framework (ESF) with CEDCaP Task Orderfor program 

management support; 

• Successfully conducted testing of Centurion and an alternate application 

Primus, in a cloud-based environment; 

• Implemented an enterprise IT Acquisition for Systems Engineering and 

Integration (SE&I) Services contract; 

• Developed Request for Quote (RFQ) for Commercial off-the-shelf (COTS) 
104 


AKING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 70 here 22362.070

product(s) for assessment prior to final build/buy decisions; 

• Performing COTS assessment on the analysis of alternatives that includes 

comparing in-house custom solution(s) versus COTS product(s); and 

• Engaged the Carnegie Melon (CM) Software Engineering Institute (SEI) to 

perform an independent assessment of CEDCaP 's COTS assessment approach 

(e.g. inputs, evaluation criteria, process). 

We are in the process of selecting an Independent Validation and Verification (IV & V) 

contractor for CEDCaP to further mitigate risk and ensure the program stays on track. 

We expect to complete our selection by the second quarter of 20 I 6. 

5. What can the 2020 Census Directorate and the IT Directorate do to better ensure that the 

IT Directorate can successfully deliver the systems to support the 2020 Census? 

The Census Bureau has gone a long way to improving the communication and 

integration of their respective Directorates to ensure the successful delivery of the 2020 

Census. For example, the 2020 Census Directorate has a Chief of the Decennial IT 

Division (DITD) that oversees the 2020 Census System Engineering and Integration 

(SE&I) team. This person and the Associate Director of Decennial Census Programs 

meets with the Census Bureau's Chief Information Officer (CIO) on a bi-weekly basis to 

ensure that the objectives for the 2020 Census and associated tests are aligned with 

enterprise IT plans and that tasks are prioritized based on meeting those objectives. 

Further, the Chief of DITD works with the IT Directorate under the CIO to ensure that 

the solutions relating to Decennial IT are following the Census Bureau's IT policies and 

procedures, and that the processes for their development are in alignment with the 

Enterprise Architecture, enterprise Systems Development Life Cycle (eSDLC), security, 

and standards. 

While the Chief of DITD is responsible for providing systems for the 2020 Census, the 

hardware and infrastructure (telecommunications, LAN/WAN, data center, 

backup/recovery, mobile devices, Cloud, security, etc.) are provided by the IT 

Directorate under the CIO. Therefore, there is shared responsibility and accountability. 

All systems managed by the DITD are assessed and approved by the Office of 

Information Security (OIS), independent of DITD. No system that DITD builds will go 

into production until the CIO signs off on the Authority-To-Operate (ATO). Independent 

assessment and approval ensures consistent approach to security. The IT Directorate has 

also hired qualified Security Engineers and embedded them into the 2020 Program to 

ensure security is built into every system or solution ji-om the beginning of every project. 

The IT Directorate established the enterprise systems readiness process being used for 

the 2020 Census Directorate to assess and ensure system readiness, and has embedded a 

Solution Architect, Chief Program Engineer, and Systems Engineers as dedicated 

members of the 2020 Census SE&I Team. 

In addition, the Census Bureau has conducted multiple sessions where the leaders of the 
105 


AKING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 71 here 22362.071

2020 Decennial Census and IT directorates were brought together to discuss and roll out 

plans, schedules and an IT roadmapfor the 2020 Census, which were signed off by both 

directorates. 

Decennial IT and the IT Directorate collaborate frequently and are in-sync from 

planning through execution regarding the 2020 Census. They also jointly attend the 

Executive Steering Committees at the Bureau and program levels. 

Overall, the IT and Decennial leaders understand the complexity, importance, and 

critical nature of the 2020 Census and are working together embracing a shared 

leadership model. !feel confident that the continuation and maturation of these processes 

between the two Directorates will provide the foundation for the successful delivery of IT 

solutions for the 2020 Census. 

6. The Bureau maintains the quality of administrative records data by ensuring its accuracy, 

relevance, and timeliness, for their planned uses. Do you believe the Bureau has been 

taking the right steps? What else could the Bureau do in order to maintain the quality of 

the records? 

The Census Bureau is committed to designing the most cost-effective strategy jar 

contacting and counting people to ensure fair representation of every person in the 

United States. 

The Census Bureau has a long history of working with administrative data, as far back as 

1970, to help with the enumeration ofgroup quarters, colleges, and prisons. The 2020 

Census Operational Plan contains a detailed discussion of how the Bureau is examining 

the quality impacts from the use of administrative records and third-party data. As 

documented in the operational plan, the Census Bureau has already determined that a 

core set of high quality administrative records data will be used to support the 2020 

Census operation, including: 

• Internal Revenue Service Individual Tax Returns; 

• Internal Revenue Service Information Returns; 

• Centersfor Medicare & Medicaid Services Medicare Enrollment Database; 

• Indian Health Service Patient Database; 

• Social Security Number Identification File; 

• United States Postal Service Delivery Sequence File; 

• United States Postal Service Undeliverable-As-Addressed Information; 

• 2010 Census Data; and 

• American Community Survey Data. 

