United States Government Accountability Office

GAO Report to Congressional Addressees

2010 CENSUS 

Census Bureau Should 

Refine Recruiting and 

Hiring Efforts and 

Enhance Training of 

Temporary Field Staff 

April 2007 

 

GAO-07-361 
What GAO Found

United States Government Accountability Office

Why GAO Did This Study

Highlights

Accountability Integrity Reliability

April 2007

2010 CENSUS

Census Bureau Should Refine Recruiting 

and Hiring Efforts and Enhance Training 

of Temporary Field Staff 

Highlights of GAO-07-361, a report to 

congressional addresses 

The success of the 2010 Census 

depends, in part, upon the U.S.

Census Bureau’s (Bureau) ability to 

recruit, hire, and train over half a 

million temporary workers at peak. 

Under the Comptroller General’s 

authority, GAO reviewed the extent 

that the Bureau’s (1) recruiting and 

hiring processes for these staff are 

consistent with selected human

capital principles and (2) training

delivery and content take into 

account known challenges. To

answer these questions, GAO 

analyzed relevant reports and past

recommendations to select 

principles for evaluating these 

activities, reviewed related Bureau 

documents, observed the 2006 

Census Test in South Dakota and 

Texas, and interviewed Bureau

officials. 

What GAO Recommends

GAO is recommending to the 

Secretary of Commerce that the 

Bureau refine its recruiting and

hiring efforts and enhance training

for field staff in the 2010 Census. 

These recommendations include 

using collected information to 

better target recruiting and hiring,

collecting performance data on 

workers, and evaluating alternate 

approaches to delivering training. 

In commenting on a draft of this 

report, the Deputy Secretary of

Commerce identified actions the 

Bureau would take on some of the 

recommendations but questioned

the need to act on others. These

stated actions partially respond to

our recommendations. 

For the 2010 Census, the Bureau plans to recruit 3.8 million applicants and 

hire nearly 600,000 temporary field staff from that applicant pool for two key 

operations: address canvassing, where staff verify the location of all housing 

units; and nonresponse follow-up, where they visit households that do not 

return census forms to collect data in person. Meeting these goals will be

difficult because, since Census 2000, the Bureau is facing increased 

challenges, including the automation of its field data collection and longstanding demographic shifts, whereby the population is increasingly diverse 

and hard to locate. For the 2010 Census, the Bureau plans to use a recruiting 

and hiring approach like the one it used in 2000, which Bureau officials 

considered a success. That approach is designed to ensure a sufficient pool 

of qualified applicants from which to hire, but the Bureau could recruit and 

hire more efficiently. 

2010 Census Recruiting Timeline

Source: GAO analysis of U.S. Census Bureau data. 

Opportunities exist for the Bureau to improve and refine recruiting and 

hiring processes for the 2010 Census. It could better target its recruiting and 

hiring by analyzing the characteristics, such as education and work status, of 

employees more likely to be successful at census work and less likely to 

leave. This would allow it to seek workers with the skills, interests, and 

likelihood for success. Also, the Bureau does not collect performance data 

needed to rehire former workers, to whom it may give hiring priority. 

Officials said they try to exclude those terminated for cause. Conduct 

problems, such as selling drugs or striking another worker or unsatisfactory 

performance, can result in such terminations. 

The Bureau’s training approach for temporary field staff, consisting 

primarily of verbatim lectures, is largely unchanged from previous 

decennials. The Bureau is providing some computer-based training on using 

the handheld computers in key operations. However, despite findings that 

we and others have made suggesting that the Bureau consider alternatives to 

its verbatim approach, it has not done so. Further, although the Bureau has 

found that its field staff face an increasingly reluctant population and other 

location-specific challenges, it has not substantially changed the content of 

training. 

www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO-07-361.

To view the full product, including the scope 

and methodology, click on the link above. 

For more information, contact Mathew J. 

Scire at (202) 512-6806 or sciremj@gao.gov. 
Contents 

Letter 1

Results in Brief 4 

Background 6

The Bureau Should Revise the Recruiting and Hiring of Its 

Temporary Field Staff 11 

The Bureau Has Not Changed Training Delivery or Content for 

Temporary Field Staff to Fully Address Known Challenges 23 

Conclusions 32

Recommendations for Executive Action 33 

Agency Comments and Our Evaluation 34 

Appendix I Comments from the Department of Commerce 39 

GAO Comments 55 

Appendix II GAO Contact and Staff Acknowledgments 59 

 

Related GAO Products 60 

Table 

Table 1: Results of OPM’s 1997 Evaluation of Competencies 

Needed for Different Field Staff 18 

Figures 

Figure 1: The Bureau’s Planned Temporary Field Infrastructure for 

the 2010 Census, Numbers at Peak 9 

Figure 2: The Bureau’s Recruiting and Hiring Timeline for 

Temporary Field Staff during the 2010 Census 10 

Figure 3: Visual Created by Harris for Use in Training 26 

Page i GAO-07-361 2010 Census
Abbreviations 

OIG Department of Commerce Office of Inspector General 

OPM Office of Personnel Management 

This is a work of the U.S. government and is not subject to copyright protection in the 

United States. It may be reproduced and distributed in its entirety without further 

permission from GAO. However, because this work may contain copyrighted images or 

other material, permission from the copyright holder may be necessary if you wish to 

reproduce this material separately. 

Page ii GAO-07-361 2010 Census
United States Government Accountability Office

Washington, DC 20548 

April 27, 2007

The Honorable Thomas R. Carper 

Chairman 

Subcommittee on Federal Financial Management, Government 

 Information, Federal Services, and International Security 

Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs 

United States Senate 

The Honorable Thomas R. Carper 

Chairman 

Subcommittee on Federal Financial Management, Government 

 Information, Federal Services, and International Security 

Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs 

United States Senate 

The Honorable Henry A. Waxman 

Chairman 

The Honorable Tom Davis 

Ranking Member 

Committee on Oversight and Government Reform 

House of Representatives 

The Honorable Henry A. Waxman 

Chairman 

The Honorable Tom Davis 

Ranking Member 

Committee on Oversight and Government Reform 

House of Representatives 

The Honorable Wm. Lacy Clay 

Chairman 

The Honorable Michael Turner 

Ranking Member 

Subcommittee on Information Policy, Census, and National Archives 

Committee on Oversight and Government Reform 

House of Representatives 

The Honorable Wm. Lacy Clay 

Chairman 

The Honorable Michael Turner 

Ranking Member 

Subcommittee on Information Policy, Census, and National Archives 

Committee on Oversight and Government Reform 

House of Representatives 

The success of the U.S. Census Bureau’s (Bureau) constitutionally 

mandated task of counting the nation’s population every 10 years is 

contingent in part upon its ability to recruit, hire, and train a peak 

workforce of more than 500,000 temporary field staff needed to collect 

data through various operations. Of the $11.3 billion that the Bureau 

expects to spend for the 2010 Census, it estimates that over $2 billion will

be used to employ temporary field staff for its major field operation—

nonresponse follow-up—where enumerators visit households that did not 

return the mailed census forms to collect that data in person. It also plans 

to spend over $350 million to employ staff for another large field 

operation, address canvassing, where field workers verify the addresses of 

all housing units. These field staff contribute to the Bureau’s efforts to 

produce data to be used to reapportion the seats of the U.S. House of 

Representatives; realign the boundaries of the legislative districts of each

state; allocate hundreds of billions of dollars in federal financial 

assistance; and provide a social, demographic, and economic profile of the 

nation’s people to guide policy decisions at each level of government. 

The success of the U.S. Census Bureau’s (Bureau) constitutionally 

mandated task of counting the nation’s population every 10 years is 

contingent in part upon its ability to recruit, hire, and train a peak 

workforce of more than 500,000 temporary field staff needed to collect 

data through various operations. Of the $11.3 billion that the Bureau 

expects to spend for the 2010 Census, it estimates that over $2 billion will

be used to employ temporary field staff for its major field operation—

nonresponse follow-up—where enumerators visit households that did not 

return the mailed census forms to collect that data in person. It also plans 

to spend over $350 million to employ staff for another large field 

operation, address canvassing, where field workers verify the addresses of 

all housing units. These field staff contribute to the Bureau’s efforts to 

produce data to be used to reapportion the seats of the U.S. House of 

Representatives; realign the boundaries of the legislative districts of each

state; allocate hundreds of billions of dollars in federal financial 

assistance; and provide a social, demographic, and economic profile of the 

nation’s people to guide policy decisions at each level of government. 

Page 1 GAO-07-361 2010 Census
Despite a historically tight national labor market during Census 2000, the 

Bureau met its recruiting goals to hire field staff it could train for the 

decennial. However, the Bureau has the same daunting task of meeting its 

recruiting, hiring, and training goals for the 2010 Census, while faced with 

significant challenges. These challenges include demographic shifts 

whereby the population is increasingly diverse and difficult to locate, as 

well as newer challenges, such as the Bureau’s reengineered approach, 

which incorporates the use of handheld computers for data collection in

the field. 

Because the effectiveness of field workers is critical to the success of the 

census, we reviewed, under the Comptroller General’s statutory authority 

to initiate evaluations, the Bureau’s recruiting, hiring, and training 

processes for temporary field staff during the 2010 Census. As agreed with

your offices, we are providing this report to you because it contains 

information that will be useful for your oversight responsibilities. 

Specifically, we reviewed the extent to which the Bureau’s (1) recruiting 

and hiring processes for temporary field staff are consistent with selected 

human capital principles and (2) training delivery methods and training 

content take into account known challenges as observed and recorded in 

previous decennial operations. 

To determine whether the Bureau’s recruiting and hiring practices in the 

field are consistent with selected human capital principles, we reviewed 

reports on leading human capital practices from a variety of sources, 

including our strategic human capital model,1

 as well as documents from 

external sources, such as the Office of Personnel Management (OPM). We 

then identified and selected principles to use as criteria that we 

determined to be relevant and applicable to the Bureau’s efforts to recruit 

and hire a temporary field staff based on our reports and that of the 

Department of Commerce (Commerce) Office of Inspector General (OIG), 

which made recommendations based on experiences during Census 2000 

and tests in preparation for the 2010 Census. These principles include 

developing human capital strategies that can be implemented with the 

resources reasonably expected to be available;2

 evaluating and identifying

 1

GAO, A Model of Strategic Human Capital Management, GAO-02-373SP (Washington,

D.C.: Mar. 15, 2002). 

2

GAO, Human Capital: Key Principles for Effective Strategic Workforce Planning, 

GAO-04-39 (Washington, D.C.: Dec. 11, 2003).

Page 2 GAO-07-361 2010 Census
critical skills needed by an agency facing a changing environment;3

 using 

employee insights to develop responsive human capital practices;4

 and 

matching the right people to the right jobs in such a way that would allow 

agencies to maximize economy, efficiency, and effectiveness in the face of

finite resources.5 We also reviewed Bureau documents on recruiting and 

hiring, including scripts used by recruiting staff, selection tests for 

temporary workers, and recruiting reports developed for local offices. We 

interviewed recruiting staff and other temporary field staff about their 

experiences with the recruiting and hiring process during the Bureau’s 

2006 Census Test, conducted at the Cheyenne River Reservation in South 

Dakota and in parts of Austin, Texas, in Travis County. We also obtained 

and analyzed personnel data on recruiting and hiring from the 2006 Census 

Test. Finally, we spoke with Bureau officials regarding our observations in 

the field and about plans for conducting recruiting and hiring during the 

upcoming 2008 Dress Rehearsal and the 2010 Census. 

To determine whether training for temporary field staff takes into account 

known challenges, we reviewed prior recommendations on training that 

we, the Bureau, OIG, and others made. We also reviewed our guide for 

strategic training and other human capital reports for principles relevant 

to the Bureau’s training efforts.6

 For example, one key principle is that 

agencies should consider refinements to human capital initiatives, 

including training, in light of changing organizational needs.7

 We attended 

training sessions at both 2006 test sites and spoke with field staff about 

their impressions of training. We also accompanied field staff as they 

conducted their work to observe whether they were following the 

Bureau’s prescribed protocol. We reviewed Bureau training manuals, 

scripts for instructors, and workbooks used by field staff during Census 

2000 and the 2006 test. We also spoke with Bureau officials about our 

observations of training and operations in South Dakota and Texas. We 

obtained information about plans for the 2008 Dress Rehearsal and the 

 3

GAO-04-39. 

4

GAO, Human Capital: A Self-Assessment Checklist for Agency Leaders, 

GAO/OCG-00-14G (Washington, D.C.: Sept. 2000). 

5

GAO/OCG-00-14G. 

6

See, for example, GAO, Human Capital: A Guide for Assessing Strategic Training and 

Development Efforts in the Federal Government, GAO-04-546G (Washington, D.C.: Mar.

2004) and GAO-02-373SP. 

7

GAO-02-373SP. 

Page 3 GAO-07-361 2010 Census
2010 Census as well as actions taken as a result of previous 

recommendations. Finally, we interviewed project staff at the Harris 

Corporation (Harris)—contracted by the Bureau to develop handheld 

computers for field operations and training materials for those handheld 

computers. We obtained and reviewed Harris’s planning documents and 

samples of materials being developed for the 2008 Dress Rehearsal and 

2010 Census. 

We conducted our work from March 2006 through April 2007 in 

accordance with generally accepted government auditing standards. 

This report contains recommendations to the Secretary of Commerce to 

improve the Bureau’s recruiting, hiring, and training of its temporary field 

staff. This report is also the latest in a series of evaluations that we have

issued on the Bureau’s preparations for the 2010 Census. See the Related 

GAO Products section at the end of this report for a list of selected reports 

we have issued to date. 

The Bureau has taken some steps that are consistent with selected human 

capital principles, such as identifying the critical skills its field staff need 

to properly use handheld computers in the reengineered census and using 

employee insights to improve its recruiting and hiring processes. Overall, 

the Bureau plans to use an approach similar to the one it took during 

Census 2000 to recruit and hire its temporary workers for the 2010 Census. 

During Census 2000, that approach allowed the Bureau to recruit 3.7 

million qualified applicants. The recruiting expenditures for fiscal years 

1998 through 2000 were estimated to be $250 million, or about $66 per 

applicant. However, opportunities exist for the Bureau to improve and 

refine its recruiting and hiring of temporary workers for the 2010 Census. 

Specifically, the Bureau could better target its recruiting and hiring 

through an analysis to identify the characteristics of employees who are 

successful at census work and less likely to leave census work before an 

operation ends. This evaluation would allow the Bureau to seek workers 

with the skills, interests, and likelihood to be successful at census work. 

Employing such field staff could reduce or better control operational costs 

as well as recruiting and hiring expenditures. Further, the Bureau has not 

differentiated its hiring tools—written tests and phone interviews 

administered to each qualified applicant—to distinguish skills needed by 

people serving as crew leaders from those skills needed by other staff. 

Moreover, while Bureau policies recommend that former employees are 

rehired first before selecting individuals without prior census experience,

the Bureau does not fully consider the past performance of these 

Results in Brief 

Page 4 GAO-07-361 2010 Census
individuals. Rehiring, in this case, applies to field staff who left their 

positions—due to the end of an operation or for other reasons—but then 

were rehired for a subsequent operation in the same decennial. The 

Bureau does not use certain information that could help assess these 

applicants’ competence nor does it prepare employee performance 

evaluations that could be used later when considering rehiring former 

employees. Bureau officials explained that, in their view, recruiting and 

hiring was effective in Census 2000 and will be effective again during the 

2010 Census. However, refinements to the Bureau’s approach for the 2010

Census could help it more efficiently recruit and hire. 

The Bureau has taken some actions to examine or enhance the delivery 

and content of the training it provides to temporary field staff to address 

challenges previously identified by the Bureau, us, and the OIG. The 

Bureau is providing some computer-based training on using the handheld

computers for the nonresponse follow-up and address canvassing 

operations and will include visual aids to enhance training on using the 

handheld computers. Nonetheless, the Bureau’s standardized approach to 

delivering training, including reading training scripts word-for-word over 

the course of several days, has remained largely unchanged. The Bureau 

has not evaluated alternate training delivery approaches, such as providing 

video segments, as has been recommended by us and the OIG. While, the 

Bureau will be including visuals created by a contractor that show how to

use the handheld devices, it has not otherwise incorporated visual aids, 

such as posters or pictures, to enhance training on census work, as the 

Bureau and the OIG have recommended. Finally, the Bureau has not 

provided adequate training on the challenges field workers are likely to 

face, such as dealing with reluctant respondents and location-specific 

issues. The Bureau already collects data it can use to assess ways in which 

reluctance to respond to the census is increasing and areas where 

additional content may be necessary given location-specific conditions, 

but the Bureau has not used these data to enhance its training. Bureau 

officials stated that their training is effective and that their approach is 

necessary to ensure the consistency of training nationwide. However, the 

Bureau has not evaluated the effectiveness of its approach to training in 

comparison with alternate approaches, nor does its emphasis on 

consistency prepare staff for situations they are likely to face in the 

geographic areas in which they are working. 

We are making seven recommendations to the Secretary of Commerce to 

improve the Bureau’s recruiting, hiring, and training processes. These 

recommendations are (1) refining its recruiting and hiring approach by 

collecting and analyzing information on the factors that explain worker 

Page 5 GAO-07-361 2010 Census
success, such as worker characteristics and performance evaluations; 

(2) determining the best way to gather and use field staff performance data

that could be collected during the address canvassing operations of the 

2010 Census and that could be used to inform hiring decisions for 

subsequent operations; (3) modifying recruiting and hiring tools to better 

identify applicants with the skills needed to serve as crew leaders; (4) 

evaluating the effectiveness of alternate approaches to training, such as 

the use of video segments; (5) incorporating visual aids illustrating 

decennial concepts; (6) modifying or revising training content to enhance 

material on dealing with reluctant respondents; and (7) preparing training 

modules that reflect prototypical location-specific challenges. 

The Deputy Secretary of Commerce forwarded written comments from the 

Bureau on a draft of this report dated April 4, 2007. The comments are 

reprinted in their entirety in appendix I. Commerce generally either 

pointed to actions that it is taking that are consistent with the 

recommendations, or questioned the need for taking action. It agreed fully

with one of our recommendations. We believe that additional refinements 

to its overall recruiting and hiring approach, such as collecting information 

to better target its efforts, could help the Bureau better identify the 

workers it needs for the 2010 Census. Further, we continue to believe that

enhancements to the delivery and content of the Bureau’s training, such as

considering alternate approaches to delivering training—as has been 

previously recommended by us, OIG, and the Bureau itself—would better 

prepare staff to collect data in the field. We reflected Commerce’s 

comments in the report and, where appropriate, provided additional 

context. 

For the 2010 Census, the Bureau has reengineered its approach to 

collecting census data by developing three interlinked strategies, which it 

refers to as a “three-legged stool.” 

Background 

• The American Community Survey will collect long-form from 

250,000 housing units each month and will provide such data on an 

annual basis, eliminating the need for a long-form as part of the 

decennial census. 

• The Map and Address File Modernization will update Bureau files 

with geographic coordinates to provide more accurate location data on 

the nation’s households. 

• The 2010 Census will survey the nation for the upcoming decennial 

using a short-form-only census, enhanced by handheld computers and 

Page 6 GAO-07-361 2010 Census
electronic maps for key operations to promote increased 

responsiveness and reduce costs. 

The Bureau estimates the 2010 Census to cost $11.3 billion, an increase 

from the $6.5 billion it took to carry out Census 2000. The Bureau believes 

that its reengineering will help contain the cost of the 2010 Census. It 

expects to increase the response rate, thereby reducing the cost of 

nonresponse follow-up, through a short-form-only census. The use of 

handheld computers for nonresponse follow-up and address canvassing is

also expected to yield cost savings. In the past, field staff collected data on

housing units and nonresponding households using cumbersome penciland-paper processes. According to the Bureau, handheld computers will 

allow its field workers to more quickly collect information for each 

housing unit and reduce costly data collection activities. The handheld 

computers will also eliminate the need to visit households that return their 

questionnaires late because the cases can be deleted from the workload on 

a real-time basis. The Bureau has a testing and development program to 

hone these new methods for the 2010 Census. It included field tests in 

Georgia and New York during its 2004 Census Test, as well as field tests in

Texas and South Dakota for the 2006 Census Test. The Bureau plans to 

hold the 2008 Dress Rehearsal in California and North Carolina, which is 

to be a demonstration of the operations and systems planned for the 2010 

Census. The Bureau has already started to recruit and hire in the two dress 

rehearsal locations for the address canvassing operation, which is 

scheduled to begin in May 2007. 

Although the census is a national undertaking, it is locally implemented by

a temporary workforce hired to complete work. To gather data from all 

households, the Bureau opens temporary offices across the country and 

employs several different data collection methods. Local census offices 

are opened for approximately 2 years and all field staff employed in these 

offices are considered temporary, with jobs as long as the entire 2-year 

period or as short as a few weeks. Some field staff work on several 

different operations during the decennial. For example, one could work on 

address canvassing, an early operation, and be rehired again to work on 

the nonresponse follow-up operation later on in the decennial. 

Operations for the 2010 Census will begin in April 2009, with address 

canvassing, a field operation for verifying and correcting addresses for all 

households and street features contained on decennial maps. Almost a 

year later, the Bureau will mail census questionnaires to the majority of 

the population in anticipation of Census Day, April 1, 2010. Those 

households that do not respond will be contacted by field staff through the 

Page 7 GAO-07-361 2010 Census
nonresponse follow-up operation to determine the number of people living 

in the house as of Census Day, among other information. In addition to 

address canvassing and nonresponse follow-up, the Bureau conducts other 

operations, for example, to gather data from residents of group quarters, 

such as prisons or military bases. The Bureau also employs different 

enumeration methods in certain settings, such as remote Alaska 

enumeration, when people living in inaccessible communities must be 

contacted in January 2010 in anticipation of the spring thaw, which makes 

travel difficult, or update/enumerate, a data collection method involving 

personal interviews and used in communities where many housing units 

may not have typical house number-street name mailing addresses. The 

Bureau has a quality control (or reinterview) process that involves 

rechecking a sample of completed work performed by an individual and 

rectifying that work if significant problems are detected. Approximately 5 

to 10 percent of the work is to be checked during the quality control 

process. 

Some positions in local census offices include 

• field operations supervisors who coordinate, supervise, and oversee 

the work performed by crew leaders, crew leader assistants, and 

enumerators, as well as train assigned crew leaders; 

• crew leaders who supervise and train a crew of enumerators or listers 

and meet daily with the crew to distribute work assignments, monitor 

progress, and review finished work for accuracy and completeness; 

• crew leader assistants who help crew leaders in guiding and 

directing the work of a group of enumerators or listers engaged in field 

data collection; and 

• enumerators or listers who perform field activities in and around 

their respective neighborhoods, including verifying addresses, 

canvassing and listing addresses, and interviewing. 

Conducting the census is a tremendous task given the hundreds of 

thousands of field staff8

 the Bureau hires and trains in just a few weeks. 

(See fig. 1.) Further, field workers often have little or no prior census 

experience, and are expected, after just a few days of training, to do their 

jobs with minimal supervision, under sometimes difficult and dangerous 

conditions. Moreover, crew leaders are usually recent hires themselves, 

with little, if any, experience as instructors or with decennial issues. 

 8

Throughout this report, we use the term field staff to refer to crew leaders, crew leader

assistants, enumerators, and listers—the frontline staff collecting data for the Bureau. 

Page 8 GAO-07-361 2010 Census
Overall, few, if any, organizations face the hiring and training challenges 

that confront the Bureau with each decennial population count. 

Figure 1: The Bureau’s Planned Temporary Field Infrastructure for the 2010 Census, 

Numbers at Peak 

12 regional census

centers

455 local census offices

3,300 field operations supervisors

43,000 crew leaders and assistants

425,000 enumerators

Source: U.S. Census Bureau.

The census is the nation’s largest peace-time mobilization. For the 2010 

Census, the Bureau plans to recruit and test 3.8 million applicants and hire

nearly 600,000 field staff for address canvassing and nonresponse followup. During Census 2000, the Bureau also hired about half a million 

enumerators at peak, which temporarily made it one of the nation’s largest 

employers, surpassed by only a handful of big organizations, such as WalMart and the U.S. Postal Service. For the 2010 Census, the Bureau expects 

to hire almost 75,000 temporary workers during address canvassing to 

verify and identify the addresses of an estimated 130 million living quarters 

over the course of about 6 weeks in 2009. During nonresponse follow-up, 

the Bureau expects to hire almost 525,000 temporary workers to visit an 

estimated 39 million housing units over the course of 12 weeks in 2010. 