Census Bureau research includes comparisons of these data to actual 2010 Census 

responses from matching households. Research also compares data quality across 2020 

Census Test panels using administrative records and traditional methods. Where highquality administrative records are not available from trusted sources, the Census Bureau 

will continue in-person visits to reach nonrespo~ding housing units. 
106 


AKING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 72 here 22362.072

I believe these are the right steps to take to ensure the appropriate use of administrative 

records in conducting an accurate and inclusive 2020 Census. 

7. The Bureau seeks to use additional sources it currently does not have access to, such as 

NDNH and KidLink. However, the Bureau needs to make a decision soon on whether or 

not to use these sources. When will these decisions be made? Will this help lower costs? 

The Census Bureau will decide the final set of administrative records and third-party 

data to support the 2020 Census no later than September 2018. We believe the use of 

information from sources like NDNH and KidLinkwill help improve the overall 

completeness and quality of data for households enumerated through the use of 

administrative records or third-party data. 

Access to NDNHinformation, which would require a new statutory authority, would 

provide an important source of records for the 2020 Census. In particular, the data 

would provide a critical confirmation link to support the use offederal tax information, 

which cannot under current agreement between the Internal Revenue Service and the 

Census Bureau be used directly for enumeration. 

We believe that the value of accessing information from the NDNH and using it to 

corroborate data from the IRS, in conjunction with other administrative record and thirdparty data sources, would be approximately $150 million (using 2010 figures and 

dollars). In their Progress Report on Administrative Records to Control Enumeration 

Costs, the GAO has indicated that this estimate is reasonable and recommends that the 

Census Bureau establish clear deadlinesfor accessing information from the NDNH 

Using administrative records will avoid over $1.4 billion in non-response follow-up costs 

during the 2020 Census. 

8. In addition to NDNH and KidLink, there are nine additional sources the Bureau may use. 

When will the Bureau decide which database to use and again, what is the potential in 

lowering costs? 

As documented in the 2020 Census Operational Plan, the Census Bureau has already 

determined that the core set of administrative records data that will support the 2020 

Census operation will include: 

• Internal Revenue Service Individual Tax Returns; 

• Internal Revenue Service Information Returns; 

• Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services Medicare Enrollment Database; 

• Indian Health Service Patient Database; 

• Social Security Number Identification File; 

• United States Postal Service Delivery Sequence File; 

• United States Postal Service Undeliverable-As-Addressed Information; 

• 2010 Census Data; and 

• American Community Survey Data. 
107 


AKING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 73 here 22362.073

The Census Bureau will decide the final set of administrative records and third-party 

data to support the 2020 Census no later than September 2018. 

Using administrative records will avoid over $1.4 billion in non-response follow-up costs 

during the 2020 Census. In their Progress Report on Administrative Records to Control 

Enumeration Costs, the GAO has indicated that this estimate is reasonable and 

recommends that the Census Bureau establish clear deadlines for assessing information 

.from the NDNH. 
108 


AKING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 74 here 22362.074

Enclosure 

Chairman Will Hurd 

Chairman Mark Meadows 

Written Questions for the Record to 

Mr. Robert Goldenkoff 

"Preparing for the 2020 Census: Will the Technology be Ready?" 

The Bureau's Upcoming and Important Deadlines 

1. Do you believe the Bureau will meet all required deadlines for the 2018 end-to-end 

test, also known as "dress rehearsal" for the 2020 Census? Why or why not? 

Bureau officials have stated that final decisions on the use of administrative records are 

needed by the end of fiscal year 2017 in order for those records to be included in the 

Bureau's 2018 end-to-end test. As noted in our statement, the Bureau has already 

committed to three uses of administrative records, and has identified nine potential 

additional uses of administrative records that may help improve the quality of the census 

still further. While the Bureau is researching the feasibility of these additional uses, as of 

August 2015, the Bureau had not set deadlines for making these decisions, nor had it 

set deadlines for determining the specific administrative records that will support those 

uses. Deadlines for when final go/no-go decisions need to be made will help ensure the 

records are adequately tested during the end-to-end test. As such, in our October 2015 

report,' we recommended that the Bureau establish clearly documented deadlines for 

making final decisions about which records to use, and for what purposes. The Bureau 

agreed and said it will prepare an action plan to document the steps it is taking to 

implement our recommendation. Moreover, GAO has been asked by the Committee on 

Oversight and Government Reform to assess the reliability of the Bureau's integrated 

schedule, and we expect to carry out that assessment in 2016. 