(See fig. 2.) 

Page 9 GAO-07-361 2010 Census
Figure 2: The Bureau’s Recruiting and Hiring Timeline for Temporary Field Staff during the 2010 Census

Oct.

2010

July

2010

April

2010

Jan.

2010

Oct.

2009

July

2009

April

2009

Jan.

2009

Oct.

2008

July

2008

April

2008

Jan.

2008

Source: GAO analysis of U.S. Census Bureau data.

1.3 million

applicants

74,344 workers

for address

canvassing

Crew leaders

and assistants:

8,276

Field staff:

66,068

 524,989 workers

for nonresponse

follow-up

Crew leaders

and assistants:

58,342

Field staff:

466,647

Regional census centers open

Local census offices open

2.5 million

applicants

Recruit Hire Recruit Hire

Each regional census center creates a recruiting plan based on a template 

developed by headquarters, which allows for variations to reflect 

characteristics of different regions. The Bureau has developed a Planning

Database that local and regional offices use to prepare recruiting plans. 

The Bureau expects those offices to use the database to identify areas 

where field staff are more difficult to recruit and other areas where certain 

skills—such as foreign language abilities—are needed. The Bureau will 

update the Planning Database for every census tract in the United States 

for the 2010 Census, using many variables from Census 2000. These 

variables include Census 2000 mail return rates; household size; median 

household income; percentage of persons living in poverty; number of 

single person households; highest level of education achieved; percentage 

of linguistically isolated households (i.e., where no person 14 or over 

speaks English at least “very well”); and percentage of persons on public 

assistance. 

The Bureau has employed essentially the same approach to training since

the 1970 Census. To conduct training, the Bureau solicits free or low-cost 

training spaces from local organizations, such as churches or libraries. 

Training classes typically include 15 to 20 students. Crew leaders usually 

Page 10 GAO-07-361 2010 Census
train their crews, with the help of at least one crew leader assistant, using 

a verbatim training approach, whereby crew leaders read training scripts 

word-for-word over the course of several days. Similarly, the crew leaders 

were themselves trained by their supervisors in a “train-the-trainers” 

approach. The length of training varies by operation; for nonresponse 

follow-up, training took almost 42 hours over the course of 6 days during 

the 2006 test. 

For the 2010 Census, the Bureau plans to use a similar approach to recruit 

and hire workers as it used during Census 2000. Some broad approaches 

the Bureau will take in the 2010 Census that it successfully implemented 

during Census 2000 include 

• exercising the flexibility to raise pay rates at local census offices that 

were encountering recruiting difficulties; 

The Bureau Should 

Revise the Recruiting 

and Hiring of Its

Temporary Field Staff 

• recruiting five times more applicants than the needed number of field 

workers to ensure a considerable depth in the applicant pool from 

which to hire; 

• “frontloading,” or hiring twice the number of people needed to do the 

work in anticipation of high levels of turnover; 

• launching a recruitment advertising campaign, which cost over 

$2.3 million for Census 2000; and 

• working with federal, state, local, and tribal officials who manage 

existing government programs to obtain waivers that will expand the 

pool of applicants by making census jobs available and attractive to 

certain populations, such as allowing individuals to simultaneously 

work two federal jobs and obtaining exemptions from state 

governments so that individuals receiving Temporary Assistance for 

Needy Families, Medicaid, and selected other types of public assistance 

would not have their benefits reduced when earning census income. 

We have noted that these strategies, in part, made the Bureau a more 

attractive employer to prospective candidates and helped to ensure a 

steady stream of applicants during Census 2000, when the Bureau was able

to recruit 3.7 million qualified applicants.9

 In particular, the flexibility to 

raise pay rates at those local census offices that were encountering 

recruitment difficulties helped local offices obtain the staff they needed. 

Bureau officials found that being able to set competitive, locally-based pay 

 9

GAO, 2000 Census: Best Practices and Lessons Learned for More Cost-Effective 

Nonresponse Follow-up, GAO-02-196 (Washington, D.C.: Feb. 11, 2002).

Page 11 GAO-07-361 2010 Census
was the Bureau’s most important strategy during Census 2000.10 We have 

identified the recruitment advertising campaign as another key ingredient

of Census 2000’s recruitment efforts as it emphasizes the ability to earn 

good pay, work flexible hours, learn new skills, and do something 

important for one’s community.11 This message was conveyed in a variety

of languages through traditional outlets, such as newspapers, as well as 

more novel media, including Internet banners and messages on utility and 

credit card bills. The Bureau’s recruiting and hiring approach allowed it to 

surpass its recruitment goals in Census 2000 and officials believe it could 

be successfully used in the 2010 Census as well. 

The Bureau Plans 

Improvements to Its 

Recruiting and Hiring 

The Bureau is making changes to how it will recruit and hire its temporary 

workforce during the 2010 Census. While still employing frontloading, 

Bureau officials said they plan to exercise caution in this approach, in part 

because census funding could result in more limitations in 2010 than in

2000. According to Bureau documents, local offices may not necessarily 

invite twice the number of needed staff to training as they did in 2000; 

however, these final numbers have not yet been determined. According to

Commerce in its response to a draft of this report, the Bureau is also 

preliminarily examining whether varying recruitment goals by area is a 

viable alternative to its current fixed goal. Using recruiting and hiring data

from its 2004 and 2006 Census Tests, the Bureau plans to determine 

whether a variable recruiting goal for each local census office 

participating in the tests would have produced enough qualified applicants

to complete the census workload. 

The Bureau has also conducted and incorporated information collected 

from employee debriefings that could improve its recruiting and hiring 

processes. During the 2006 Census Test, the Bureau collected information 

from employees to evaluate its operations, including the effectiveness of 

its recruiting and hiring processes, by (1) debriefing field staff at the end of 

each operation to gain a broader understanding of their thoughts on 

operations and procedures and (2) conducting exit interviews to 

understand why certain enumerators, crew leaders, and crew leader 

assistants left before field tests were completed. Bureau officials said that

feedback from employees could be helpful in evaluating and refining its 

 10Janet Cummings, Census 2000: Staffing the Nation’s Largest Data Collection Workforce, 

(Washington, D.C.: U.S. Census Bureau, Aug. 2001). 

11 GAO-02-196. 

Page 12 GAO-07-361 2010 Census
recruiting and hiring processes and intend to incorporate some of that 

information for the 2008 Dress Rehearsal. For example, the Bureau intends

to include in its recruiting manuals the strategy of better utilizing the 

recruiting staff by establishing and assigning specific groups—like faithbased groups and community-based organizations—for recruiters to focus 

on, as was suggested to the Bureau during a debriefing. Bureau officials 

said that they plan to conduct these debriefings and exit interviews during 

the 2008 Dress Rehearsal as well. Specifically, information from exit 

interviews will be used to gain additional insight into why employees leave 

before an operation was completed. Finally, officials also told us that a 

small amount of money was allocated to improve their recruiting efforts, 

for example, through conducting focus groups on diversity. 

Opportunities Exist for the 

Bureau to Refine Its 

Recruiting and Hiring 

Efforts 

Opportunities exist for the Bureau to hone its recruiting efforts to identify 

individuals who would be more likely to be effective at census work and 

willing to continue working throughout an operation. Presently, the 

Bureau casts a wide net to recruit its temporary workforce to ensure it has 

a large enough applicant pool from which to hire. The Bureau selects field 

staff on the basis of how well they score on the standardized hiring test 

each applicant takes. The written test consists of basic cognitive skills 

required for the job, such as clerical skills, number skills, and 

organizational skills. Additional points are provided to applicants with 

veteran’s preference. Applicants who score 70 or above on the written 

test12 and pass a Federal Bureau of Investigation background check are 

interviewed on the phone by office clerks. This interview assesses the 

extent to which the applicant can speak and understand English. 

Additionally, the applicant’s availability, access to transportation and 

phone lines, willingness to travel from house to house to gather data, and 

other logistical questions of this nature are asked during the interview. 

Other than applicants achieving a passing score on its written test, 

however, the Bureau has not targeted its recruitment toward approaches

that are likely to hire successful employees willing to complete a census 

operation. 

We understand that when recruiting and hiring for so many positions, it is 

a challenge to assess an applicant’s potential success or willingness to 

work. However, Bureau officials have also stated that refining this 

 12Local census offices experiencing difficulties in recruiting applicants are able to lower the

cutoff score on the written test. 

Page 13 GAO-07-361 2010 Census
approach could allow them to recruit more efficiently. To do so, the 

Bureau could evaluate the factors associated with and predictive of 

employee acceptance of census work, performance on the job, and 

commitment to completing census operations. The Bureau possesses 

much of the information needed to identify the factors that would 

characterize an employee who would be successful at census work and 

willing to work throughout an operation. 

• Through the employment application form, the Bureau collects 

information about how field staff learn about census work to 

understand the most effective ways to reach out to potential 

applicants. 

• Also through the application form, the Bureau collects information on 

the characteristics of every temporary employee, such as education 

level and language skills. 

• As previously described, the Bureau’s Planning Database will be 

updated for every census tract in the nation for the 2010 Census, using 

such variables as Census 2000 mail return rates, household size, and 

percentage of linguistically isolated households, among others. The 

database might allow the Bureau to adjust its analysis of employee 

productivity across locations by holding constant factors that affect 

productivity in different areas. 

• Through its personnel database, the Bureau knows whether employees 

completed the operation they were hired for, which could provide 

information about commitment of field staff and willingness to work in 

the census. 

The Bureau could collect or extract other data to evaluate factors to help

determine the likely success of an applicant. 

• The Bureau does not have data about the attrition rates of its field staff, 

which could provide information on what type of workers are more 

likely to commit to census employment and thereby would stay long 

enough to complete census operations. However, the Bureau already 

gathers personnel data during each of its tests, including dates of the 

hiring and termination of each applicant, and plans to collect them for 

the 2008 Dress Rehearsal and 2010 Census. Attrition data could be 

extracted from an analysis of those data. 

• The Bureau does not have a direct measure of an employee’s 

effectiveness. However, the Bureau could begin collecting such

information as early as the 2008 Dress Rehearsal. Further, the Bureau 

Page 14 GAO-07-361 2010 Census
also could compile information about individual performance using 

data collected from its quality control operation.13 The Bureau does 

collect productivity data, which indicate the number of housing units 

for which a field worker successfully collected data from each hour, 

and could be an indicator of employee performance.14 However, Bureau 

officials said this information does not adequately reflect worker 

performance because the situations in which workers do their jobs 

vary considerably. Nevertheless, information from the Planning 

Database may allow the Bureau to adjust these data for differences in 

employee productivity between locations. With this adjustment, 

productivity data might better inform the Bureau about employee 

performance after controlling for location-specific differences. 

• The Bureau does not have information about other characteristics of 

field staff, such as employment status and history. However, these data

can be collected on the application form workers complete when they 

apply for census work, as well as before the employees leave the 

Bureau’s employment. 

Analysis of these data would allow the Bureau to refine its recruiting and 

hiring strategy. Multiple regression or other statistical methods can be 

employed to analyze these data to determine likely predictors for 

successful field staff. Although local and regional factors can affect how 

successful a worker will be, such as working in urban or rural settings and 

unemployment rates, information from the Planning Database and other 

such data may be useful in controlling for these variations. In addition, 

analyses can be conducted at the regional or local level to further tailor 

recruiting and hiring. There are several ways that the Bureau can define a 

successful worker. Productivity data and attrition rates can be used to 

measure employee success. But there may be better measures of 

performance that could be identified by using information collected in the 

quality control operation. However, without conducting such analysis, the 

Bureau does not know what types of workers are more likely to be 

successful at census work. 

The Bureau noted that it has done or plans some analyses of worker 

effectiveness and turnover. For example, during the 2006 Census Test, a 

contractor examined the Bureau’s selection tools to see which employee 

 13As stated earlier, the quality control process involves rechecking a sample of completed

work an individual performed and correcting it if significant problems are detected. 

Approximately 5 to 10 percent of work completed is checked in all operations. 

14Officials said productivity data are primarily collected and used for budgetary purposes. 

Page 15 GAO-07-361 2010 Census
attributes are most highly associated with success, tenure, and 

performance. However, the Bureau could not produce the results of the 

contractor study at the time of this report. The Bureau also plans to 

identify factors that might affect turnover and job tenure from its 

employee debriefings and exit surveys. 