2. In your opinion, how has the Bureau's delay in making key decisions affected the 

2020 Census? 

We have not conducted the work necessary to answer this question. However, in 2013, 

the Bureau noted that the effects of the continuing resolution and sequestration, as well 

as the potential for future budget uncertainty later in the decade, necessitated a 

reassessment of priorities in the research and testing program. The Bureau delayed and 

consolidated previously planned tests to focus on cost cutting. The new testing focus 

could not supply information necessary for decision making by the end of the 2014 fiscal 

year as originally planned. As such, decisions on preliminary design were postponed 

from September 2014 to September 2015. Moreover, in our prior work, we have 

underscored the importance of staying on schedule so that key activities can occur at 

1 GAO, 2020 Census: Additional Actions Would Help the Bureau Realize Potential Administrative Records Cost 

Savings, GA0-16-48 (Washington, D.C.: Oct. 20, 2015). 

Page2 
109 


AKING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 75 here 22362.075

the appropriate time and in the correct sequence in order to meet key dates for testing 

activities, as well as for collecting, analyzing, and disseminating information. 

GAO has been asked by the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform to 

assess the reliability of the Bureau's integrated schedule, including what schedule risk 

analyses the Bureau may have conducted that might inform this question, and we expect 

to carry out that assessment in 2016. 

Bureau's Use of Administrative Records 

3. The use of administrative records is not new for the Bureau, but the Bureau plans 

to rely on them more heavily than ever before. Moreover, while some uses have 

been decided, a number of other uses are still being debated. 

Page 3 

a. Are you concerned about this ongoing debate? 

As of August 2015, the Bureau had not set deadlines to determine when to make 

final decisions on which of its 12 identified uses of administrative records it will 

implement for the 2020 Census, nor had it set deadlines for determining exactly 

which records from which sources it will tap in support of each use it implements. 

Setting deadlines will help the Bureau complete needed activities on time and 

prioritize which activities-or records-to abandon if time and resources become a 

constraint. As with much of the design of the 2020 Census, most of the uses still 

being considered are new. Moving forward, to help support broader public discussion 

on trade-offs that the Bureau may need to make on the role of administrative records 

in the 2020 Census, the Bureau should address our prior recommendation to 

develop and implement an effective congressional outreach strategy, particularly on 

new design elements the Bureau is researching and considering, as well as on costquality trade-offs of potential design decisions. 

b. What challenges does the Bureau face in ensuring that administrative records 

uses are successfully implemented? 

Our October 2015 report listed three key challenges the Bureau faces in ensuring 

that administrative records uses are successfully implemented: 

Data Quality. Although the Bureau has no control over the accuracy of data 

provided to it by other agencies, it is responsible for ensuring that data it uses for 

2020 Census are of sufficient quality for their planned uses. Data quality can 

involve the accuracy, relevance, and timeliness of the data. The Bureau has 

taken steps to ensure the quality of the records it is considering using for 2020 

and plans comprehensive testing of all records during an end-to-end test of its 

2020 Census design (to be conducted in 2018). Additionally, the Bureau plans 

testing of administrative records for the 2016 Census Test in the Los Angeles 

and Houston metro areas, in a large test of address canvassing, also in 2016, 

and in an another site test in 2017 at a to-be-determined location. 

Prevention of Disclosure. We have previously reported that until the Bureau 

implements a complete and comprehensive security program, it will have limited 
110 


AKING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 76 here 22362.076

assurance that its information and systems are being adequately protected 

against unauthorized access, use, disclosure, modification, disruption, or loss. In 

response, the Bureau has cited examples of its past long-standing experience in 

collecting data from other agencies and reporting on it as evidence of the 

Bureau's ability to prevent disclosure of information. Once the Bureau obtains 

access to an administrative data source, it transfers the information that it needs 

to Bureau servers and maintains the information within the Bureau's firewalls and 

information security infrastructure. 

• Public Perception. A third challenge is the extent to which the public will accept 

the sharing of personal data across government agencies for the purposes of the 

census. In 2013, the Bureau contracted for regular polling of nationally 

representative individuals on the. extent to which they prefer data to come from 

information already provided to federal and state governments, or from a survey 

they fill out. Findings included that respondents were evenly divided when asked 

whether they prefer the Bureau to obtain someone's name and age directly from 

the Social Security Administration rather than asking for this information on a 

questionnaire. In 2013, the Bureau began hosting quarterly program 

management reviews encouraging dialogue with oversight on selected technical 

aspects of the Bureau's ongoing research and testing. These reviews are open to 

the public and viewable online. These supplement the Bureau's monthly status 

reports on ongoing research projects that the Bureau provides to Office of 

Management and Budget and, later, Congress. Additionally, the Bureau is 

developing a communications campaign for 2020, which it will formally launch in 

2016. The campaign will include information about how the Bureau intends to 

use administrative records in the 2020 Census. 