Officials provided various reasons for why the Bureau’s recruiting and 

hiring processes remain substantially unchanged. First, they said the 

Bureau focused on achieving cost containment through the reengineering 

of the census, including a short-form census and use of handheld 

computers, which left few funds to make improvements in other areas, 

such as recruiting and hiring. Second, in commenting on a draft of this 

report, Commerce noted that it does not believe that significant cost 

savings could be achieved through refining its recruiting and hiring 

approach. Third, Bureau officials said that the recruiting and hiring during 

Census 2000 was a success and the same approach will be effective during 

the 2010 Census. Lastly, Commerce noted in its comments that making any 

changes to the Bureau’s current approach would reduce its ability to find 

the people needed to complete operations within the statutory deadlines.

We agree that the Bureau needs to recruit and hire staff in time to meet 

these deadlines; however, Bureau officials told us that they have not 

invested resources into making recruiting and hiring more effective. 

Regarding evaluating factors that would allow the Bureau to target 

potential applicants and hence improve recruiting practices, Bureau 

officials said that doing this could prevent the Bureau from forming 

community-based census crews that, in their view, are more likely to be

familiar with the local environment, build trust with nonrespondents, and 

hence elicit their participation in the census more easily than would other 

field staff. However, the Bureau has not conducted analyses to indicate 

that targeting recruitment would preclude it from hiring community-based 

field staff. 

Moreover, according to Bureau officials, having a large applicant pool 

provides the Bureau with assurance that it can meet its recruiting goals; 

however, they agree that this approach may not be the most cost-effective. 

Specifically, in an evaluation of the Census 2000 recruiting effort, a 

contractor found that the goal of creating an applicant pool of five 

individuals for each needed field staff position was more than adequate for 

staffing the nonresponse follow-up operation.15 The contractor suggested 

 15Westat, Inc., Factors Affecting Census 2000 Recruiting (Rockville, Md.: Jan. 7, 2002).

Page 16 GAO-07-361 2010 Census
that the Bureau develop methods to recruit for the 2010 Census without 

the resulting applicant pool exceeding the number it plans to hire by such

large amounts. Nevertheless, the Bureau does not plan to modify this 

approach and will continue to recruit five times as many individuals as it 

plans to hire. Officials told us that as a result of the Bureau’s inability to 

hire enough field staff during the 1990 Census—which delayed the address 

canvassing operation—the Bureau would rather overrecruit than 

underrecruit. The statistical analysis discussed above would be one 

method the Bureau could use to target its recruiting, thereby potentially 

decreasing both the size of the applicant pool and the number of persons 

who would need to be hired. 

A more targeted approach to recruiting and hiring for the 2010 Census 

could allow the Bureau to recruit and hire staff with the necessary skills 

and interests for census work, and identify applicants who would be more 

likely to commit to completing an operation and be successful throughout 

census operations. Having these workers could help reduce or better 

control operational costs as well as recruiting and hiring expenditures. 

Better performing workers could complete fieldwork more expediently,

thereby potentially decreasing the time needed to complete operations. 

During Census 2000, the recruiting expenditures for fiscal years 1998 

through 2000 were estimated to be $250 million, about $66 per applicant. 

Efforts to target applicants likely to continue throughout an operation 

could decrease the need to recruit and hire additional workers. Improving 

recruiting and hiring could also reduce training costs to replace staff who 

have quit, which add to the Bureau’s training expenses. For example, 

during the 2006 test, the Bureau paid each enumerator in Texas $605 to 

participate in 1 week of training. 

The Bureau May Modify 

Some Tools and Processes 

to Hire Staff with the Right 

Skills, but Should Also 

Differentiate Those Tools 

for Various Field Positions 

The Bureau uses the same set of hiring tools—written tests and phone 

interviews administered to each qualified applicant—to hire individuals 

for crew leader and other field positions, although the skills needed for 

those positions differ. The Bureau hired a contractor to assess whether the 

tools used during the 2006 Census Test selected individuals with the skills 

necessary to conduct fieldwork using handheld computers. According to 

comments provided by Commerce, this contractor plans to conduct a 

comprehensive study to review the validity and reliability of new selection 

tools during the 2008 Dress Rehearsal to assess whether they 

appropriately address the new skills needed in the reengineered census 

environment. While updated hiring tools may be implemented during the 

2010 Census, Bureau officials said that, overall, they do not expect major 

changes to be made. Changes made to the hiring process will be to 

Page 17 GAO-07-361 2010 Census
account for the automation of field data collection, and not to differentiate

hiring tools for crew leaders and other field positions. 

In 1997, OPM found that the competencies needed by a crew leader were 

different from those required in other field positions.16 For example, while 

it was important for field staff working in the nonresponse follow-up 

operation to have arithmetic and visual identification skills, crew leaders 

need skills such as management, leadership, and creative thinking (see 

table 1). Bureau officials stated that crew leaders are also responsible for 

providing on-the-job training where necessary and will accompany 

workers who are facing problems. Further, with the reengineering of the 

2010 Census, crew leaders are responsible for troubleshooting the 

handheld computers that other field staff use to collect census data. 

Table 1: Results of OPM’s 1997 Evaluation of Competencies Needed for Different 

Field Staff 

Competencies rated as important for 

crew leaders and not enumerators 

Competencies rated as important for 

enumerators and not crew leaders 

Creative thinking 

Manages and organizes information 

Leadership 

Teaching others 

Managing human resources 

Managing diverse workforce 

Geography 

Number manipulation

Arithmetic 

Perceptual speed 

Visual identification 

Foreign language 

Source: GAO analysis of OPM data. 

Applicants interested in census fieldwork take one of two hiring tests, a 

supervisory or nonsupervisory one. Individuals who wish to be considered 

for field operations supervisor or office operations supervisor take the 

supervisory test. Those people interested in all other positions, including 

crew leaders, enumerators, and clerks, take the nonsupervisory test. 

Individuals that score highest on this test are supposed to be selected as 

crew leaders. A selection guide for crew leaders is used to conduct phone 

interviews with qualified applicants, but the two sets of additional 

questions asked of individuals applying for the crew leader position do not 

 16Office of Personnel Management, A Test Validation Study of the Bureau of the Census: 

Decennial Census Non-Supervisory and Supervisory Selection Aids, PRDC-97-02 

(Washington, D.C.: Aug. 1997).

Page 18 GAO-07-361 2010 Census
assess the specific skills needed of crew leaders. During their phone 

interviews, crew leader applicants are asked to broadly describe the 

nature and scope of their leadership responsibilities, including organizing 

materials, scheduling activities, and leading others. 

OPM also examined whether the Bureau’s hiring tools adequately 

identified individuals with the abilities needed for those positions during 

Census 2000. It found that the hiring tools adequately assessed the 

cognitive competencies of field staff but were limited in assessing 

interpersonal competencies. OPM validated the hiring tools for use in 

Census 2000 but suggested that the Bureau incorporate interpersonal 

assessments into the hiring tools. 

We reviewed the Bureau’s hiring tools during the 2006 test and found that 

they do not differentiate between crew leaders and other field positions. 

Bureau officials said they do not expect to revise these tools for the 2010 

Census because the selection guide used during phone interviews has two 

sets of questions for the crew leaders. However, these two sets of 

questions do not specifically ask whether applicants have experience in

providing training or using computers. One set of questions asked 

candidates if they were familiar with the area in which they live and the 

second set of questions asked about their leadership experiences and 

willingness to lead others. Officials told us that the selection tools the 

Bureau plans to use in the 2010 Census will be largely unchanged from 

those used in Census 2000 and the 2004 and 2006 tests. That is, the Bureau

does not plan to hone its tools to target the skills needed by crew leaders, 

a key position for decennial field activities. 

During the 2004 Census Test, the OIG reported that Bureau officials said

the multiple-choice test does not capture the technical or supervisory 

skills needed by crew leaders. Several field operations supervisors also 

commented that enumerators in training were more managerially and

technically competent to be crew leaders than the crew leaders who were 

training them.17 Furthermore, during debriefings conducted with field staff 

(including field operations supervisors, crew leaders, and enumerators) 

during the 2006 test, participants commented about the ability of crew 

 17Department of Commerce, Office of Inspector General, Improving Our Measure of

America: What the 2004 Census Test Can Teach Us in Planning for the 2010 Decennial 

Census, OIG-16949 (Washington, D.C.: Sept. 2004). 

Page 19 GAO-07-361 2010 Census
leaders to carry out their duties.18 There were a few comments that were 

positive, such as one that noted that crew leaders were able to resolve 

their problems about census procedures immediately. However, most 

other comments regarding crew leaders remarked upon the need for them 

to be better skilled or prepared. The following observations were made 

about individuals in the crew leader position: 

• they did not have the skills necessary to perform the duties required in 

that position, 

• they did not feel comfortable providing training to enumerators and 

asked their assistants to deliver the training, 

• they did not have the appropriate leadership skills, and 

• they should not be hired based on their test scores but based on 

whether they possess specific skills needed for that position. 

Without using hiring tools that distinguish between skills needed for the 

crew leader position, the Bureau does not have assurances that it is 

selecting crew leaders who can best perform duties like providing training, 

managing other field staff, and troubleshooting handheld computers. In 

commenting on a draft of this report, Commerce noted that a contractor 

hired by the Bureau is examining whether there is a need to replace the 

current written tests and interview selection guides used for hiring all field 

positions, including crew leaders. Depending upon the contractor’s 

finding, the Bureau may modify these selection tools. Nevertheless, the 

Bureau still does not collect information about the performance of 

individual crew leaders nor does it collect information on turnover of crew 

leaders. Without this information, the Bureau is limited in its ability to 

assess the effectiveness of its hiring tools in selecting able crew leaders for 

the 2010 Census. 

 18These sessions aimed to obtain information that will improve Bureau procedures, 

including training. We reviewed summaries of debriefings conducted for three operations—

nonresponse follow-up, update/enumerate, and address canvassing. The Bureau’s

debriefing documents did not specify how many participants were included during

debriefings for update/enumerate and address canvassing. During nonresponse follow-up 

debriefings, Bureau officials spoke with 3 field operations supervisors, 9 crew leaders, 5

crew leader assistants, and 18 enumerators. These statements reflect the opinions of a 

sample of individuals who completed the operation. Field workers who left the census

before the end of the operation were not included in these debriefings.

Page 20 GAO-07-361 2010 Census
When hiring, Bureau policies recommend that former employees are 

rehired first before selecting individuals without prior census experience.

Over the course of the 2006 Census Test, almost 15 percent of all field staff 

were rehired. In other words, these individuals left their field position—

due to the end of an operation or for other reasons—but then were rehired 

for a subsequent operation of the 2006 test. However, the Bureau does not 

fully consider past performance. When rehiring field staff, the Bureau does 

not use certain information that could help assess an applicant’s 

competence, nor does the Bureau prepare employee performance 

evaluations that could be used later when considering rehiring former 

employees. Bureau officials say they try not to rehire those individuals 

who were terminated for cause. In comments on a draft of this report, 

Commerce noted that OPM has exempted most of the Bureau’s statutory 

field staff from its requirement that all federal employees undergo a 

performance evaluation. 

The Bureau Gives Little 

Consideration to Previous 

Performance When 

Rehiring Former Workers 

The Bureau rehires former employees using the same procedures it uses to 

hire those with no prior census experience. Office clerks conduct 

telephone interviews of former employees using the same hiring scripts 

used to assess all other applicants. Individuals who could comment on the 

performance of an individual, such as crew leaders, field office

supervisors, or local office managers, are not consulted during the rehiring 

process. Bureau officials said that they try to exclude rehiring former 

employees who were terminated for cause. The actions that would result 

in a worker being terminated for cause are severe conduct or performance 

problems—such as striking another person or selling alcohol or drugs on 

Bureau premises. 

Commerce also stated that the Bureau’s Decennial Applicant Personnel 

and Payroll System contains termination data about each applicant—such

as whether a worker left an operation due to cause, resignation, or lack of 

work—and have controls that do not allow employees who were 

terminated for cause to be rehired. However, officials we interviewed 

during the 2006 Census Test told us that not all employees with conduct 

problems or who performed poorly were terminated. Further, the OIG 

found that during Census 2000, managers were reluctant to terminate 

poor-performing workers, but instead would refrain from assigning them 

new work. Some of these managers were concerned that separated 

employees would be unable to find new jobs; others were put off by the 

amount of time and paperwork involved in terminating workers. In 

addition to collecting termination data, the Bureau also collects 

productivity data on field workers. According to officials, the Bureau does 

not use this information when rehiring former employees, because 

Page 21 GAO-07-361 2010 Census
productivity data do not adequately describe the performance of a 

temporary worker, as the situations in which workers do their jobs vary

considerably. 

Despite the limitations of using productivity data discussed above, the 

Bureau does not collect other data that could allow it to quickly evaluate

the prior performance of applicants reapplying for census work, such as 

individual performance evaluations that could be prepared at the 

completion of employment. Bureau officials said that the policies for 

rehiring former employees should be sufficient to hire and maintain a 

competent workforce because the process worked during Census 2000. 

Furthermore, they said that the pace of the decennial, particularly the 

nonresponse follow-up operation, is such that local census officials have 

insufficient time to consider past performance in making hiring decisions. 

Bureau officials do not prepare performance evaluations of employees 

because field operations supervisors do not have the time to conduct this 

assessment and crew leaders do not have the training needed to provide a 

relatively objective assessment of field staff. 

Although officials believe they lack sufficient time to consider past 

performance when rehiring, we believe that the Bureau does have enough

time. For example, performance data could be collected during the 

address canvassing operation to be used to assess previous workers for 

the nonresponse follow-up operation, which occurs nearly a year later. 

Moreover, during the 2006 Census Test, information from supervisors on 

the performance of their workers was readily available, as crew leaders we 

spoke with were able to identify the relative strengths of their crew 

members; however, that information is neither collected nor used. Bureau

officials believed that such information is inherently subjective. 

Nonetheless, the Bureau appears to recognize the value of collecting such

information. Specifically, the contractor validating the hiring tests intends 

to collect similar information during the 2008 Dress Rehearsal by asking 

supervisors, “Would you be willing to rehire this individual for the next 

operation?” Collecting and using responses to a question as simple as this 

could inform the Bureau about the performance of former employees and 

help ensure that rehired workers are competent. 

If 15 percent of the field staff were to be rehired during the 2010 Census, 

as was the case during the 2006 Census Test, the Bureau would not have

performance data to meaningfully evaluate whether to rehire 

approximately 90,000 individuals. Without preparing employee 

performance information, the Bureau cannot ensure that the weakest 

performers are not rehired. 

Page 22 GAO-07-361 2010 Census
The Bureau is providing some computer-based training on using the 

handheld computers in key operations. However, overall, the Bureau has 

made limited changes to the approach it uses to deliver training and has 

not evaluated alternate approaches to providing training. In addition to 

having trainers read a script verbatim, nonresponse follow-up training in 

2006 included (1) scripted role play exercises, where trainers and trainees

read from prepared materials; (2) a few hours of practice in the field with 

actual housing units and residents, although not all field staff we spoke 

with had this opportunity; (3) opportunities for enumerators to answer 

scripted questions from the crew leader, though instructions for trainers 

discouraged class discussion because such discussions would disrupt the 

training schedule; and (4) limited use of visual aids, created by crew 

leaders rather than the Bureau or local census office staff. Although in 

commenting on a draft of our report, Commerce stated its commitment to 

continuously improving training through the incorporation of trainee selfassessment and practice questions, role-playing, and focusing on practical 

applications it has largely retained its verbatim approach. Bureau officials 

stated this was to preserve the consistency of the training it delivers 

nationwide. Additionally, officials stated that a verbatim approach is 

necessary because crew leaders, who usually provide their crews’ training, 

may have been employed only a few weeks and have no practical 

decennial experience in the field. Commerce also pointed to the challenge

of holding 40,000 training sessions simultaneously. 

The Bureau Has Not 

Changed Training 

Delivery or Content 

for Temporary Field 

Staff to Fully Address 

Known Challenges 

Many field staff we spoke with during the 2006 test said their overall 

impression of training was generally positive. Nonetheless, many said that

videos or visuals would or might improve training. Further, according to 

Bureau summaries of debriefings it conducted, field staff indicated that 

the verbatim training was slow-paced and redundant; they said training 

would have been improved by videos or other media.19 These comments 

are bolstered by observations during the 2004 and 2006 tests, which 

showed that field staff may have missed important parts of training. When

Harris—the contractor developing the handheld computers—observed 

training during the 2006 test, it saw students playing games on their 

handheld computers during training.20 Moreover, in 2004, OIG observers 

 19These sessions aimed to obtain information that will improve Bureau procedures, 

including training. We reviewed summaries of debriefings conducted for three operations—

nonresponse follow-up, update/enumerate, and address canvassing. 

20The handheld computers developed by Harris will not include software that will allow 

field staff to play games during training. 

Page 23 GAO-07-361 2010 Census
found students not paying attention and even falling asleep during class 

and concluded that some enumerators may have failed to learn how to 

conduct census operations.21 The OIG attributed some enumerator 

deficiencies to the Bureau’s verbatim training method, as enumerators 

they spoke with said training was slow and uninteresting and that lapses in 

their concentration occurred. 

The Bureau and others, including us, have reported that the Bureau should 

consider alternate approaches to training delivery. Our review of the 2004 

Census Test found that, as a result of the demographic and technological

changes that have taken place since 1970, the Bureau might want to 

explore alternatives to its verbatim approach to training.22 Moreover, in 

2004, the OIG suggested the Bureau explore the use of interactive training

methods, as the Bureau does for other nondecennial surveys.23

Specifically, the OIG noted that the Bureau should consider using 

multimedia or computer-based training. The Bureau has also conducted,

or contracted for, several evaluations of its nonresponse follow-up 

training, though none of these evaluations assessed whether alternate 

delivery approaches would improve training. Bureau officials claim the 

training they provide is effective so evaluations comparing alternate 

approaches are not necessary. Officials indicated that the primary 

criterion they used to judge the effectiveness of training was whether 

operations were completed on time. However, timeliness does not take 

into account the quality of data collected by these field staff and therefore 

is not an appropriate measure of training effectiveness. In an evaluation of 

training for nonresponse follow-up in Census 2000, for example, the 

Bureau found that field staff struggled to read questions as worded, show 

flashcards to respondents, and consistently ask questions about Hispanic 

origin and race. 

Our guide for strategic training recommends that agencies compare 

various training approaches by weighing their estimated costs and 

anticipated benefits,24 but Bureau officials said they did not explore 

alternate approaches because they could not think of any feasible 

 21OIG-16949. 

22GAO, 2010 Census: Basic Design Has Potential, but Remaining Challenges Need

Prompt Resolution, GAO-05-9 (Washington, D.C.: Jan. 12, 2005). 

23OIG-16949. 

24GAO-04-546G. 

Page 24 GAO-07-361 2010 Census
improvements. In particular, Bureau officials explained that audiovisual 

equipment was not always available at training sites, so video segments 

could not be scheduled during training. Further, they said wealthy areas 

are more likely to have greater access to video equipment, which may lead

to better-prepared field staff in those neighborhoods. However, the Bureau 

has not collected data to show that video equipment was unavailable at 

training locations during Census 2000 or either of the tests conducted in 

2004 and 2006. In fact, for some training sites in the reengineered 

environment, the Bureau has increased requirements such as having 

sufficient electrical outlets to power trainees’ handheld computers and a 

dedicated phone line for transmitting census and payroll data. As a result 

of having to meet increased Bureau requirements, training sites may be 

more likely to have audiovisual technology. 

Commerce’s comments also cited concerns about the cost of buying or 

renting audiovisual equipment. However, several options exist that could 

allow video content to be used more broadly without renting or 

purchasing new technology. Further, evaluations could show that video

segments are more efficient than verbatim training, thus reducing the time 

needed for training and mitigating the cost of audiovisual equipment. One 

option the Bureau could pursue is providing video content to its field staff 

to watch during their self-study as homework assignments. In an OIG 

report on the 2004 Census Test, Bureau officials agreed that distributing 

videos as a homework assignment might be beneficial and feasible, as a 

large number of homes now have VCRs or DVD players, but did not 

distribute this type of content in the 2006 test. Alternatively, given 

increased Internet access, Web-based material may be a practical way to 

present video content. If only a few training sites lack access to

audiovisual technology, crews could be invited into the local census office 

to view video segments. If more training sites lack such technology or the 

local census office is located a great distance from the training site, field 

operations supervisors, who we observed visiting each of their crews 

every day during training, could show video segments on their laptops. 

However, the Bureau has not evaluated whether any or all of these options

would be feasible. Officials explained that they could not know the extent

to which technology is available prior to opening local census offices, but 

this information could be compiled during early operations for use during 

nonresponse follow-up training, which occurs more than a year after the 

local census offices open. 

Regardless of whether the Bureau considers alternate approaches to 

training, training could be enhanced by the addition of visual aids to 

illustrate census concepts. In fact, the Bureau has shown support for using 

Page 25 GAO-07-361 2010 Census
visual aids during training, as it will incorporate visual aids developed by 

Harris that will help illustrate how to use the handheld computers (see fig. 

3). 

Figure 3: Visual Created by Harris for Use in Training

Toolbar

Home

Language Switcher

Font size toggle

Lock

Notification Icon

Volume Control

Battery Meter

Clock

Help

Source: The Harris Corporation.

A Bureau evaluation of nonresponse follow-up training in Census 2000 

recommended creating additional media, such as flip charts or posters, for 

use in training.25 The OIG found that some trainees had trouble following 

the verbatim instructions and might have benefited from the use of visual 

aids.26 Finally, an external contractor that reviewed the Bureau’s training 

 25U.S. Census Bureau, 2003. 

26Department of Commerce, Office of Inspector General, Valuable Learning Opportunities 

Were Missed in the 2006 Test of Address Canvassing, OIG-17524 (Washington, D.C.: Mar. 

2006). 

Page 26 GAO-07-361 2010 Census
in 2004 recommended that the Bureau develop visual aids for use during 

training.27 During our observations of the 2006 test, we also noted 

instances where visual aids might enhance training. For example, field 

staff had difficulty distinguishing between vacant and occupied housing 

units in rural South Dakota. Training materials suggested field staff speak 

with a knowledgeable person and observe some visual cues, such as uncut 

grass or boarded-up windows. In that regard, a series of pictures 

illustrating such features might enhance the ability of field staff to make 

judgments about vacant houses consistently. 

Bureau’s Training Content 

Largely Unchanged 

Despite Recommendations 

Calling for Change 

The content of the Bureau’s training for field staff has not changed 

substantially since Census 2000, despite the fact that collecting data from 

the nation’s population has become increasingly complex, as people 

become more reluctant to participate in the census and the nation has 

continued to become more diverse. According to Bureau officials, the 

Bureau is finding it increasingly difficult to locate people and get them to 

participate in the census. Field workers we spoke with during the 2006 test 

noted two related issues on which they had not received sufficient 

training—dealing with reluctant respondents and handling locationspecific challenges. 

Field staff may not be sufficiently prepared to encourage reluctant 

respondents to participate in the census. In 2004, the OIG found that field 

staff complained they felt unprepared to deal with reluctant respondents 

and the report recommended the Bureau consider adding content to 

enhance training on this topic.28 In 2006, the Bureau included one role-play 

example of a reluctant respondent in nonresponse follow-up training in 

Texas, but none in update/enumerate—the comparable operation 

conducted at the more rural South Dakota test site. Despite this 

improvement, dealing with these reluctant respondents continued to be a 

problem for field staff in 2006. For example, an enumerator in Texas told 

us that the Bureau should more directly explain that most respondents are 

likely to be reluctant. She said she was surprised by how many reluctant 

respondents she encountered. During the debriefing discussions the 

Bureau held with field staff, many participants indicated that respondent 

 27Eagle International, Inc., 2004 Census Test: Review and Evaluation of Training 

Efficacy (Rochester, N.Y.: Oct. 21, 2005). 

28OIG-16949. 

Page 27 GAO-07-361 2010 Census
reluctance was challenging.29 When asked, enumerators at the debriefings 

said respondent refusals were something they were least prepared to 

handle after training. Crew leaders echoed this sentiment when asked 

about it during the debriefing, saying that overcoming respondent 

reluctance was the most difficult task enumerators faced. 

The nonresponse follow-up training provided in 2006 has more material on

how to deal with reluctant respondents than did the Census 2000 

nonresponse follow-up training. However, much of the new material 

concerns how enumerators enter data on the handheld computers and not 

about training field staff on how to best elicit cooperation. A relatively 

small portion of training time is dedicated to working with reluctant 

respondents and this section begins “most of the people you have to 

interview will cooperate.” Officials explained to us that households in 

nonresponse follow-up have already chosen not to participate—by not 

mailing in their surveys—and therefore may be more likely to be reluctant 

to respond when field staff visit their homes. Finally, as the OIG noted in 

2004, training materials generally advised field staff to be prepared to 

explain why the census was necessary and how data would be used, but 

offered no special guidance for convincing respondents to cooperate.30

This kind of guidance was also not contained in training materials for the 

2006 test. 