Given the many potential uses of administrative records the Bureau has 

identified, it will be important for the Bureau's external messaging to consider the 

range of uses. For example, some people may feel differently about the Bureau 

using administrative records for enumerating, as opposed to targeting the time of 

day they will be contacted by the Bureau. As noted above, the Bureau should 

address our prior recommendation to develop and implement an effective 

congressional outreach strategy. 

4. The Bureau and GAO both appear to be in agreement that the expanded use of 

administrative records could save significant amounts of money compared to 

historical Census operations. Can you explain whether these "cost savings" are 

real savings to the taxpayer or just "paper savings"? 

Page4 

The Bureau's 2015 Census Test appears to have demonstrated the feasibility and 

potential effectiveness of administrative records for several uses during nonresponse 

follow-up, which the Bureau estimates could save up to $1.4 billion compared to using 

traditional census methods in the 2020 Census. The Bureau recently estimated that with 

a new approach it can conduct the 2020 Census for $12.3 billion, which is around $5 

billion less than the Bureau's initial cost estimate of $17.5 billion to repeat the design and 

methods of the 2010 Census. The Bureau plans to do this in part by reengineering key 

census-taking methods, including making greater use of information already provided to 

federal and state governments. as they administer programs-administrative records. We 
111 


AKING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 77 here 22362.077

have ongoing work to assess the reliability of the Bureau's 2020 Census lifecycle cost 

estimate. We plan to inventory the cost assumptions provided by the Bureau and identify 

those related to changes from historical census designs and with significant cost-saving 

potential. 

5. In preparation for the 2016 and 2017 tests, does GAO recommend the Bureau to 

use administrative records differently than it did in its 2015 tests? If so, how? 

GAO has not conducted work with which to recommend that the Bureau use 

administrative records differently than it did in 2015. However, according to Bureau 

officials, the results of the 2015 test demonstrated that it can save an estimated $1.4 

billion by using administrative records in the ways it already committed to and tested in 

2015. Specifically, in 2015, the Bureau tested, among other things, how well 

administrative records; helped identify vacant addresses in advance of follow-up field 

work; substituted for additional visits to collect information from nonresponding 

households and from proxies, such as neighbors; and predicted the best times for 

sending enumerators to households to increase the likelihood that someone is home. 

The Bureau plans to test additional uses of administrative records beyond what it did in 

2015, such as using them for group quarters populations (e.g., dormitories, prisons, 

nursing homes, or homeless shelters), and for respondent validation for those 

responding without a unique identification number. 

6. In your October 2015 report, GAO recommends the Bureau should clearly set 

deadlines for making decisions on the use of records it does not have access to, 

such as NDNH and Kidlink. 

Page 5 

a. Do you recommend the Bureau uses them? Why or why not? 

GAO has not done work with which to recommend the use of specific administrative 

records for the 2020 Census. However, if accessible and used properly, these data 

sources have the potential to improve the quality of the census and potentially 

reduce its cost. Thus, going forward, it will be important for the Bureau to continue to 

explore the feasibility of using these records, ensuring, for example, that the records 

improve cost and quality, and that the Bureau understands the IT implications 

associated with expanded use of administrative records. At the same time, the 

Bureau has a lot of activity to follow through on in the time remaining, so it will be 

important to reduce the number of open options to ones the Bureau can manage 

well. 

The National Directory of New Hires (NDNH) is a national database of wage and 

employment information used for child support enforcement. Bureau officials believe 

that name and wage information from NDNH could help corroborate the tax data 

from IRS that the Bureau already has access to, improving the collective accuracy of 

the records. The President's 2016 budget submission included a request for 

legislation that would authorize the Department of Health and Human Services to 

share NDNH data with the Bureau for statistical purposes such as the decennial 

census. Kidlink is a database from the Social Security Administration (SSA) that 
112 


AKING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 78 here 22362.078

PageS 

links parent and child Social Security numbers for children born after 1998 in U.S. 

hospitals. It is valuable to the Bureau, because children, and babies less than 1 year 

old in particular, have been historically undercounted. Bureau officials have said that 

this database could help identify another 1 million people. According to the Bureau, 

SSA raised issues about Bureau access to these data. However, the Bureau 

maintains that it has access authority for this data. The Census Bureau Director says 

that he will work with departmental staff and the Office of Management and Budget 

to explore an administrative solution that would provide the Bureau with access. 

Bureau officials said that there is value in accessing these records for the Bureau's 

other statistical surveys as well. 

b. How do you suggest the Bureau go about making this decision? 

Bureau officials have said that they are examining ways to quantify the potential 

effect that their access to these additional sources could have on the 2020 Census. 