Although data are available to help the Bureau refine its material on 

reluctant respondents, the Bureau is not making use of this resource. The 

Bureau’s Planning Database, used mainly for recruiting purposes and 

enumeration planning, highlights areas where the Bureau believes it would 

be hard to enumerate, such as where many migrant workers reside or 

where there is a large number of public assistance households. Those 

conditions could be used to assess whether the responsiveness of 

households to respond to the census over time indicates a need to 

increase training on handling reluctant respondents. For example, reasons 

for respondent reluctance could vary based on whether the population of

migrant workers or people living in public assistance housing has 

increased. The necessary changes to training should vary based on how 

 29As previously discussed, these sessions aimed to obtain information that will improve 

Bureau procedures, including training. We reviewed summaries of debriefings conducted

for three operations—nonresponse follow-up, update/enumerate, and address canvassing. 

30OIG-16949. 

Page 28 GAO-07-361 2010 Census
the population has changed. Bureau officials said that they had not used 

the database to inform changes made to training. 

The increasing reluctance of the nation to participate in the census makes 

it important for field staff to be trained in the skills needed to complete 

census work accurately and effectively. We also saw a notice created by

an enumerator that informed residents they needed to provide census data

or federal marshals would come to arrest them, which local officials told 

us will not happen. Without adequate preparation, field staff may develop

their own strategies when confronted with these difficult situations, 

resulting in inconsistent and sometimes inappropriate data collection 

methods. For example, when unable to contact respondents, one Texas 

enumerator we observed looked up respondent information online, tried 

to find a phone number for another respondent from a neighborhood cat’s

collar, and even illegally went through residents’ mail. Another enumerator 

told us she sat in front of housing units for hours waiting for residents to 

come home from work. Bureau procedures as outlined in training indicate

that field staff should make six attempts to contact residents, either in 

person or by phone, before seeking another knowledgeable person from 

which to obtain data. 

Another issue on which field staff said they needed additional training was 

with challenges that were specific to their local areas. In South Dakota, for 

example, an enumerator told us that Abbotsville, Oklahoma—the 

hypothetical city the Bureau used for role playing and other exercises in 

the training class—did not reflect the rural conditions of the Cheyenne 

River Reservation.31 This sentiment was also mentioned in the Bureau’s 

debriefing following the operation.32 Field staff participating in these 

meetings also commented on the challenges related to enumerating empty

mobile home sites and working under dangerous rural road conditions. In

Austin, Texas, on the other hand, one crew leader explained that training 

 31The example of Abbotsville, Oklahoma, was not used in nonresponse follow-up training. It

was used to train field staff in South Dakota to carry out the update/enumerate operation. 

That operation targets communities with special enumeration needs and where most 

housing units may not have house number and street name mailing addresses. These areas 

include resort areas with high concentrations of seasonally vacant housing units and

selected American Indian reservations. The training provided for this operation is different 

from that provided during nonresponse follow-up. 

32As previously discussed, these sessions aimed to obtain information that will improve 

Bureau procedures, including training. We reviewed summaries of debriefings conducted

for three operations—nonresponse follow-up, update/enumerate, and address canvassing. 

Page 29 GAO-07-361 2010 Census
spent a lot of time on mobile homes—which did not exist in his area—but 

very little time on apartment buildings, which are common there. Other 

field staff mentioned problems collecting data from the large college 

student population in Austin—which had already vacated their Census 

Day residences for summer vacation by the start of nonresponse followup. In debriefings from the nonresponse follow-up operation in Texas, 

field staff also mentioned a need for additional information on obtaining 

data in apartment buildings and dealing with large families. 

To address these kinds of location-specific challenges, the Bureau works 

with regional offices to develop 10-minute training modules for specific 

locations. For example, in 2000, Bureau officials said enumerators in Los 

Angeles were trained to look for small, hidden housing units, such as 

apartments in converted garages. Commerce’s comments on a draft of this

report stated that the Bureau also provides guidance on how long these 

modules should be and at what point they should be presented. However, 

officials told us they were not sure how often this kind of training took 

place, nor had they allocated time during training to present specialized 

information. On the basis of observations of the 2004 test, we suggested 

that the Bureau supplement the existing training with modules geared 

toward addressing the particular enumeration challenges that field staff 

are likely to encounter in specific locales.33 The National Academy of 

Sciences also recommended in 2004 that the Bureau develop special 

enumeration methods for locations that might face unique challenges, 

such as irregular urban areas, gated communities, rural areas, and 

colonias—unincorporated and low-income residential subdivisions lacking 

basic infrastructure and services along the border between the United 

States and Mexico.34

The Planning Database may be helpful in determining whether modules 

focused on particular enumeration challenges may be needed, in that it 

includes detailed information on small geographic areas. For example, the 

database contains information on the prevalence of difficult terrain, 

student populations, and trailer parks, among other variables. However, 

the Bureau has not used information from the Planning Database to 

determine where a local census office may need to use location-specific 

 33GAO-05-9. 

34The National Academies Press, Reengineering the 2010 Census: Risks and Challenges

(Washington, D.C.: 2004). 

Page 30 GAO-07-361 2010 Census
training modules nor taken any steps to develop this type of module 

centrally to ensure the consistency of content. 

Bureau officials offered several explanations as to why they have made 

limited changes to enhance training on reluctant respondents and locationspecific challenges. They said the Bureau lacks the time and budget to 

make systematic changes to its training, and they believe that the content 

of training is already effective. They also said that the Bureau has made 

changes to training “iteratively” over time, citing increases to the content 

on reluctant respondents since Census 2000. Officials noted that while 

fieldwork in various locations can be different, a consistent nationwide 

approach is necessary and that local differences were handled by the 

10-minute modules that could be created by regional offices. Further, 

officials explained that creating location-specific modules centrally would 

be time-consuming and expensive. Finally, officials were opposed to 

including any additional material on dealing with reluctant respondents 

because longer training is costly. However, as field staff told us, the 

training contains material on issues they did not face in their local areas. 

For example, as we stated earlier in this section, much time was spent on 

training on mobile homes in Austin, Texas, although they are not prevalent 

in the area. The inclusion of this material in a standard nationwide training 

reduces the time available for other issues, such as strategies for 

addressing reluctant respondents. 

Developing modules for different types of locations centrally, while 

potentially costly, would allow the Bureau to control the consistency and 

quality of training throughout the nation and therefore control the cost of 

local operations. For example, headquarters staff could centrally develop 

modules covering enumeration strategies in a variety of situations, such as 

mobile homes, large apartment buildings, and migrant worker dwellings, 

which local officials can selectively insert into their training if there is a 

need to train their field staff on that topic. In Census 2000, the Bureau did 

not know where location-specific modules created by regional offices 

were used, nor the quality of instruction provided in those modules. For 

example, to collect data from colonias in 2000, the Denver Regional Office 

provided field staff information about the layout of the colonias, while the 

Dallas Regional Office decided to use a different enumeration method for 

these housing units. Targeting training to address those issues field staff 

are likely to face could also save time during training by deleting topics 

that are not needed by field staff. Moreover, targeted training could 

enhance the effectiveness of trainers and field staff by giving greater 

attention to the challenges they do face. 

Page 31 GAO-07-361 2010 Census
For the 2010 Census, the Bureau faces difficulties in enumerating a 

changing society, whereby the population is increasingly diverse and hard

to locate. The Bureau has responded to challenges with a reengineered 

approach that relies to a much greater extent on new technologies, such as 

handheld computers. In addition, it is important that the Bureau evaluate

and improve how it recruits and hires temporary field workers and trains 

them on the skills needed to successfully complete the 2010 Census. 

Conclusions 

The Bureau’s overall approach to recruiting and hiring is focused on 

ensuring that it recruits and hires a sufficient number of field staff. 

However, a more targeted and considered approach would help the 

Bureau to more effectively identify the workers it needs. Conducting an

analysis of the characteristics of applicants likely to become effective 

census workers or analyzing information about field staff turnover could 

allow the Bureau to recruit and hire staff more likely to be successful 

throughout census operations and thereby reduce or better control 

operational costs, as well as recruiting and hiring expenditures. The 

Bureau is making efforts to revise its tools to better identify staff with the 

necessary skills in light of the new automated environment. However, its 

hiring tools have not adequately differentiated between crew leaders and 

their field staff. During the reengineered 2010 Census, crew leaders will be 

responsible for training and supervising field staff as well as 

troubleshooting the handheld computers used to collect data in the field.

By using the same hiring tools for positions that need different skills, the 

Bureau cannot ensure that crew leaders have the skills needed to fulfill the 

requirements of those key positions. Finally, the Bureau does not prepare 

employee performance evaluations that can be used to make informed 

decisions when rehiring former employees, who may be given preference

during hiring for later operations. Such performance information may also 

be useful in assessing the characteristics of applicants likely to be 

successful at census work. 

The Bureau has decades of experience in training field workers, but we 

and others made recommendations following Census 2000 and subsequent 

field tests that could improve the delivery and content of training. The 

Bureau has not evaluated alternate approaches to training like using video 

content, nor has the Bureau evaluated the feasibility of such alternatives.

Without these evaluations, Bureau decision makers lack information they 

need to determine the best way to deliver training. Moreover, while the 

Bureau will be incorporating visual aids on how to use the handheld 

computers, it has not developed other visual aids that could improve the 

ability of field staff to conduct census operations. 

Page 32 GAO-07-361 2010 Census
With respect to the content of training, some field staff said they need 

more training on how to deal with reluctant respondents. Bureau officials 

said that this content has increased since Census 2000, but we found that 

field staff still lacked a clear idea of how likely they were to encounter 

reluctance and also needed strategies to convince such respondents to 

cooperate. Likewise, although the Bureau permits regional or local offices 

to provide a very small amount of training specific to their areas, it has not 

centrally developed modules on topics field staff are likely to face in

certain areas—such as apartment buildings and mobile homes—for those 

offices to incorporate into their standard training. These modules could 

improve the training on these situations and increase the consistency of 

training content. Without evaluating the way training is delivered, 

developing visual aids to enhance training, and making appropriate 

modifications to improve content on reluctant respondents and locationspecific situations, the Bureau’s temporary field staff may be less than 

fully prepared to do their work. 

We recommend that the Secretary of Commerce direct the Director of the

U.S. Census Bureau to take the following seven actions to improve the 

Bureau’s recruiting, hiring, and training of temporary field staff. The 

Bureau should 

Recommendations for 

Executive Action 

• To refine its approach to recruiting and hiring, evaluate the factors that 

are associated with and predictive of employee interest in census work, 

performance, and commitment. These factors may include prior work 

experience and employment status. The Bureau should determine the 

best way to measure employee performance for the purposes of this 

analysis. The Bureau should also consider these findings for better 

targeting applicants in subsequent decennial operations. This effort 

could be conducted during address canvassing and other early 

operations during the 2008 Dress Rehearsal and during the 2010 

Census. The resulting information will be useful when recruiting and 

hiring for the Bureau’s largest decennial operation, nonresponse 

follow-up, and subsequent operations. 

• Determine the best way to gather employee performance data during 

the address canvassing operation in the 2010 Census to inform rehiring 

decisions during subsequent operations. 

• Modify recruiting and hiring tools, including the skills test and phone 

interview, to better differentiate applicants with the skills and 

competencies needed by crew leaders from those who would be better 

suited for other field positions. 

Page 33 GAO-07-361 2010 Census
• Evaluate the effectiveness of alternate approaches for delivering 

training, including the use of video content, as compared to the current 

verbatim approach. If new approaches are found to be more effective, 

evaluate the feasibility of delivering this type of training during 

subsequent operations. 

• Prior to the 2010 Census, incorporate into training visual aids

illustrating how to conduct census work. 

• Revise or modify training to enhance material on reluctant respondents 

so that field staff are provided with a realistic impression of the 

prevalence of respondent reluctance and strategies for convincing 

these respondents to participate. 