We believe this step is critical to the decision making process. The Bureau estimated 

that the value of acquiring NDNH and using it to corroborate data from IRS, in 

conjunction with other administrative and third-party data sources, would be 

approximately $157.5 million (using 2010 figures and dollars). This assumes no 

nonresponse follow-up visits for cases with administrative and/or third-party data, so 

that the actual savings would likely be less since the Bureau recently decided to 

make at least one follow-up visit before enumerating a household with administrative 

records. 

c. What are your suggested deadlines? 

The Bureau will need to consider when to end research pursuits that show less 

promise for substantially reducing the census' cost or meeting other 2020 goals so 

that it can focus resources on successfully refining and implementing activities that 

have greater potential. Knowing deadlines for when final go/no-go decisions need to 

be made about which records the Bureau will use, how it will use them, and for which 

purposes will help ensure necessary activities are completed on time. Deadlines 

regarding still uncertain purposes or those involving records the Bureau is still 

pursuing, such as NDNH and Kid link, as well as those from some states, will also 

help the Bureau prioritize which activities-or records-to continue pursuing or to 

abandon if time becomes a constraint. Bureau officials state that there is value in 

accessing these records for the Bureau's other statistical surveys as well, and that 

even if they are unable to obtain the additional records in time for the 2020 Census, 

they would continue pursuing them for these other purposes, as well as for use in 

future censuses. 
113 


AKING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 79 here 22362.079

Enclosure 

Post-Hearing Questions for the Record 

Submitted to Carol Cha 

From Chairman Will Hurd and Chairman Mark Meadows 

"Preparing for the 2020 Census: Will the Technology Be Ready?" 

The Bureau's Upcoming and Important Deadlines 

1. Given that less than 2 years remain before preparations for the end-to-end testing 

begins, what specific steps should the Bureau take to ensure CEDCAP systems are 

ready in time? 

The Bureau should take several key steps to better ensure the readiness of CEDCAP 

systems in time for planned end-to-end testing: 

Decide as soon as possible whether to build or buy each of the needed CEDCAP 

systems and establish risk mitigation plans to address the unique challenges associated 

with each of these approaches. For example, the build approach will require a significant 

amount of technical expertise and time to build, integrate, and test unproven system 

capabilities. The buy approach, as we have previously reported, can also require a 

significant amount of time (e.g., in preparation for the 2010 Decennial Census, the 

Bureau was issuing solicitations and awarding contracts in 2005}. 1 

Promptly address open GAO recommendations related to 2020 IT planning and 

information security. Consistent with our IT planning recommendations, identify the 

deferred decisions with the largest impact on the CEDCAP systems (e.g., IT 

infrastructure and scalability needs) and make those decisions as soon as possible. For 

those deferred decisions impacting the development and/or acquisitions of IT systems, 

but which the Bureau does not believe it can make soon, consider eliminating them from 

the scope of the 2020 Census design. 

Hire a permanent Chief Information Officer for the Census Bureau as soon as possible. 

Until this critical vacancy is filled, the Commerce Chief Information Officer should take a 

greater role in overseeing the CEDCAP program to help ensure systems will be ready in 

time. 

Take steps to ensure that the CEDCAP implementation schedule is driven by the 2020 

Census program. As I previously testified, the CEDCAP program is intended to deliver 

an enterprise-wide system-of-systems to be used for all of the Bureau's survey data 

collection and processing functions, including those used by the American Community 

Survey and Economic Census.2 While CEDCAP is releasing capabilities for these 

surveys, the 2020 Census must take priority in light of the immoveable deadline and 

expected reliance on these systems to achieve its projected $5.2 billion in savings. 

1

GAO, lnfonnation Technology: Agencies Need to Establish and Implement Incremental Development Policies, GA0-

14-361 (Washington, D.C.: May 1, 2014). 

2

GAO, 2020 Census: Key lnfonnation Technology Decisions Must Be Made Soon, GA0-16-205T (Washington, D.C.: 

Nov. 3. 2015). 

Page2 
114 


AKING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 80 here 22362.080

2. Based on GAO's experience with system testing, what would be the effect if the 

Bureau is unable to have the systems in place in time for end-to-end testing in a 

census-like environment? 

The purpose of Bureau's planned end-to-end test is to ensure that all the various operations 

and systems are integrated before the decennial census. If all systems are not in place in 

time for this critical test, there is greater risk that they will not operate as intended during the 

2020 Census. 

As we previously reported, the 2010 Census experienced significant operational issues 

largely because the end-to-end testing was not comprehensive. Although multiple GAO 

reports, testimonies, and recommendations urged the Bureau to conduct full end-to-end 

testing leading up to the 2010 Census, the Bureau removed several key operations from this 

test. One such system excluded from the test was the paper-based operational control 

system. During the 2010 census-taking operations, this system experienced outages, slow 

performance, and problems generating and maintaining timely reports. As a workaround, the 

Bureau had to severely limit the number of concurrent users on the system a 

Another example of a large-scale system roll-out that experienced significant issues due to 

incomplete testing is Healthcare.gov. Specifically, we reported that Healthcare.gov lacked 

complete integration and end-to-end testing of the system, and as a result the Department 

of Health and Human Services' Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services lacked a basis for 

knowing if all Healthcare.gov interconnected systems could operate correctly, pass data 

correctly to one another, and store data correctly prior to system launch.' This was a key 

contributor to the problems Heathcare.gov faced, including inadequate system capacity, 

numerous errors in software code, and limited system functionality. Consequently, 

consumers attempting to enroll in health plans were met with confusing error messages, 

slow load times for forms and pages, and, in some cases, website outages. 

For the 2020 Census, the Bureau's redesigned operations are expected to be more heavily 

dependent upon IT systems than ever before. Accordingly, comprehensive end-to-end 

testing that includes these new procedures and system interfaces will be critical to a costeffective and complete census. 

3. Is the Bureau's planned August 2017 milestone to begin preparations for the end-toend system testing a reasonable date? 

Yes, consistent with my remarks at the hearing, the planned August 2017 milestone date is 

reasonable and would likely provide the Bureau with sufficient time to correct defects 

identified during testing before the 2020 Census-which the Bureau currently plans to 

address from July 2018 to May 2019. 

However, it is important to note that this time frame for achieving end-to-end testing is only 

feasible if the Bureau rapidly moves away from researching and testing prototype systems, 

as I previously testified, and instead focuses on implementing and testing the production 

3

GAO, 2010 Census: Data Collection Operations Were Generally Completed as Planned, but Long-standing 

Challenges Suggest Need for Fundamental Reforms, GA0-11-193 (Washington, D.C.: Dec. 14, 2010), and 

Information Technology: Census Bureau Testing of 2010 Decennial Systems Can Be Strengthened, GA0-09-262 

(Washington, D.C.: Mar. 5, 2009). 

4

GAO, Healthcare.gov: CMS Has Taken Steps to Address Problems, but Needs to Further Implement Systems 

Development Best Practices, GA0-15-238 (Washington, D.C.: Mar. 4, 2015). 

Page 3 
115 


AKING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 81 here 22362.081

systems that will be used for 2020 operations. Specifically, while the Bureau has conducted 

several tests to date, these tests have been using prototype systems in order to define 

business requirements-and the Bureau is continuing to refine these prototype systems for 

the next major site test in the spring of 2016. However, given the limited time remaining, 

continuing to test and refine prototype systems rather than production systems will result in 

diminishing returns. The Bureau should take the steps described in my answer to question 1 

to ensure that the production systems are ready in time for end-to-end testing. 

4. What additional security and IT infrastructure measures should the Bureau take in its 

2016 and 2017 tests before the 2018 end-to-end test? 

As indicated in my prior response, in 2016 and 2017 the Bureau should focus on acquiring, 

implementing, securing, and testing production systems, rather than testing and refining 

prototype systems that will not be used in the 2020 Census. To do so, the Bureau must 

make the decisions about the projected demand that the IT infrastructure would need to 

meet and whether it will build or buy the needed production systems soon. Until these 

decisions have been made, the Bureau cannot effectively identify all appropriate security 

and IT infrastructure measures that it must take to support 2020 operations (and the testing 

leading up to these operations). 

5. In your statement, you explain some key IT decisions that must be made quickly. 

o How long have these decisions been deferred? 

The Bureau has deferred key IT decisions for between roughly 2 and 4 years. 

Specifically, the Bureau had originally planned to complete all research and testing 

activities and determine the preliminary design decisions for the 2020 Census by 

September 2014. Many decisions about the redesign were documented in last 

month's 2020 Census Operational Plan; however, others were deferred because 

selected research and testing activities are still ongoing. As detailed in my written 

testimony, the Bureau deferred many key IT-related decisions that will impact the 

development of the operational system to 2016 through 2018. 

o What are some repercussions in the deference? 

By making key IT-related design decisions too late, the Bureau may not be able to 

fully implement one or more of its planned redesign areas, such as optimizing selfresponse (via the Internet response option) and reengineering field operations (by 

automating and optimizing enumerator case assignment and routing and by using 

mobile devices for data collection). Since the planned systems are large and 

complex, the Bureau could simply run out of time to put them in place, thus 

diminishing the projected $5.2 billion in cost savings. 

o What are some foreseeable long-term effects? 

A significant long-term effect is the possibility of perpetuating the Bureau's cycle of 

building and/or acquiring unique, survey-specific systems with redundant capabilities 

for each survey it delivers. As reported by the Bureau, over $1 billion was spent to 

build and deploy systems that supported the 2010 Census, which were retired 

following that decennial. 5 To the Bureau's credit, its CEDCAP program was 

5

The Office of Management and Budget's IT Dashboard. 

Page 4 
116 


AKING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 82 here 22362.082

established to break that inefficient cycle by delivering an enterprise-wide system-ofsystems to be used for all of the Bureau's survey data collection and processing 

functions. However, if CEDCAP systems are not ready in time to support the 2020 

Census, the Decennial Census program may revert back to developing or acquiring 

separate systems to serve its needs. 

As a result of the Bureau's challenges in key IT internal controls and its looming 

deadline, we identified CEDCAP as an IT investment in need of attention in our 

February 2015 high-risk report. 6 We recently initiated a review of the CEDCAP 

program for your subcommittees, and expect to issue a report in the spring of 2016. 

o What is the first and foremost important decision that has to be made, and 

why? 

The first and most important decision the Bureau needs to make, which will enable it 

to begin IT implementation, is whether it will build or buy the IT solutions needed to 

support the 2020 Census redesign, such as the operational control system and 

Internet and mobile data collection systems, for the reasons outlined in my response 

to question 1. 

6. A number of key leadership positions at the Bureau remain vacant, including the 

positions of Chief Information Officer and Assistant Chief of Business Integration for 

the Bureau's CEDCAP initiative. How have these vacancies affected the Bureau and 

its planning for the 2020 Census? 

As of November 2015, one of the key IT leadership positions has been filled, according to 

Bureau officials (CEDCAP Assistant Chief of Business Integration); however, a new vacancy 

will be opening soon (CEDCAP Program Manager). According to Bureau officials, they are 

currently seeking a replacement, in addition to their other ongoing efforts to fill the remaining 

leadership vacancies. 

It will be important for these vacancies to be filled as soon as possible in order to improve 

the Bureau's ability to effectively deliver CEDCAP systems in time for 2020 operations. For 

example, with the newly filled Assistant Chief of Business Integration position, the Bureau 

will be better positioned to oversee the integration of schedule, risks, and budget across the 

12 CEDCAP projects. The remaining gaps, including the Chief Information Officer, must be 

closed to ensure that the CEDCAP program will be adequately governed and held 

accountable for cost, schedule, and performance plans. 

7. In addition, the Bureau's IT staff is "highly-matrixed." Has this made project 

accountability and decision-making more difficult? How has it affected costs? 

We have ongoing work for your subcommittees that will include examining the Bureau's use 

of IT staff in both the CEDCAP and 2020 Census programs. 

6

Every 2 years at the start of a new Congress, GAO calls attention to agencies and program areas that are high risk 

due to their vulnerabilities to fraud, waste, abuse, and mismanagement, or are most in need of transformation. As 

part of a new entry into the February 2015 update to our High-Risk Series focused on improving the management of 

IT acquisitions and operations, CEDCAP was identified as an IT investment-among others across the federal 

government-in need of the most attention. See GAO, High-Risk Series: An Update, GA0-15-290 (Washington, D.C.: 

Feb. 11, 2015). 

Page 5 
117 


AKING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 83 here 22362.083

8. How is the Bureau's current IT posture and implementation of security options? Do 

you have any recommendations for improvement? 

In January 2013, we reported that the Bureau had a number of weaknesses in information 

security controls intended to limit access to its systems and information, as well as those 

related to managing system configurations and unplanned events. We attributed these 

weaknesses to the fact that the Bureau had not fully implemented a comprehensive 

information security program, and made 115 recommendations aimed at addressing these 

deficiencies.7 As of October 29, 2015, the Bureau had addressed 66 of the 115 

recommendations, and of the remaining open recommendations, we had determined that 30 

required additional actions by the Bureau while the other 19 were still under evaluation. The 

Bureau's progress toward addressing our security recommendations is encouraging. 

However, more work remains to address the open recommendations. Additionally, we have 

ongoing work reviewing the CEDCAP program that will allow us to better understand the 

specific IT security issues related to the 2020 Census design and make associated 

recommendations where appropriate. 

9. The Bureau seeks to generate the largest possible self-response in the history of the 

decennial census in order to reduce the number of households requiring follow-up. 

o Is the Bureau on the right trajectory to be able to implement these plans? 

No. In February 2015, we reported that key challenges needed to be addressed to 

successfully enable Internet response for the 2020 Census-a critical component to 

generating the largest possible self-response. 8 Specifically, the Bureau had not yet 

determined how key IT research questions related to estimating the Internet selfresponse rate and determining the IT infrastructure needed to support the large 

volume of data processing and storage expected for the 2020 Census were to be 

answered. We recommended that the Bureau, among other things, develop 

methodologies and plans for answering these key questions in time to inform 

upcoming design decisions. The Bureau subsequently released 2020 Census design 

decisions in October 2015 that deferred answering these questions, as well as other 

Internet response-related decisions, such as whether the Bureau will provide a 

mobile application and what languages would be available, until 2016 through 2017. 

Also in our February report, we stated that high-level time frames had not been 

established for making decisions related to implementing cloud computing, which 

was intended to help the Bureau scale up its IT infrastructure for the 2020 Census, 

and we recommended that the Bureau develop these time frames. To the Bureau's 

credit, the 2020 Census Operational Plan established these high-level cloud testing 

and readiness milestones. However, these milestones include completing an 

alternatives assessment of the solutions architecture and acquiring cloud computing 

services for each of the Census tests frorn 2016 through 2018-which as previously 

mentioned leaves a narrow window for ensuring that all production systems are in 

place for end-to-end testing. 

7 GAO, Information Security: Actions Needed by Census Bureau to Address Weaknesses, GA0-13-63 (Washington, 

D.C.: Jan. 22, 2013). Another version of this report was issued for limited distribution. 

8

GAO, 2020 Census: Key Challenges Need to Be Addressed to Successfully Enable Internet Response, GA0-15-

225 (Washington, D.C.: Feb. 5, 2015). 

Page6 
118 


AKING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 84 here 22362.084

o Are the right deadlines in place for decision-making? 

No. We are concerned about the deferred timing of many of the remaining decisions 

and their impact on delivering IT solutions for 2020, including the Internet selfresponse option, for the reasons discussed in my prior responses. Accordingly, the 

Bureau should take swift action to address the open recommendations in our 

February report in order to more effectively carry out its redesign plans. 

Bureau's Use of Administrative Records and Additional Resources 

10. What are some key security issues with using administrative records, and what 

recommendations would you make in remedying that? 

We have previously reported that until the Bureau fully implements all of our security 

recommendations from our January 2013 report, 9 it will have limited assurance that its 

information and systems are being adequately protected against unauthorized access, use, 

disclosure, modification, disruption, or loss. 10 Specifically, as previously mentioned, we 

made 115 recommendations aimed at addressing IT security weaknesses-56 of which 

have been fully implemented as of October 2015. 

In addition, our previous reports, and those by federal inspectors general, describe 

persistent information security weaknesses that place federal agencies, including the 

Bureau, at risk of disruption, fraud, or inappropriate disclosure of sensitive information. In 

particular, in January 2014, we reported about the risk to individual privacy associated with 

data sharing across government agencies, including individuals' personally identifiable 

information, such as names and Social Security numbers, One important analytical 

technique used by agencies to enhance their ability to share data and evaluate program 

performance, among other things, is computer matching-a term commonly used to refer to 

the computerized comparison of information, generally including personally identifiable 

information, in two or more information systems. While computer matching programs have 

been successful in identifying fraud, waste, and abuse in federal benefit programs, we 

reported that if proper controls are not in place, they can also adversely affect the privacy 

and due process rights of individuals whose records are being matched. We have an 

ongoing review of the CEDCAP program that will allow us to better understand the specific 

IT security issues related to the 2020 Census design, including those related to the use of 

administrative records. Our tentative plan is to issue a report in spring 2016, potentially 

including recommendations if weaknesses are found. 

11. Did the Bureau's lack of addressing key IT issues affect the secure use of 

administrative records in its 2015 tests? 

We have not conducted the necessary work to answer this question. 

9

GA0-13-63. Another version of this report was issued for limited distribution. 

10GAO, 2020 Census: Additional Actions Would Help the Bureau Realize Potential Administrative Records Cost 

Savings, GA0-16-48 (Washington, D.C.: Oct 20, 2015). 

11GAO, Computer Matching Act, OMB and Selected Agencies Need to Ensure Consistent Implementation, GA0-14-

44 (Washington, DL: Jan. 13, 2014). 

Page 7 
119 

Æ 


AKING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 85 here 22362.085

12. In preparation for the 2016 and 2017 tests, does GAO recommend the Bureau to use 

administrative records differently than it did in its 2015 tests? If so, how? 

Please refer to the response of my colleague, Robert Goldenkoff, on this question. In 

addition, from an IT perspective, the Bureau should consider the findings contained in our 

January 2014 report cited in my response to question 10 to help inform test preparations. 

13. The Bureau seeks to use additional sources it currently does not have access to, 

such as NDNH and Kidlink. 

Page 8 

o Do you recommend the Bureau uses them? Why or why not? 

Please refer to the response of my colleague, Robert Goldenkoff, on this question. 

Additionally, from an IT perspective, in light of the scope and complexity of the 

planned 2020 IT systems to be implemented in a narrowing window of time available, 

the Bureau should consult with the Commerce Chief Information Officer to fully 

understand the IT implications associated with acquiring these additional databases 

(e.g., information security measures and adapting the 2020 IT architecture and 

supporting systems to integrate the use of these additional data sources), and then 

make an informed decision whether to continue or end pursuit of these records. 

o What potential security issues will this raise? 

Please refer to my responses to questions 8 and 10.