• Prepare training modules addressing prototypical location-specific 

challenges that may be selected and used by regional or local census 

offices. For example, modules on situations localities may face—such 

as enumerating apartment buildings or dealing with empty mobile 

home sites—could be centrally developed by Bureau officials to ensure 

the consistency and quality of such modules. Local or regional officials 

could then select those modules most appropriate to the local area for 

use in training. 

We provided a draft of this report to the Secretary of Commerce for his 

review and comment. We received comments from Commerce’s Deputy 

Secretary. Overall, Commerce agreed with the importance of the key 

human capital principles reflected in the draft report, noting that the 

Bureau believes it already has implemented strategies relating to those 

principles for its permanent workforce, and that, internally, the Bureau 

has recommended using similar strategies for the decennial census as 

well. Commerce incorrectly asserts that we find the Bureau’s overall 

approach for recruiting, hiring, and training to be insufficient. Rather, as 

the report title indicates, we believe the Bureau can refine its recruiting 

and hiring efforts and enhance training. Commerce agreed with one of the 

report’s recommendations and in commenting on the remaining 

recommendations, either pointed to actions that it is taking that are 

consistent with the recommendation or questioned the need for taking 

action. We describe Commerce’s response to the report’s 

recommendations below. Commerce also provided other comments and

concerns, including technical corrections and suggestions where 

additional context was needed. We revised the report to reflect these 

comments as appropriate. Our response to these comments and 

Commerce’s letter appear in appendix I. 

Agency Comments 

and Our Evaluation 

In response to our recommendation that the Bureau refine its overall 

approach to recruiting and hiring, Commerce noted that the Bureau’s 

Page 34 GAO-07-361 2010 Census
selection tools are developed to ensure that all legal and professional 

standards for hiring employees are met, while allowing it to select the 

large number of persons needed to complete the census. Commerce also 

stated that the Bureau’s previous and current job analyses would allow the 

Bureau to identify the factors most likely to predict success on the job and 

that those factors are currently represented in the Bureau’s selection tools 

and procedures. We agree that the Bureau’s recruiting approach should be

designed to ensure it may select a sufficient number of persons to 

complete the census. However, we do not agree that the Bureau’s 

analyses identify the factors most likely to predict applicants’ success and 

are incorporated in selection tools and procedures. In fact, the Bureau has 

no documentation to indicate that it has identified and analyzed these 

factors. As a result, we concluded that the Bureau could refine its 

recruiting and hiring tools to better understand what makes applicants 

successful and thereby minimize operating costs. Our recommendation 

calls for the Bureau to use a fact-based approach to developing selection 

criteria. We believe that without a usable measure of performance and 

analysis of attrition, the Bureau cannot fully measure success in terms of 

performance and turnover. Such analysis would permit the Bureau to 

target recruitment to applicants who are not only more likely to perform 

well, but also continue throughout an operation. Recruiting such 

applicants could help reduce or better control operational costs as well as 

recruiting and hiring expenditures by decreasing the need to recruit and 

hire additional workers. 

Regarding our second recommendation that the Bureau determine the best 

way to gather performance data to inform rehiring decisions, Commerce 

stated that our report does not have evidence that a significantly large 

portion of rehired employees are poor performers. It also noted that the 

Bureau has taken steps to prevent the rehiring of poor performers. While 

agreeing that performance appraisal and evaluation are relevant in most 

agencies, Commerce added that such a system would not be practical for

the Bureau given the sheer number of workers hired during the decennial, 

their temporary employment, and the time-consuming nature of 

performance management systems. Our draft report in no way suggested

that either a “significantly large” or even a “large” portion of the employees 

are poor performers. To the contrary, neither we nor the Bureau has 

information regarding the performance of its temporary workers, other 

than whether an employee has been terminated for cause. Further, we 

disagree that our suggested appraisal system would create a large 

administrative burden. We are not recommending that the Bureau develop 

a complex, time-consuming and formal appraisal system in the course of 

obtaining performance information; instead, we suggest that local census 

Page 35 GAO-07-361 2010 Census
offices obtain limited information, such as whether a crew leader would 

be willing to rehire a worker for a later operation. As we noted in the 

report, these data could be systematically collected upon a worker’s 

termination to assess whether to rehire that individual. In commenting on 

the report, Commerce noted that crew leaders and other field office 

supervisors are instructed to terminate workers who are not performing at 

an acceptable level, thus eliminating them from consideration for future 

operations. However, the OIG found that during the Census 2000, 

managers were reluctant to terminate workers, but instead would refrain 

from assigning them new work. Officials we interviewed during the 2006

test told us that not all poor performers were terminated. We conclude 

that the Bureau could do more to determine whether an employee should 

be considered for rehiring, such as through recording the crew leader’s or

field office supervisor’s overall assessment prior to an employee leaving

operations. Without such information, the Bureau cannot know whether it 

is rehiring poor performers who had not been terminated due to conduct 

problems or unsatisfactory performance. We added additional context in 

our report about how poor-performing workers are not always terminated. 

By failing to terminate weak performers, local census offices cannot 

identify those workers if they reapply for census work in a subsequent 

operation. Finally, we do not believe that a performance assessment 

system would create a large set of legal problems because it is unlikely 

that taking such information into account would negatively affect the 

Bureau’s compliance with the Uniformed Services Employment and 

Reemployment Rights Act and veterans’ preference requirements. 

Commerce agreed with our third recommendation that recruiting and 

hiring tools should be modified to better differentiate applicants with the 

skills and competencies needed by crew leaders and noted that the Bureau 

is working with a contractor to do so. 

In its comments on our fourth recommendation—that the Bureau evaluate 

the effectiveness of alternate approaches to delivering training—

Commerce noted that the Bureau continues to explore methods for 

providing training within the constraints of time and funding, and that it 

intends to reevaluate the purely verbatim training approach. Commerce 

commented that renting or purchasing additional audiovisual equipment 

needed for nonresponse follow-up training would be cost-prohibitive. 

However, Bureau officials have told us that they have not studied the 

prevalence of audiovisual equipment in training locations; therefore, the 

Bureau cannot know the cost of providing such equipment. Further, we 

are not recommending that the Bureau rent or purchase this equipment. 

Instead, we call for the Bureau to evaluate the effectiveness of these 

Page 36 GAO-07-361 2010 Census
alternative approaches, including audio-visual equipment. The internal 

process of reviewing previous training schedules and topics to identify 

areas needed for modification and emphasis is commendable; however, 

the Bureau does not have any documentation of this effort. Further, while 

the Commerce also asserts that it is not feasible to provide training 

content through audiovisual technology, in our report, we outline several

ways the Bureau could provide this content using technology already 

available. Moreover, without studying whether alternate approaches are 

more efficient or effective; the Bureau cannot know whether or not it is 

worth making an investment in such approaches. Therefore, we continue

to recommend that the Bureau study alternate approaches to delivering 

training. 

Regarding our fifth recommendation—that the Bureau incorporate into 

training visual aids that illustrate how to conduct census work—

Commerce explained that the Bureau will be using visual aids in address 

canvassing and nonresponse follow-up training. Commerce offered to 

provide us with the visual aids that would be used during the dress 

rehearsal; however, when we asked for these visual aids, the Bureau 

informed us that they have not been completed and could not be provided. 

We believe that introducing this material during the dress rehearsal is an

excellent first step and commended the Bureau taking this step. As our 

report pointed out, however, the visuals proposed for address canvassing 

and nonresponse follow-up were technical in nature, illustrating how to 

use the handheld devices. Commerce also pointed out that the Bureau 

would use large maps during training in another operation. These maps 

will also likely enhance training for this operation. Nonetheless, in our 

audit work, we found that additional visuals, such as pictures illustrating 

the difference between vacant and occupied housing units, would have

helped field staff better understand census work. We, therefore, believe 

the Bureau could do more to incorporate visual aids into training. 

In response to our sixth recommendation, where we recommended 

revising or modifying training on reluctant respondents, Commerce 

explained that efforts to reevaluate training are ongoing. It mentioned that

adding material to training would make training longer and thereby 

costlier. In recognition of the costs of additional training time, we 

specifically recommended that the Bureau revise or modify its approach to 

providing training on reluctant respondents, rather than simply providing 

more training. Overall, we found that continued attention to providing 

adequate training on reluctant respondents is important, especially given

that the Bureau believes reluctance among the nation’s public has been 

increasing. 

Page 37 GAO-07-361 2010 Census
Finally, Commerce noted that the Bureau acknowledged that locationspecific training was necessary in some cases, as was suggested by our 

seventh recommendation. The comments provided outlined the Bureau’s

procedures for providing location-specific training modules through the 

efforts of regional census offices. We incorporated some additional details 

into our report to better characterize the role of headquarters staff in 

developing the modules used in specific local census offices. However, as 

we state in the report, developing modules for different types of locations

centrally would allow the Bureau to control the consistency and quality of

training throughout the nation. 

We are sending copies of this report to the Secretary of Commerce, 

Commerce’s Office of Inspector General, the Director of the U.S. Census 

Bureau, and other interested congressional committees. We will make 

copies available to others upon request. This report will also be available 

at no charge on our Web site at http://www.gao.gov. 

If you or your staff have any questions concerning this report, please 

contact me on (202) 512-6806 or by e-mail at sciremj@gao.gov. Contact 

points for our Offices of Congressional Relations and Public Affairs may 

be found on the last page of this report. GAO staff who made major 

contributions to this report are listed in appendix II. 

Mathew J. Scirè 

Director 

Strategic Issues 

Page 38 GAO-07-361 2010 Census
Appendix I: Comments from the Department Appendix I: Comments from the Department of Commerce 

of Commerce 

Note: GAO comments 

supplementing those in 

the report text appear at 

the end of this appendix. 

Page 39 GAO-07-361 2010 Census
Appendix I: Comments from the Department 

of Commerce 

Page 40 GAO-07-361 2010 Census
Appendix I: Comments from the Department 

of Commerce 

Now on page 33. 

Page 41 GAO-07-361 2010 Census
Appendix I: Comments from the Department 

of Commerce 

Page 42 GAO-07-361 2010 Census
Appendix I: Comments from the Department 

of Commerce 

Page 43 GAO-07-361 2010 Census
Appendix I: Comments from the Department 

of Commerce 

Page 44 GAO-07-361 2010 Census
Appendix I: Comments from the Department 

of Commerce 

Now on page 4. 

See comment 1. 

Now on page 4. 

See comment 2. 

Page 45 GAO-07-361 2010 Census
Appendix I: Comments from the Department 

of Commerce 

Now on pages 4-5. 

See comment 3. 

Now on page 5. 

See comment 4. 

Now on page 11. 

See comment 5. 

Page 46 GAO-07-361 2010 Census
Appendix I: Comments from the Department 

of Commerce 

Now on page 14. 

See comment 6. 

Now on page 16. 

See comment 7. 

Page 47 GAO-07-361 2010 Census
Appendix I: Comments from the Department 

of Commerce 

Now on page 16. 

See comment 8. 

Page 48 GAO-07-361 2010 Census
Appendix I: Comments from the Department 

of Commerce 

Now on pages 16-17. 

See comment 9. 

Now on page 17. 

See comment 10. 

Now on pages 17-18. 

See comment 11. 

Page 49 GAO-07-361 2010 Census
Appendix I: Comments from the Department 

of Commerce 

Now on page 19. 

See comment 2. 

Now on page 20. 

See comment 12. 

Now on page 21. 

See comment 3. 

Page 50 GAO-07-361 2010 Census
Appendix I: Comments from the Department 

of Commerce 

Now on page 21. 

See comment 13. 

Now on page 21. 

See comment 14. 

Now on page 22. 

See comment 15. 

Page 51 GAO-07-361 2010 Census
Appendix I: Comments from the Department 

of Commerce 

Now on page 22. 

See comment 16. 

Now on page 24. 

See comment 17. 

Now on page 25. 

See comment 18. 

Page 52 GAO-07-361 2010 Census
Appendix I: Comments from the Department 

of Commerce 

Now on page 27. 

See comment 19. 

Now on pages 27-28. 

See comment 20. 

Now on page 32. 

See comment 2. 

Page 53 GAO-07-361 2010 Census
Appendix I: Comments from the Department 

of Commerce 

Now on page 32. 

See comment 3. 

Now on page 32. 

See comment 21. 

Page 54 GAO-07-361 2010 Census
Appendix I: Comments from the Department 

of Commerce 

The following are GAO’s comments on the Department of Commerce’s 

(Commerce) “other comments and concerns about the report” section of 

the letter dated April 4, 2007. 

1. This report does not, as stated in this comment, suggest that the U.S. 

Census Bureau (Bureau) made “little effort to improve its recruiting and 

hiring practices.” In fact, we commend the Bureau for taking steps such as 

identifying critical skills for its field staff in using the handheld computer 

and using employee insights to improve its recruiting and hiring practices. 

We provided additional context in our report related to the Bureau’s future 

work to examine correlations between job success, tenure, and 

performance on selection tools. Further, we also added the Bureau’s plans 

during the 2008 Dress Rehearsal to use exit survey data to gain additional

insights on why a worker left before an operation was completed. Such

evaluations and insights may help the Bureau improve its recruiting and 

hiring processes for the 2010 Census. 

GAO Comments 

2. As noted in the report, we reviewed each of these selection guides 

described in Commerce’s comments. We found that these tools do not 

specifically ask whether the applicants have experience in providing 

training or using computers—critical skills needed for individuals in the 

crew leader position. We note in the report that the Bureau has a 

contractor that will examine the current selection tools during the 2008 

Dress Rehearsal, including those used to select crew leaders. 

3. We have revised the report to reflect the Bureau’s clarification that it 

“recommends” hiring experienced employees before inexperienced ones. 

4. We have revised our report to reflect the Bureau’s stated commitment to 

continuously improving training, including the use of self-assessment and 

practice questions, role-playing, and focusing on the practical applications

of what is being taught. Further, we incorporated additional information 

about the unique challenges faced by the Bureau in training its temporary 

field staff. 

5. We incorporated the clarifying information Commerce provided that

the Bureau is working with federal, state, local, and tribal officials to 

obtain waivers that will help expand the pool of potential applicants. 

6. We have added to the report additional explanation of how the Planning

Database may provide useful information in understanding productivity. 

The report describes how this information would be useful in designing a 

multiple regression or other statistical method for determining likely 

Page 55 GAO-07-361 2010 Census
Appendix I: Comments from the Department 

of Commerce 

predictors for successful field staff. Such information would be helpful in

designing a recruiting strategy and not for making individual rehiring 

decisions. We include in the report additional explanation of how the data 

would assist in such an analysis. 

 

7. Commerce states that adding more complexity to the recruiting, testing,

hiring, training, and supervision efforts will not produce significant cost 

savings. We revised the report to further reflect Commerce’s views on this 

matter. However, without adequately evaluating its existing recruiting, 

hiring, and training practices, the Bureau risks unnecessarily hiring too 

many employees without the right skills and commitment to completing 

key operations. As we note in our report, a more targeted approach could 

allow the Bureau to identify applicants who would be more likely to 

commit to long-term employment and be successful throughout census 

operations. Having these workers could help reduce or better control 

operational costs as well as recruiting and hiring expenditures. Betterperforming workers could also complete fieldwork more expediently, 

thereby potentially decreasing the time needed to complete operations. 

8. We agree with Commerce’s comments. The draft described the 

advantages of forming community-based census crews. 

9. We have clarified our report to reflect that the Bureau is taking a 

preliminary look at whether varying recruiting goals by area is a viable 

alternative. However, we have not received documents related to this 

effort. 

10. We agree with Commerce’s comment that the positions the Bureau 

recruits and hires for are not longterm. We have clarified the report to 

refer to workers who complete an operation and may stay on to work for 

later decennial operations. 

11. We clarified our report to reflect Commerce’s comments about the 

contractor’s current study to address the validity and reliability of its 

selection tools. 

12. Commerce noted that in Bureau evaluations of staff preparedness, 

field staff said they were adequately prepared to do their jobs. Further, 

crew leaders indicated in Bureau debriefings that they felt adequately 

prepared although there were areas where they would like more training. 

However, in this instance, we are not critiquing the Bureau’s training of 

crew leaders. Rather, we have found that during the hiring phase—before 

training occurs—the Bureau does not have appropriate hiring tools to 

Page 56 GAO-07-361 2010 Census
Appendix I: Comments from the Department 

of Commerce 

identify and select crew leaders with the needed skills for that position, 

such as skills for instructing crews and troubleshooting computers. 

Commerce also noted that a 2006 contractor found that field staff were 

adequately prepared to do the tasks associated with their jobs. However, 

this evaluation assesses whether training effectively prepared crew 

leaders, their assistants, and enumerators to use the handheld computers. 

13. We appreciate Commerce’s concern that it is impractical and costprohibitive to conduct formal performance evaluations for temporary field 

positions. However, a system that the Bureau could use does not need to

be complex or time-consuming. As we noted in the report, information 

from supervisors on the performance of their workers was readily 

available. Such information could be systematically collected upon a 

worker’s termination to assess whether to rehire that individual. 

14. We revised the report to state that, according to Bureau officials, its 

Decennial Applicant Personnel and Payroll System does not allow it to 

rehire employees terminated for cause. 

15. See our response to Commerce’s comments on the second

recommendation in our evaluation of the agency’s comments on page 35 of

the report. 

16. Our analysis of hiring data from the 2006 Census Test found that 

almost 15 percent of field staff were rehired for a later operation. These 

data included field staff from all field operations conducted during the 

2006 test, including update/leave and group quarters enumeration. 

Therefore, this figure takes into account potential workers that the Bureau 

could rehire in all operations, and not just address canvassing and 

nonresponse follow-up.

17. We acknowledge the differences between the decennial and other 

Bureau operations, but nonetheless believe, as the OIG suggested in 2004,

that some lessons could be learned from the Bureau’s overall experiences 

with survey training. 

18. The options provided in our report were not intended to be exhaustive, 

nor did we suppose that any of them would work in all field situations. 

Throughout the report, we were cognizant of the constraints and costs 

facing the Bureau, including those associated with training sites and 

equipment rental and purchases. We revised our report to reflect the 

Bureau’s concerns about the costs of buying and renting audiovisual 

equipment; however, we offered various options as a way of illustrating 

Page 57 GAO-07-361 2010 Census
Appendix I: Comments from the Department 

of Commerce 

that the Bureau should consider innovative ways to provide training 

outside the context of a verbatim approach. We commend the Bureau’s 

efforts to incorporate visual aids and computer-based training into training 

for address canvassing and nonresponse follow-up. 

19. We agree with the Bureau’s position that conversation with a 

knowledgeable person is also important and have incorporated this into 

the report. As our draft report indicated, however, understanding such 

visual cues would serve as an additional source of information for field 

workers. 

20. The Bureau’s efforts to explore more formal ways to assist the regional 

census offices to identify location-specific issues that might require unique 

information is a positive step. We have incorporated additional

information into the report to acknowledge the Bureau’s role in assisting 

regional census offices. However, we believe that the efforts the regional

census offices would be enhanced if the Bureau prepared training modules 

addressing prototypical location-specific challenges that the regional 

census offices may use. 

21. See our response to Commerce comments on our fourth and fifth 

recommendations starting on page 36 of the report. 

Page 58 GAO-07-361 2010 Census
Appendix II: 

A

GAO Contact and Staff 

cknowledgments 

Page 59 GAO-07-361

Appendix II: GAO Contact and Staff 

Acknowledgments 

Mathew J. Scirè (202) 512-6806 or sciremj@gao.gov 

In addition to the contact name above, Ernie Hazera, Assistant Director; 

Betty Clark; Shirley Hwang; Krista Loose; and Scott Purdy made key 

contributions to the report. Thomas Beall, Catherine Hurley, Andrea 

Levine, and Donna Miller provided significant technical support.

GAO Contact 

Acknowledgements 

2010 Census
Related GAO Products Related GAO Products 

2010 Census: Design Shows Progress, but Managing Technology 

Acquisitions, Temporary Field Staff and Gulf Region Enumeration 

Require Attention. GAO-07-779T. Washington, D.C.: April 24, 2007. 

2010 Census: Redesigned Approach Holds Promise, but Census Bureau 

Needs to Annually Develop and Provide a Comprehensive Project Plan to 

Monitor Costs. GAO-06-1009T. Washington, D.C.: July 27, 2006. 

2010 Census: Census Bureau Needs to Take Prompt Actions to Resolve 

Long-standing and Emerging Address and Mapping Challenges. 

GAO-06-272. Washington, D.C.: June 15, 2006. 

2010 Census: Costs and Risks Must Be Closely Monitored and Evaluated 

with Mitigation Plans in Place. GAO-06-822T. Washington, D.C.: June 6, 

2006. 

2010 Census: Census Bureau Generally Follows Selected Leading 

Acquisition Planning Practices, but Continued Management Attention 

Is Needed to Help Ensure Success. GAO-06-277. Washington, D.C.: May 18, 

2006. 

2010 Census: Planning and Testing Activities Are Making Progress. 

GAO-06-465T. Washington, D.C.: March 1, 2006. 

Census Bureau: Important Activities for Improving Management of Key 

2010 Decennial Acquisitions Remain to be Done. GAO-06-444T. 

Washington D.C.: March 1, 2006. 

Data Quality: Improvements to Count Correction Efforts Could Produce 

More Accurate Census Data. GAO-05-463. Washington, D.C.: June 20, 2005. 

Information Technology Management: Census Bureau Has Implemented

Many Key Practices, but Additional Actions Are Needed. GAO-05-661. 

Washington, D.C.: June 16, 2005. 

2010 Census: Basic Design Has Potential, but Remaining Challenges 

Need Prompt Resolution. GAO-05-9. Washington, D.C.: January 12, 2005. 

Data Quality: Census Bureau Needs to Accelerate Efforts to Develop and 

Implement Data Quality Review Standards. GAO-05-86. Washington, 

D.C.: November 17, 2004.

Page 60 GAO-07-361 2010 Census
Related GAO Products 

American Community Survey: Key Unresolved Issues. GAO-05-82. 

Washington, D.C.: October 8, 2004. 

2010 Census: Counting Americans Overseas as Part of the Decennial 

Census Would Not Be Cost-Effective. GAO-04-898. Washington, D.C.: 

August 19, 2004. 

2010 Census: Overseas Enumeration Test Raises Need for Clear Policy 

Direction. GAO-04-470. Washington, D.C.: May 21, 2004. 

2010 Census: Cost and Design Issues Need to Be Addressed Soon. 

GAO-04-37. Washington, D.C.: January 15, 2004. 

2000 Census: Lessons Learned for Planning a More Cost-Effective 2010 

Census. GAO-03-40. Washington, D.C.: October 31, 2002. 

 (450477) Page 61 GAO-07-361 2010 Census
GAO’s Mission The Government Accountability Office, the audit, evaluation and 

investigative arm of Congress, exists to support Congress in meeting its 

constitutional responsibilities and to help improve the performance and 

accountability of the federal government for the American people. GAO 

examines the use of public funds; evaluates federal programs and policies; 

and provides analyses, recommendations, and other assistance to help

Congress make informed oversight, policy, and funding decisions. GAO’s 

commitment to good government is reflected in its core values of 

accountability, integrity, and reliability. 

The fastest and easiest way to obtain copies of GAO documents at no cost

is through GAO’s Web site (www.gao.gov). Each weekday, GAO posts 

newly released reports, testimony, and correspondence on its Web site. To

have GAO e-mail you a list of newly posted products every afternoon, go 

to www.gao.gov and select “Subscribe to Updates.” 

The first copy of each printed report is free. Additional copies are $2 each. 

A check or money order should be made out to the Superintendent of 

Documents. GAO also accepts VISA and Mastercard. Orders for 100 or 

more copies mailed to a single address are discounted 25 percent. Orders 

should be sent to: 

U.S. Government Accountability Office 

441 G Street NW, Room LM 

Washington, D.C. 20548 

To order by Phone: Voice: (202) 512-6000 

TDD: (202) 512-2537 

Fax: (202) 512-6061 

Contact: 

Web site: www.gao.gov/fraudnet/fraudnet.htm

E-mail: fraudnet@gao.gov

Automated answering system: (800) 424-5454 or (202) 512-7470 

Gloria Jarmon, Managing Director, JarmonG@gao.gov (202) 512-4400 

U.S. Government Accountability Office, 441 G Street NW, Room 7125 

Washington, D.C. 20548 

Paul Anderson, Managing Director, AndersonP1@gao.gov (202) 512-4800

U.S. Government Accountability Office, 441 G Street NW, Room 7149 

Washington, D.C. 20548 

Obtaining Copies of 

GAO Reports and 

Testimony

Order by Mail or Phone 

To Report Fraud,

Waste, and Abuse in 

Federal Programs 

Congressional 

Relations 

Public Affairs 

PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER