U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE

55–973 PDF WASHINGTON : 2024

EXAMINING GAO’S FINDINGS TO 

ADDRESS DATA GAPS AND IMPROVE 

DATA COLLECTION IN THE 

TERRITORIES 

OVERSIGHT HEARING 

BEFORE THE

SUBCOMMITTEE ON INDIAN AND INSULAR AFFAIRS 

OF THE

COMMITTEE ON NATURAL RESOURCES 

U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

ONE HUNDRED EIGHTEENTH CONGRESS 

SECOND SESSION 

Thursday, June 13, 2024 

Serial No. 118–129 

Printed for the use of the Committee on Natural Resources 

( 

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

or 

Committee address: http://naturalresources.house.gov 
(II) 

COMMITTEE ON NATURAL RESOURCES 

BRUCE WESTERMAN, AR, Chairman 

DOUG LAMBORN, CO, Vice Chairman 

RAU ́ L M. GRIJALVA, AZ, Ranking Member 

Doug Lamborn, CO 

Robert J. Wittman, VA 

Tom McClintock, CA 

Paul Gosar, AZ 

Garret Graves, LA 

Aumua Amata C. Radewagen, AS 

Doug LaMalfa, CA 

Daniel Webster, FL 

Jenniffer Gonza ́lez-Colo ́n, PR 

Russ Fulcher, ID 

Pete Stauber, MN 

John R. Curtis, UT 

Tom Tiffany, WI 

Jerry Carl, AL 

Matt Rosendale, MT 

Lauren Boebert, CO 

Cliff Bentz, OR 

Jen Kiggans, VA 

Jim Moylan, GU 

Wesley P. Hunt, TX 

Mike Collins, GA 

Anna Paulina Luna, FL 

John Duarte, CA 

Harriet M. Hageman, WY 

Grace F. Napolitano, CA 

Gregorio Kilili Camacho Sablan, CNMI 

Jared Huffman, CA 

Ruben Gallego, AZ 

Joe Neguse, CO 

Mike Levin, CA 

Katie Porter, CA 

Teresa Leger Ferna ́ndez, NM 

Melanie A. Stansbury, NM 

Mary Sattler Peltola, AK 

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, NY 

Kevin Mullin, CA 

Val T. Hoyle, OR 

Sydney Kamlager-Dove, CA 

Seth Magaziner, RI 

Nydia M. Vela ́zquez, NY 

Ed Case, HI 

Debbie Dingell, MI 

Susie Lee, NV 

Vivian Moeglein, Staff Director 

Tom Connally, Chief Counsel 

Lora Snyder, Democratic Staff Director 

http://naturalresources.house.gov 

SUBCOMMITTEE ON INDIAN AND INSULAR AFFAIRS 

HARRIET M. HAGEMAN, WY, Chair 

JENNIFFER GONZA ́ LEZ-COLO ́ N, PR, Vice Chair 

TERESA LEGER FERNA ́ NDEZ, NM, Ranking Member 

Aumua Amata C. Radewagen, AS 

Doug LaMalfa, CA 

Jenniffer Gonza ́lez-Colo ́n, PR 

Jerry Carl, AL 

Jim Moylan, GU 

Bruce Westerman, AR, ex officio 

Gregorio Kilili Camacho Sablan, CNMI 

Ruben Gallego, AZ 

Nydia M. Vela ́zquez, NY 

Ed Case, HI 

Rau ́l M. Grijalva, AZ, ex officio 
(III) 

CONTENTS 

Page 

Hearing held on Thursday, June 13, 2024 ............................................................ 1 

Statement of Members: 

Hageman, Hon. Harriet M., a Representative in Congress from the State 

of Wyoming .................................................................................................... 1 

Leger Ferna ́ndez, Hon. Teresa, a Representative in Congress from the 

State of New Mexico ..................................................................................... 3 

Statement of Witnesses: 

Braybrooks, Melissa, Economist, Office of Insular Affairs, U.S. 

Department of the Interior, Washington, DC ............................................. 5 

Prepared statement of ............................................................................... 6 

Questions submitted for the record ......................................................... 9 

Love-Grayer, Latesha, Director, International Affairs and Trade, U.S. 

Government Accountability Office, Washington, DC ................................. 10 

Prepared statement of ............................................................................... 11 

Questions submitted for the record ......................................................... 18 

Leon Guerrero, Lola, Director, Bureau of Statistics and Plans, 

Government of Guam, Hagatna, Guam ...................................................... 20 

Prepared statement of ............................................................................... 22 

Questions submitted for the record ......................................................... 28 

Orenstein-Cardona, Jacobo, Executive Assistant, Puerto Rico Institute 

of Statistics, Government of Puerto Rico, San Juan, Puerto Rico ............ 28 

Prepared statement of ............................................................................... 30 

Questions submitted for the record ......................................................... 33 

Levin, Michael, Managing Partner, PacificWeb LLC, Honolulu, Hawaii .... 34 

Prepared statement of ............................................................................... 36 

Questions submitted for the record ......................................................... 40 

(1) 

OVERSIGHT HEARING ON EXAMINING GAO’S 

FINDINGS TO ADDRESS DATA GAPS AND 

IMPROVE DATA COLLECTION IN 

THE TERRITORIES 

Thursday, June 13, 2024 

U.S. House of Representatives 

Subcommittee on Indian and Insular Affairs 

Committee on Natural Resources 

Washington, DC 

The Subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 11:05 a.m., in 

Room 1324, Longworth House Office Building, Hon. Harriet M. 

Hageman [Chairwoman of the Subcommittee] presiding. 

Present: Representatives Hageman, LaMalfa, Moylan, 

Westerman; Leger Ferna ́ndez, Sablan, and Vela ́zquez. 

Ms. HAGEMAN. The Subcommittee on Indian and Insular Affairs 

will come to order. 

Without objection, the Chair is authorized to declare a recess of 

the Subcommittee at any time. 

The Subcommittee is meeting today to hear testimony on 

examining GAO’s findings to address data gaps and improve data 

collection in the territories. 

Under Committee Rule 4(f), any oral opening statements at 

hearings are limited to the Chairman and the Ranking Minority 

Member. I, therefore, ask unanimous consent that all other 

Members’ opening statements be made part of the hearing record 

if they are submitted in accordance with Committee Rule 3(o). 

Without objection, so ordered. 

I will now recognize myself for an opening statement. 

STATEMENT OF THE HON. HARRIET M. HAGEMAN, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF WYOMING 

Ms. HAGEMAN. Today’s hearing is entitled, ‘‘Examining GAO’s 

Findings to Address Data Gaps and Improve Data Collection in the 

Territories.’’ 

On May 9, 2024, the Government Accountability Office published 

a report on gaps in Federal data for the five U.S. territories: 

American Samoa, Guam, Northern Mariana Islands, Puerto Rico, 

and the U.S. Virgin Islands. The GAO found that the U.S. Federal 

statistical products often contain data gaps for the territories. 

The U.S. territories are often excluded from or not fully included 

in Federal statistical data products. Even in instances where the 

U.S. territories are included in these products, there may be disparities in the timeliness and in the measurement of data quality 

when compared to the 50 U.S. states and the District of Columbia. 

Data impacts every facet of our life, from economic development 

to national security. Statistics provide analytics for planning, 

implementing, and assessing policy. 
2 

The U.S. Federal Statistical System is a decentralized system 

with over 100 agencies, organizational units, and programs. The 

Federal Statistical System is led by the Chief Statistician of the 

United States within the Office of Management and Budget and 

the Interagency Council on Statistical Policy. The chief statistician 

also chairs the Interagency Council on Statistical Policy. 

Data gaps make it challenging to efficiently plan and implement 

policy. Inaccurate or unavailable data increases the risk of government waste. It also creates barriers for local communities from 

accessing critical Federal programs and opportunities. Quality and 

robust data, on the other hand, enables policymakers in the 

government to carry out targeted programs and ensure that laws 

are carried out in the manner that they were intended. 

Furthermore, it ensures that the local communities are represented when assessing the distribution of Federal resources. This 

is especially true for the U.S. territories, as they have unique needs 

due to their geographic location. Many of the territories rely 

heavily on U.S. Federal assistance, including access to Federal 

programs and grants. 

The U.S. territories are also highly prone to severe weather disasters that often require population and employment statistics to 

support recovery efforts. As many of the territorial governments do 

not have the capacity and infrastructure to collect data themselves, 

they have no choice but to rely upon Federal data, even if it may 

be severely outdated. The data gaps have restricted territory 

government operations and continue to present unnecessary 

barriers to economic growth. 

As the U.S. territories face greater economic challenges compared 

to the continental United States, it becomes ever more important 

to have access to quality data. Today, we will hear from agency 

officials, experts, and from the territories themselves to examine 

this issue closely and to fully understand what must be done to 

close this data gap. 

The U.S. territories deserve and need quality data to ensure that 

Federal and territorial policymakers have accurate information to 

best implement strategies for the benefit of their local communities. Finding ways to address the data gaps for the territories 

will not only positively benefit our fellow Americans in the U.S. 

territories, but also helps save U.S. taxpayer dollars. 

It would have been helpful to have the Chief Statistician of the 

United States here today to discuss what steps it is taking to 

ensure the principal statistical agencies taking to improve data collection in the U.S. territories since the publication of the GAO 

report. In its report, the GAO had specific recommendations for the 

Chief Statistician to develop better coordinated approaches to 

address data gaps in the U.S. territories. I am deeply troubled that 

the Office of Management and Budget lacked the capacity to prepare for this hearing. I am especially troubled, when considering 

the fact that they play a primary role in leading and coordinating 

the U.S. Federal Statistical System. 

This topic is of bipartisan interest to this Committee, and of 

great importance to the U.S. territories. It is my sincere hope that 

their absence from this hearing does not reflect a lack of interest 

in this critical issue. 
3 

I would like to thank our witnesses who are with us today to discuss the findings of the GAO report, and I look forward to 

continuing this conversation about addressing the data gaps in the 

territories. 

The Chair now recognizes the Ranking Minority Member for a 

statement. 

STATEMENT OF THE HON. TERESA LEGER FERNA ́ NDEZ, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF 

NEW MEXICO 

Ms. LEGER FERNA ́ NDEZ. Thank you, Madam Chair, for working 

with us and holding this important hearing to address the need for 

timely data collection in the insular areas, a long-standing concern, 

I know, of the islands. 

And thank you so very much for traveling to be with us to 

discuss these issues. 

As we have heard, the lack of available data has presented many 

obstacles to the islands and making decisions about their communities and economies. If we don’t have the information, we cannot 

make informed decisions. It is a very simple proposition. Incomplete and inaccurate population, economic, labor force, and agricultural data leads to underfunding and under-representation of the 

territories in certain Federal programs. 

For example, the Georgetown Law Center on Poverty and 

Inequality published an issue brief in December 2022 highlighting 

how insufficient data about the territories prevents policymakers 

from making informed decisions for residents on issues from 

education, health care, and emergency preparedness, issues that 

are key for your future prosperity and survivability in a changing 

climate. 

I want to commend GAO and, in particular, the authors of the 

report we are discussing today for their work to find inconsistent 

data collection methods for U.S. territories across Federal agencies, 

and how that impacts the territories. 

For example, in American Samoa, farmers may not be eligible for 

certain farm support programs due to issues with the address list 

utilized by the Census of Agriculture. 

A lack of vital statistics prevents American Samoa from participating in the Center for Disease Control and Prevention’s Vital 

Statistics Cooperatives program, which provides funds in exchange 

for records of births and deaths. 

For the Northern Mariana Islands, territorial officials lack recurring economic indicators like employment statistics from BLS. As 

a result, local officials don’t have access to updated data, and must 

collect it themselves. 

In Guam, the area census lacks reportable data for some of your 

smaller communities within the territory. As a result, those communities are excluded from data tools like the Social Vulnerability 

Index, which is used to identify groups that need the extra support 

such as emergency preparedness funding for natural disasters. 

In the U.S. Virgin Islands, local officials struggle to assess the 

effectiveness of COVID-19 resilience and recovery efforts due to the 

Virgin Islands’ exclusion in the Census Bureau’s Population Survey 

and Household Pulse Survey. 
4 

In Puerto Rico, it is not included in the current population 

survey, and therefore lacks access to important labor force information, including data related to veterans and people with disabilities. 

Puerto Rico is also excluded from the Census Bureau’s Census of 

Governments, limiting available information on government 

expenditures. 

To address this problem, Ranking Member Rau ́l Grijalva and the 

five territorial delegates introduced H.R. 1400, the bipartisan 

Territorial Statistics Collection Equity Act. I am always pleased 

that this Committee is as bipartisan as it is in terms of finding 

solutions and working together for the issues that are presented 

here. 

This bill requires the Office of Management and Budget to 

develop and implement a plan for Federal agencies to collect and 

publish statistics regarding the U.S. territories in the same manner 

as statistics are collected and reported for the states, also a simple 

proposition. I look forward to working with you, Madam Chair, and 

the other members of the Subcommittee to move this bipartisan bill 

in a similar bipartisan manner to the way today’s hearing was 

developed, which, once again, thank you very much for that. 

Thank you for yielding to me, and I look forward to hearing from 

our witnesses. I do apologize we have conflicting hearings today, so 

I am going to be popping in and out. 

With that, I yield back. 

Ms. HAGEMAN. Thank you. I will now introduce our witnesses. 

Ms. Melissa Braybrooks, Economist, Office of Insular and International Affairs, U.S. Department of the Interior, Washington, DC; 

Ms. Latesha Love-Grayer, Director, International Affairs and 

Trade, U.S. Government Accountability Office, Washington, DC; 

Ms. Lola Leon Guerrero, Director, Bureau of Statistics and Plans, 

Government of Guam, Hagatna, Guam; Mr. Jacobo—did I get that 

right? 

Mr. ORENSTEIN-CARDONA. Yes, that is perfect. 

[Laughter.] 

Ms. HAGEMAN. Not perfect. Close enough, right? Thank you. 

Jacobo Orenstein-Cardona, Executive Assistant, Puerto Rico Institute of Statistics, Government of Puerto Rico, San Juan, Puerto 

Rico; and Dr. Michael Levin, Managing Partner, PacificWeb LLC, 

Honolulu, Hawaii. 

Let me remind the witnesses that under Committee Rules, they 

must limit their oral statements to 5 minutes, but their entire 

statement will appear in the hearing record. 

To begin your testimony, please press the ‘‘talk’’ button on the 

microphone. 

And we use timing lights. When you begin, the light will turn 

green. When you have 1 minute left, the light will turn yellow. And 

at the end of your 5 minutes, the light will turn red, and I will ask 

you to please complete your statement. 

I will also allow all witnesses on the panel to testify before 

Member questioning. 

The Chair now recognizes Ms. Braybrooks for 5 minutes. 
5 

STATEMENT OF MELISSA BRAYBROOKS, ECONOMIST, OFFICE 

OF INSULAR AFFAIRS, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR, 

WASHINGTON, DC 

Ms. BRAYBROOKS. Thank you, Chair Hageman, Ranking Member 

Leger Ferna ́ndez, and other distinguished members of the Subcommittee. I am the Economist of the Office of Insular Affairs. It 

is an honor to be before you today as a representative of Assistant 

Secretary Cantor in the U.S. Department of the Interior. 

The Committee has my full testimony, but I would like to highlight some of the most important issues related to the data needs 

in the U.S. territories. 

The existing gaps in territorial data create and perpetuate 

inequities in how fellow Americans are served by our policymakers 

and programs, and places undue burden on territorial resources to 

solve. Accounting for all American communities in the collection 

and publication of Federal statistics is the foundation for being able 

to meet the public’s needs and priorities, inform solutions, and 

measure performance of Federal programs and funding efficiently 

and effectively. 

Addressing Federal data gaps for U.S. territories is long overdue. 

Having recently spent several weeks in the U.S. territories discussing statistics, I would be remiss not to convey some of the 

impacts from these gaps that were shared with me. 

Insufficient data affects the private sector’s ability to leverage 

outside investment and understand labor needs, the government’s 

ability to make informed policy decisions such as forecasting revenue for budget purposes and the daily lives of Americans, be it 

minimum wage determinants or the ability to participate in mitigation of natural disaster risks. In a world increasingly driven by 

data, the U.S. territories and the Americans that live there are at 

risk of being left behind. 

GAO’s recent report recognizes the Federal Government’s historically fragmented approach to territorial data and statistics. As we 

evaluate GAO’s recommendation and look to work with our Federal 

partners to address the root issues in a meaningful way, in order 

to ensure that the barriers don’t serve as justifications for the gaps, 

OIA, or the Office of Insular Affairs, suggests that the Federal community consider the following. 

First, the goal should be to identify the priority data needs for 

the U.S. territories, and determine best options for achieving, not 

approach this issue assuming that what works for states is the best 

fit model for the U.S. territories. 

Second, understanding of exclusion as a symptom of statutory, 

administrative, or agency-level decisions is paramount. Without the 

context of why the gap exists, the how to solve is very challenging. 

Third, statistics are only as good as the source data that goes 

into it. The statistical discussion must be coupled with a focus on 

investment in territorial capacity and statistical infrastructure. 

Fourth, the Office of Insular Affairs’ limited pool of technical 

assistance funds is not sustainable or sufficient for providing the 

data necessary to help inform decisions and support fiscal responsibility. The development of timely, robust territorial statistics is 

best met when the statistical agencies are working in equal 
6 

partnership with organizations that can represent, advocate, and 

guide the unique territorial needs. 

Lastly, the Federal investment for territorial statistics should not 

be determined based on the size of these geographies. Rather, the 

Federal investment should take into consideration the integral role 

of the individuals, strategic locations, and cultural and ecological 

diversity that the U.S. territories contribute to the United States. 

The Office of Insular Affairs is committed to serve and help meet 

the priority needs of the people living in the U.S. territories. However, we are not positioned to solve the data problem alone, nor can 

the territories continue to carry the burden of addressing the gaps. 

As information and statistics play an ever more important role in 

informing evidence-based decisions on policy and funding resources, 

we must continue to actively participate in addressing these pervasive U.S. territorial data gaps in a meaningful way. If we do not, 

we risk perpetuating known territorial inequities, distorting decisions based on the limited statistics that are available, and further 

marginalizing communities that are important to the United States 

and are already too often overlooked. 

The Office of Insular Affairs appreciates the interest in this issue 

and looks forward to continuing to be an active part of the solution. 

Members of the Subcommittee, it is a pleasure to appear before you 

today, and I thank you for your time. 

[The prepared statement of Ms. Braybrooks follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF MELISSA BRAYBROOKS, ECONOMIST, OFFICE OF INSULAR

AFFAIRS, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Chair Hageman, Ranking Member Leger Ferna ́ndez, and members of the 

Subcommittee on Indian and Insular Affairs, thank you for the opportunity to testify on the need for a coordinated Federal approach to address data gaps for U.S. 

territories. I am the economist of the Office of Insular Affairs (OIA) at the U.S. 

Department of the Interior (Department). OIA carries out the Secretary of the 

Interior’s responsibilities for administering the Federal government’s relationship 

with the territories of American Samoa, the Commonwealth of the Northern 

Mariana Islands (CNMI), Guam, and the United States Virgin Islands (USVI) 

(collectively, the territories). 

It is important to have adequate data for the territories because the existing data 

gaps that the U.S. territories experience create, and perpetuate, inequities in how 

these Americans are served by our policymakers and programs, and place undue 

burden on the U.S. territories to solve these information needs. Accounting for all 

American communities in the collection and publication of Federal statistics is the 

foundation for being able to meet the public’s needs and priorities, inform solutions, 

and measure performance of Federal programs and activities efficiently and 

effectively. Addressing Federal data gaps for U.S. territories is long overdue. 

Nonetheless, historically there has been a lack of data for the territories due to 

variety of reasons. For example, the unique legal status of these territories, i.e., not 

being defined as states, has resulted in uneven treatment for how the U.S. makes 

policy and creates legal or administrative frameworks for Federal programs and 

activities, including the production of national statistics. Additionally, the territories’ remote geographies can impact scope as a result of travel costs, time zone 

differences, and the lack of awareness of the U.S. territories. The result has been 

a piecemeal approach at the Federal level, which has resulted in data gaps in 

Federal statistics. 

These data gaps negatively impact the territories. Insufficient data affects the 

private sector’s ability to leverage outside investment and understand labor needs 

and the government’s ability to make informed policy decisions, like forecasting revenue for budget purposes. The daily lives of Americans in the territories are also 

negatively impacted—be it the ability to identify and participate in mitigation of 

natural disaster risks or minimum wage determinates. It is important to the terri-
7 

1https://www.gao.gov/assets/gao-24-106574.pdf 

tories and those living there to address these issues, and OIA welcomes all efforts 

to close persistent data gaps in a meaningful way. 

GAO’s Report on the Current Statistical Landscape 

In a world increasingly driven by data, the U.S. territories and the Americans 

that live there are at risk of being left behind. The U.S. Government Accountability 

Office (GAO) recently recognized the inequities in data and statistics that the U.S. 

territories face in a report titled, U.S. Territories: Coordinated Federal Approach 

Needed to Better Address Data Gaps.1 In order to address a problem, it is often 

helpful to first identify its scope and causes. 

The GAO report identifies the information gaps and structural characteristics 

that, to date, have served as barriers to the inclusion of the U.S. territories in 

Federal statistics. To address this issue, the GAO recommends a coordinated, 

government-wide approach to examine the costs, benefits, and feasibility of 

including territories in statistical products. OIA looks forward to working with our 

Federal partners to evaluate GAO’s recommendation, which would assess the 

Federal government’s historically fragmented approach to U.S. territorial statistics 

that has led to an overburden on the territorial resources, duplication of efforts, and 

critical statistical gaps. 

As we evaluate GAO’s recommendation and look to address this issue of gaps in 

territorial data with our Federal partners, consideration should be given to the fact 

that certain barriers—such as lack of local capacity—have persistently been used as 

the justification for these gaps and as justification for failing to address the root 

issues. Rather, instead of addressing the root issues, this misunderstanding of these 

island communities often leads federal agencies to try to force island territorial 

communities into continental State models—in other words, square pegs into round 

holes. 

To identify long-term solutions to address these historic data inequities, OIA 

suggests that other factors for consideration include: 

1. Unique Territorial Needs Compared to Existing State Models: The 

GAO report cites several examples of challenges that statistical agencies face 

when trying to include the U.S. territories into existing products, however, 

these examples largely assume the state methodology to be the goal. The territories possess fundamentally unique attributes driven by culture, the ability 

of local capacity to create information, and the uniqueness of their economies. 

These factors require an open-minded approach that borrows from known 

methodologies but also meets the unique situations of the U.S. territories. 

Possible approaches include looking beyond existing U.S. methodologies to 

borrow from successful international models already in use across the Pacific 

and the Caribbean islands, exploring hybrid surveys, and recognizing the role 

of collaboration with entities outside of the Federal statistical community. 

2. Statutory, Administrative, and Agency-level Barriers of Inclusion: 

Currently, there is no comprehensive understanding for ‘‘why’’ the U.S. territories are excluded from most Federal statistics. Without the context of the 

‘‘why’’, the ‘‘how to solve’’ becomes very challenging. 

Identifying if the territorial exclusion from each key statistical product is a 

result of statute, administrative (regulatory), or other (e.g., agency-level scope 

decisions, funding, etc.) will enable us to identify what must be done to 

remedy the inequity. 

3. Local Capacity to Overcome Data Collection Challenges: Statistics are 

only as good as the information that goes into them. As such, the need for 

territorial statistics cannot be thought of as a single investment, but rather 

must be coupled with an evaluation of source data needs and investment in 

local capacity. Such examples include guidance and resources to support electronic infrastructure, survey frames, U.S. standards and classification 

schemes, and capacity and training. Local capacity should not be justification 

for U.S. territorial exclusion. 

4. Reliance on OIA Technical Assistance: To date, territorial gaps in Federal 

statistics have been supplemented by technical assistance funding from OIA 

(e.g., territorial CPI, GDP, Household Income and Expenditure Survey, 

Visitor surveys, Prevailing Wage Survey). Using OIA technical assistance as 

the Federal strategy for supporting territorial statistics is not sustainable or 

sufficient. The reliance on OIA technical assistance to address the statistical 
8 

needs of the territories places the burden on the territories to solve this data 

gap for themselves and diminishes the ability to focus on the intended 

purpose of addressing priority areas to foster development. 

5. Federal and Territorial Cooperation: Including entities that can 

represent, advocate, and guide the unique territorial needs in the discussion 

regarding how to address this issue would be helpful. In doing so, expertise 

on statistics would be merged with authorities who can represent and meet 

the unique territorial needs where they currently are. The ideal execution of 

this partnership will require statistical and territorial support entities to be 

equal partners—allowing for open sharing of information and methods. 

6. Other Considerations: 

a. Best Practices for Navigating Existing Data Gaps Today: The 

recommendations focus on a coordinated evaluation for addressing data 

gaps in the future. However, OIA believes it is necessary to identify nearand medium-term guidance and coordination around the realities of the 

available science. Coordinated guidance and best practices (e.g., treatment 

of null data, use of proxy indicators, etc.) ensures that data producers and 

users today do not allow existing gaps to inadvertently perpetuate 

inequalities. 

b. Puerto Rico’s Statistical Needs May Differ from the Other U.S. 

Territories: Puerto Rico is included in more Federal statistics and has 

experienced more coordinated efforts to target the territories’ data needs. 

Although there are several data gaps that still need to be addressed for 

Puerto Rico, the investment in the territory’s statistical capacity and inclusion in Federal statistics to date is different than that of American Samoa, 

the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, Guam, and the U.S. 

Virgin Islands. As such, Puerto Rico’s next steps may differ from that of 

the other U.S. territories. 

c. The Value of the U.S. Territories is Beyond Their Size: The population and land area of the territories should not be used as a basis for 

determining Federal investment in statistics. The value of the U.S. 

territories should capture the comprehensive contributions that the U.S. 

territories provide to the United States (e.g., economic contributions from 

individuals, geographic location (defense), cultural diversity, etc.). 

Conclusion 

OIA, in its role to serve and meet the needs of the people living in the U.S. territories, has been, and continues to be, committed to addressing the priority data 

needs that can help inform the decisions of the territorial and Federal stakeholders. 

OIA uses its limited resources to do so, but the Department is not positioned to 

solve this problem by itself, nor can the territories continue to carry the burden of 

addressing the gaps. 

As information and statistics play an ever more important role in identifying 

trends, measuring performance, and informing evidence-based decisions on policy 

and resources, we must continue to actively participate in addressing these U.S. 

territorial data gaps. If we do not, we perpetuate known territorial inequities, distorting policy decisions based on an overfocus on the slim data that does exist, and 

further marginalize communities already too often overlooked. 

OIA appreciates the interest in this issue and looks forward to continuing to be 

an active part of the solution. 

Chair Hageman, Ranking Member Leger Ferna ́ndez, it is a pleasure to appear 

before your Subcommittee today. Thank you for your time. 
9 

QUESTIONS SUBMITTED FOR THE RECORD TO MS. MELISSA BRAYBROOKS, ECONOMIST, 

OFFICE OF INSULAR AFFAIRS, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Ms. Braybrooks did not submit responses to the Committee by the 

appropriate deadline for inclusion in the printed record. 

Questions Submitted by Representative Westerman 

Question 1. What is the Office of Insular Affair’s assessment of each U.S. territory’s 

capability to do its own data work and partner with federal statistical agencies? 

Question 2. Please clarify the Office of Insular Affair’s specific role within the 

federal statistical system in supporting federal data collection for the U.S. territories. 

Question 3. During the hearing, when asked what the Department of the Interior’s 

role is in the Interagency Council of Statistical Policy, you stated that DOI educates 

the Council on the Territories’ situation. 

3a) a. Can you please expand on that point, what specifically is the Department 

of the Interior educating the Council on? 

3b) Is there any other role the Department of the Interior has on the Council? If 

so, what? 

Question 4. During the hearing, you mentioned that including the territories in the 

existing federal data products may not be the best idea, rather ‘‘alternative ideas 

should be considered.’’ 

4a) Please provide examples of what alternative ideas the Office of Insular Affairs 

has considered or is considering. What are the pros and cons of these alternatives? 

Question 5. Has the Department of the Interior raised the issue of federal data 

gaps for the U.S. territories with the Interagency Council on Statistical Policy? 

5a) If so, how was this issue raised? 

5b) What was the response from the Chief Statistician? 

Question 6. According to the GAO report, there have been concerns within the U.S. 

territories that the gaps in federal data collection for them could prevent access to 

federal programs and grants that they would otherwise be eligible for. 

6a) Is this true? 

6b) If so, please provide specific instances where this has happened. 

Question 7. How would addressing the data gaps improve the Office of Insular 

Affairs operations and policy implementation in the U.S. territories? 

Question 8. In the 1990s through the mid-2000s, the Office of Insular Affairs 

proactively supported data collection for the U.S. territories. However, since then, it 

seems that the Office of Insular Affairs’ support has diminished and changed to 

provide reactive grants. 

8a) Why has the Office of Insular Affairs switched from providing proactive 

support to reactive grants for data collection efforts in the U.S. territories? 

8b) Why does the Office of Insular Affairs’ budget justifications suppress details 

about statistical technical assistance in the U.S. territories? 

Questions Submitted by Representative Sablan 

Question 1. In your testimony, you mention the possibility of exploring 

international survey models in use across the Pacific and the Caribbean islands and 

exploring hybrid surveys. Could you please describe these international surveys and 

how they could be used to improve data collection in the territories? 

Question 2. A 2018 report by the Census Bureau I requested declared it is 

infeasible to conduct the American Community Survey in the smaller territories. This 

was attributed to high costs, small populations, and the lack of home mail delivery 

in most areas. To replicate the ACS in the insular areas and yield reliable data, 

Census said they would need to conduct the long-form census every year, to everyone. 

This is clearly untenable, so as an alternative, I introduced legislation to have the 

Census Bureau conduct the census in the insular areas every five years. While not 
10 

ideal or equivalent to the data collection frequency in the states and Puerto Rico, this 

would at least give us timelier data than we have now. 

Would conducting a census in the territories every five years help close current data 

gaps? 

Question 3. Would it help to conduct other surveys in the territories more 

frequently? 

Question 4. What other ways would be useful to improve our data collection efforts 

on our islands? 

Ms. HAGEMAN. Thank you for your testimony. The Chair now 

recognizes Ms. Love-Grayer for 5 minutes. 

STATEMENT OF LATESHA LOVE-GRAYER, DIRECTOR, INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS AND TRADE, U.S. GOVERNMENT 

ACCOUNTABILITY OFFICE, WASHINGTON, DC 

Ms. LOVE-GRAYER. Chair Hageman, Ranking Member Leger 

Ferna ́ndez, and distinguished members of the Committee, thank 

you for the opportunity to discuss our work. 

Federal statistical products often contain gaps for the five inhabited U.S. territories. At each of the 13 principal statistical agencies, 

a majority of the products that we reviewed excluded at least one 

of the U.S. territories. Even when territories are included, as mentioned earlier, there are often disparities in the quality or the timeliness of the data that is collected in comparison to the United 

States. 

Several factors contribute to these data gaps. Laws governing 

agencies may differ or be ambiguous about whether territories 

should be included. Small populations in the territories can present 

confidentiality challenges when reporting on detailed data. Population estimation costs, as sample sizes increase, so do the costs. 

For example, if it is necessary to take a census of an entire territory, that becomes sometimes cost prohibitive. 

According to the Census Bureau, some territories’ distances from 

the U.S. mainland create challenges to their ability to collect the 

data in person when that is necessary. Officials from several of the 

agencies that we cited also determined that there were other complications to collecting this data. For example, non-standard 

address lists and language barriers can complicate that data 

collection. 

The Department of the Interior also told us that if agency 

officials are accustomed to collecting data for the 50 states, they 

sometimes may simply be unaware that they can also include the 

territories. 

Despite these known gaps, very few agencies have conducted 

research on the costs, the benefits, or the feasibility of including 

territories in their data collection, and these data gaps can and 

often do have adverse effects, including on the decisions that are 

made both at the Federal and at the territorial government level. 

For example, as mentioned earlier, officials from American 

Samoa expressed concerns that some of their farmers may not be 

captured in Federal statistics due to issues with the list that the 

Census of Agriculture uses. This may mean that farmers who 

would otherwise be eligible for Federal farm benefits may not be. 
11 

1GAO, U.S. Territories: Coordinated Federal Approach Needed to Better Address Data Gaps, 

GAO-24-106574 (Washington, D.C.: May 9, 2024). 

CNMI officials emphasized the absence of reoccurring economic 

indicators such as employment data from the Bureau of Labor 

Statistics, which complicates their ability to understand their labor 

force. 

Guam officials reported that not enough information collected in 

the Island Area Census on their smaller populations is a barrier 

to being able to include them and other statistical products like the 

Social Vulnerability Index. 

USVI officials, as noted earlier, also have had troubles assessing 

their recovery and their resilience from the pandemic because they 

do not have data that is collected by the census in the current 

population survey. 

And Puerto Rico also cannot obtain and use certain detailed 

information because they are also not included in the current 

population survey. 

According to some of these territories, they may not even apply 

to some of the Federal programs because they lack the data that 

is needed to apply. 

Territories are trying to mitigate these data gaps. American 

Samoa and USVI are trying to collect information that is similar 

to the information that is collected by the Bureau of Labor Statistics and the Census Bureau. CNMI and Guam are updating their 

address lists. Puerto Rico is trying to improve how their GDP is 

calculated. 

And while these data collection needs may vary across the territories, there does need to be a more coordinated, government-wide 

approach for agencies to use in deciding whether and how to collect 

the data and report statistics from the territories. As a result, we 

recommended that OMB ensure the Chief Statistician develops a 

coordinated, government-wide approach for addressing these territorial data gaps. Doing so would improve the information that is 

available to decision makers at all levels of government, and would 

allow for us to make better decisions about the allocation of those 

resources and to evaluate the effectiveness of our programs. 

Chair Hageman, Ranking Member Leger Ferna ́ndez, and 

members of the Committee, this concludes my prepared statements. I would be pleased to answer any questions you may have. 

[The prepared statement of Ms. Love-Grayer follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF LATESHA LOVE-GRAYER, DIRECTOR, INTERNATIONAL

AFFAIRS AND TRADE, U.S. GOVERNMENT ACCOUNTABILITY OFFICE

U.S. TERRITORIES: Coordinated Federal Approach Needed to Better 

Address Data Gaps 

Chair Hageman, Ranking Member Leger Ferna ́ndez, and Members of the 

Subcommittee: 

Thank you for the opportunity to discuss our work on gaps in data for the U.S. 

territories. Our comments today are based on our May 2024 report entitled U.S. 

Territories: Coordinated Federal Approach Needed to Better Address Data Gaps.1

We were asked to report on gaps in federal statistics for the territories, the impact 

of such data gaps, and any administrative or legislative actions that can be taken 

to address them. 
12 

2The Federated States of Micronesia, the Republic of the Marshall Islands, and the Republic 

of Palau—the freely associated states—are independent countries and so are excluded from our 

scope. 3The 13 principal statistical agencies are the Bureaus of Economic Analysis, Justice Statistics, 

Labor Statistics, Transportation Statistics, and the Census; Economic Research Service; Energy 

Information Administration; Internal Revenue Service Statistics of Income; National 

Agricultural Statistics Service; National Center for Education Statistics; National Center for 

Health Statistics; National Center for Science and Engineering Statistics; and Social Security 

Administration Office of Research, Evaluation and Statistics. 4GAO-24-106574. 

The U.S. government needs evidence—including statistics—to guide decisionmaking, evaluate the effectiveness of programs, and determine where best to target 

resources. It is also expected to ensure the quality of the data used for these 

purposes. 

Public-facing federal statistical products often contain gaps in data for the five 

permanently inhabited U.S. territories: American Samoa, the Commonwealth of the 

Northern Mariana Islands (CNMI), Guam, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, and 

the U.S. Virgin Islands (USVI).2 At each of the 13 federal statistical agencies we 

reviewed (comprising the core of the federal statistical system), a majority of statistical products we examined excluded at least one of the territories.3 In products 

where the territories were included, we found disparities in the timeliness and in 

the measurement of quality of territorial data relative to the rest of the U.S. 

Numerous factors prevent precise quantification of the effects of data gaps for 

federal funding to the territories. However, officials in these territories described a 

wide variety of resulting adverse effects, such as the inability to demonstrate need 

and eligibility for a range of federal support programs. Officials also underscored the 

difficulty in assessing the effectiveness of resilience and recovery efforts during the 

COVID-19 pandemic, due to lack of data. 

To better understand data gaps and related issues, we collected lists of statistical 

products from the principal federal statistical agencies, analyzed authorizing 

statutes of those agencies, and interviewed territorial and federal statistical officials—including from the Office of the Chief Statistician of the United States— 

among other methodologies. This work was conducted in accordance with generally 

accepted government auditing standards. More details on our scope and methodology can be found in the full report.4

Background 

As we have previously reported, the five territories continue to face a range of 

economic challenges, including 

• declining populations, 

• high cost of energy and imported goods, 

• increasing vulnerability to extreme weather, and 

• undiversified economies. 

The COVID-19 pandemic exacerbated some of these conditions in several 

territories by decreasing tourism. 

American Samoa, CNMI, Guam, and USVI are small island areas with small 

economies, as measured by gross domestic product (GDP). As of 2020, all the territories but Puerto Rico had lower levels of GDP than Vermont—the state with the 

smallest GDP. Puerto Rico’s GDP is larger than the GDP of 14 states. Reporting 

of GDP statistics for the territories is lagged relative to the rest of the U.S. 

Forming a key part of the federal statistical system are the 13 principal statistical 

agencies—agencies whose missions are predominantly the collection, compilation, 

analysis, and dissemination of information for statistical purposes. The Office of 

Management and Budget (OMB), through the Office of the Chief Statistician of the 

United States, works with these agencies and other statistical officials to discuss 

and implement federal statistical policy through multiple consultative bodies such 

as the Interagency Council on Statistical Policy and the Federal Committee on 

Statistical Methodology. 

Several Factors Contribute to Data Gaps in the Territories 

Geographic. According to Census Bureau officials we spoke with, some territories’ distances from the U.S. mainland can make it difficult for dependable and 

timely in-person data collection if agencies do not have staff permanently assigned 

to the territories. The Census Bureau’s evolution in data collection for the stateside 
13 

5GAO, 2020 Census: Innovations Helped with Implementation, but Bureau Can Do More to 

Realize Future Benefits, GAO-21-478 (Washington, D.C.: June 14, 2021). 

decennial census shows that technology and automation can help overcome 

geographic challenges.5

As figure 1 shows, Puerto Rico and USVI in the Caribbean Sea are much closer 

to the headquarters of most federal agencies than are the Pacific territories. We 

found that Puerto Rico and USVI appeared as often as the Pacific territories—or 

more frequently—in all but one agency’s lists of statistical products we received. 

Statistical. Small populations in the territories can present confidentiality concerns when reporting detailed data and can affect the ability of agencies to calculate 

precise estimates, according to officials with the Office of Management and Budget 

(OMB) and Census Bureau. Figure 2 illustrates a hypothetical example of how jurisdictions with relatively smaller populations require higher sampling percentages 

than relatively larger jurisdictions to achieve the same margin of error. Higher sampling requirements for a given level of precision do not preclude the use of sampling 

in a territory with a smaller population, but they do raise the associated costs. 
14 

6 29 U.S.C. §§ 1-2. 

7 3 L.P.R.A. §§ 308, 309, 315. 

Note: For this figure, we use a hypothetical example to demonstrate what percent of the 

respective populations would need to be sampled to attain the same level of precision (i.e., the 

same margin of error). Our calculation assumed an error rate of 0.5, a design effect of 2, and 

a confidence level of 95 percent. 

Cost. Estimation costs increase as sample size increases. The Census Bureau in 

2018 cited the cost of needing to do a full census of the territories (except Puerto 

Rico) in lieu of sampling as a primary barrier to including them in the American 

Community Survey (ACS). The ACS provides detailed demographic statistics used 

in a large number of federal formula grant programs. The Census Bureau administers the Puerto Rico Community Survey, which collects and produces companion 

data to the ACS. 

Statutory. Statutes that govern and fund principal statistical agencies may differ 

or be ambiguous about the requirement to collect data from the territories. For 

example, the authorizing statute for the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) does not 

specify whether to include the territories in data collection efforts.6 Absent any additional guidance from OMB, variation exists in how territories are treated in BLS’s 

statistical products. For instance, Guam is not included in the Current Employment 

Statistics program due to a lack of unemployment insurance program data, which 

are a key data source for the product. However, Puerto Rico is included in the 

Current Employment Statistics program and requires reporting of such data under 

local law.7

Technical. According to officials from OMB and multiple statistical agencies, 

several factors can complicate data collection: non-standardized address formats in 

the territories, difficulty integrating federal information technology with that of the 

territories, language barriers, and use of paper surveys. In addition, some statistical 

products have topics that may not be applicable to the territories, such as those that 

measure geography-specific agricultural commodities or energy sources. 
15 

8The Community Development Block Grant Program reserves $7 million annually for 

American Samoa, Guam, CNMI, and USVI which is distributed based on their relative populations, while program funds are allocated to states and Puerto Rico based on separate formulas. 

See 42 U.S.C. § 5302(a)(24); 42 U.S.C. § 5306(a)(2). 9 7 U.S.C. §§ 2012-2014; 42 U.S.C. § 9902(2). 

10GAO, Veterans Affairs: Actions Needed to Improve Access to Care in the U.S. Territories and 

Freely Associated States, GAO-24-106364 (Washington, D.C.: May 23, 2024). VA’s model uses 

three main data sources: VA’s U.S. Veteran Eligibility Trends and Statistics database, Department of Defense separation projections, and the U.S. Census Bureau’s American Community 

Survey. According to VA, the U.S. Veteran Eligibility Trends and Statistics database likely 

includes information on veterans from all U.S. territories and the freely associated states, but 

the other two major data sources—Department of Defense separation projections and the 

Continued 

Additionally, agencies attributed some of the data gaps to limitations in source 

data within the territories. For example, Census Bureau officials told us that the 

lack of a robust and up-to-date address list in the territories reduces the bureau’s 

ability to include territories in certain mail-based surveys. 

Department of the Interior officials added that federal statistical products may 

sometimes exclude territories in cases where officials at statistical agencies are 

accustomed to limiting the scope of their products to the 50 states and are not 

aware that they could also include the territories. 

Gaps in Data Have Various Adverse Effects on Territories 

Numerous factors prevent policymakers from precisely quantifying the effects of 

data gaps for federal funding to the territories. However, territories cited a variety 

of ways in which data gaps significantly affect their jurisdictions. For example: 

• American Samoa officials expressed concern that subsistence farming is not 

fully captured due to underlying issues with the address list the Census of 

Agriculture relies on, which may mean that its farmers are not eligible for 

certain farm support programs. 

• CNMI officials emphasized the absence of recurring economic indicators, such 

as certain employment statistics from BLS. 

• Officials from Guam said that not enough reportable data in the Island Areas 

Census for some of the territory’s smaller communities prevent those communities from being included in other composite statistics, such as the Social 

Vulnerability Index. Officials noted that this affects their ability to identify 

communities of need before, during, and after natural disasters and affects 

how decisions are made to allocate emergency preparedness funding. 

• USVI officials indicated that since they are not included in the Census 

Bureau’s Current Population Survey (done in concert with BLS) and Household Pulse Survey, they had difficulties assessing the effectiveness of local 

resilience and recovery efforts during the pandemic. 

• Officials from Puerto Rico described not being able to obtain and use certain 

detailed labor-force information because of not being included in the Current 

Population Survey. 

According to Guam and USVI officials, territories may in some cases simply not 

seek or be able to apply for opportunities for federal funds allocations because they 

are not included in a statistical product or lack the local data sources needed to 

apply. In some cases, territories are still able to participate in a federal program 

even when data from a statistical product are not available. For example, despite 

not being part of the ACS, American Samoa, Guam, CNMI, and USVI have separately been included in an equivalent Community Development Block Grant Insular 

Areas Program.8

Data gaps can also affect the mechanisms agencies use to allocate funds to the 

territories. For example, federal Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program payments to Guam and USVI are adjusted to reflect the cost of food in these territories 

based on federal poverty and consumer price data that are not collected the same 

way as for the 50 states.9

Overall, our body of work examining assistance to the territories has, at times, 

illustrated that limitations in federal data collected in the territories can adversely 

affect the federal government’s ability to make informed decisions about the 

distribution of resources. As one example, in May 2024, we reported that the 

Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) uses a model to estimate the size of the 

veteran population (by certain demographic characteristics and across geographic 

areas through fiscal year 2050) to inform resource allocation and outreach needs.10
16 

American Community Survey—do not. We did not review any local data sets to assess their 

accuracy or reliability because it was not within the scope of our review. 11 44 U.S.C. § 3504(e)(1), (7). 

However, because one of the major data sources is the Census Bureau’s American 

Community Survey, which does not include data on territories except Puerto Rico, 

the VA lacks assurance that its estimates are accurate for territory veterans. We 

reported that for at least two of the territories, federal estimates were about or less 

than half of what the territories estimated to be accurate. We recommended that 

the Secretary of VA identify the extent to which known data limitations impact the 

accuracy of population estimates for veterans living in the U.S. territories and freely 

associated states, and VA agreed with the recommendation. 

Territories, with Federal Support, Have Made Efforts to Mitigate Data 

Gaps through Local Data Collection 

We found that territories have taken steps to mitigate federal data gaps. For 

example, officials from both American Samoa and USVI described local efforts to 

collect data equivalent to data collected by BLS and the Census Bureau, respectively. Officials from CNMI and Guam described efforts to update their address lists 

in order to enhance the quality of their participation in the Island Areas Censuses, 

while officials from Puerto Rico described local efforts to improve how their GDP 

is calculated. 

Improved statistical efforts are part of activities the Department of the Interior’s 

Office of Insular Affairs funds through a technical assistance program for the territories (other than Puerto Rico, for which the department does not have administrative responsibility). This program allocated a total of over $60 million from fiscal 

years 2019 through 2023 for activities such as Guam’s effort to update its Household 

Income and Expenditures Survey. 

Federal Efforts to Collect and Report Data on the Territories Are Limited 

and Uncoordinated 

OMB is responsible for coordinating the federal statistical system to ensure its 

effectiveness and efficiency.11 However, there is not a coordinated, government-wide 

approach for agencies to use in deciding whether to collect data and report statistics 

from territories in federal statistical products. For example, OMB has not developed 

guidance or directives that explicitly address data collection in the territories. Moreover, despite the pervasive nature of data gaps in the territories, we found that 

agencies other than the Bureau of Economic Analysis and Census Bureau generally 

have not researched the costs, benefits, and feasibility of expanding the scope of 

their statistical products to include the territories. 

As a result, we recommended that OMB ensure the Chief Statistician develops a 

coordinated, government-wide approach for federal statistical agencies to use in 

examining and addressing territorial data gaps. Doing so would improve the transparency of statistical decisions. Improved data collection for the territories could 

also better inform decision-makers about how to allocate resources to the territories 

and how to evaluate the effectiveness of those investments. 

OMB neither agreed nor disagreed with our recommendation but provided technical comments to our draft report, which we incorporated as appropriate. The 

causes of data gaps in the U.S. territories are multifaceted. We believe our 

recommendation will help spur federal attention and facilitate a more comprehensive approach to understanding and addressing the territories’ data needs. 

Chairman Hageman, Ranking Member Leger Ferna ́ndez, and Members of the 

Subcommittee, this completes my prepared statement. I would be pleased to respond 

to any questions that you may have at this time. 

***** 
17 

Ms. Love-Grayer submitted her prepared statement as a GAO 

report. The full GAO report can be viewed at: 

https://www.gao.gov/assets/870/869419.pdf 
18 

QUESTIONS SUBMITTED FOR THE RECORD TO MS. LATESHA LOVE-GRAYER, DIRECTOR

OF INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS AND TRADE, GOVERNMENT ACCOUNTABILITY OFFICE

Ms. Love-Grayer did not submit responses to the Committee by the 

appropriate deadline for inclusion in the printed record. 

Questions Submitted by Representative Westerman 

Question 1. What role can be interested outside groups play in helping to address 

territorial data gaps? 

Question 2. Why can’t the federal statistical agencies already close the data gaps 

in the U.S. territories? 

Question 3. Your report and written testimony list the various economic challenges 

the U.S. territories face. 

3a) Can you explain the connection between these challenges and the need for good 

data? 

Question 4. What steps can federal statistical agencies take now, without waiting 

for additional funding or authorizations? 

Question 5. Your written statement notes that there have been few efforts by statistical agencies to research the costs, benefits, and feasibility of expanding statistical 

coverage in the U.S. territories. 

5a) For those few efforts that have been made, what were the results? 

Question 6. Your written statement notes that statistical agencies sometimes 

exclude territories from data collection because ‘‘they are accustomed to limiting the 

scope of their products to the 50 states and are not aware that they could also include 

the U.S. territories.’’ 

6a) Can you elaborate on this point? Do you have any examples? 

Question 7. What did each territory identify as their specific need to improve their 

statistical operations? 

Question 8. What did each territory identify as their most important existing gap 

in federal statistics coverage? 

Question 9. Aside from the Office of the Chief Statistician, are the other federal 

statistical agencies aware of the gaps in data collection for the U.S. territories? 

9a) Do they agree that this is a serious issue? 

Question 10. In the GAO report, it was stated that federal agencies attributed some 

of the data gaps to limitations in source data within the U.S. territories. 

10a) What limitations does each territory have? 

10b) Would addressing the data gaps at a federal level be sufficient or would this 

also require the U.S. territories to address some of these limitations? Why? 

Question 11. Do federal agencies have cost estimates and feasibility assessments for 

including the U.S. territories in their statistical products? 

11a) If so, what are they? 

Question 12. Why do some federal statistic products collect territory for one or some 

territories, but exclude the rest? 

Question 13. Why does Puerto Rico receive more coverage in federal data collection 

than the other territories? 

Question 14 How does addressing these data gaps sooner rather than later save 

American taxpayer dollars and improve fiscal responsibility in the long run? 

Questions Submitted by Representative Gonza ́lez-Colo ́n 

Question 1. In its report, GAO recommended that the Office of Management and 

Budget (OMB) should ensure the Chief Statistician develops a government-wide 

approach for federal statistical agencies to use to examine the costs, benefits, and 

feasibility of including territories in statistical products and, as appropriate, identify 

ways to address data gaps. 
19 

Could you discuss why, in GAO’s view, a whole-of-government approach such as 

this one is necessary to understand and address federal data gaps impacting the 

territories? How would this help address the lack of coordination GAO identified in 

its report? 

Question 2. When GAO recommends that the Chief Statistician should develop a 

coordinated, government-wide approach, what do you envision that approach would 

look like in practice? Would it be OMB developing and publishing a Statistical Policy 

Directive, or distributing general guidance for all 13 principal statistical agencies? 

Or a potential plan with short-, medium-, and long-term objectives? 

Question 3. In my and my office’s conversations with federal agencies like the 

Census Bureau, one of the major obstacles that is always raised when it comes to 

expanding statistical programs to include Puerto Rico is costs or the need for 

additional funding. 

However, sometimes these statistical products or surveys are sponsored by two 

agencies—such as the Current Population Survey, which is jointly sponsored by the 

Census and the Bureau of Labor Statistics—or carried out by one agency but 

sponsored by another—such as the American Housing Survey, which is conducted by 

the Census but sponsored by HUD. This means that costs are shared between 

multiple agencies, and efforts to expand a particular survey or product to include 

Puerto Rico or the other territories would require interagency cooperation and 

agreements. 

Could you discuss how OMB would be best positioned to address situations like 

this one? 

Question 4. As GAO notes in its report, OMB neither agreed nor disagreed with 

its recommendation on developing a coordinated, government-wide approach. Since 

the report’s release, has GAO heard from OMB or had any follow-up conversations 

with them as to whether they are taking actions to implement the recommendation? 

Is GAO concerned that OMB will not implement the recommendation, given they 

neither agreed nor disagreed with it? 

Question 5. Now that the report is released, what comes next? How will GAO 

monitor compliance with its recommendation? For instance, how frequently do you 

intend to engage with OMB moving forward, if at all? 

Question 6. In its report, GAO mentions that OMB officials shared that there are 

plans to open a new data center in Puerto Rico as part of the Federal Statistical 

Research Data Center Program. Would you be able to provide or share additional 

information on these plans? 

Question 7. One of the major concerns with federal data gaps is their potential 

impact on how federal funding is allocated to the territories. Could you discuss what 

GAO found regarding this issue? Were you able to identify instances of federal 

programs allocating funding to the territories differently because of the lack of data? 

Questions Submitted by Representative Sablan 

Question 1. In our discussion of sample sizes and associated costs, you stated that 

in smaller populations the cost per person is higher when collecting data. Could you 

tell us why the cost per person would be different? Could you tell us what the cost 

per person sampled would be in each of the U.S. territories for a representative 

sample? And could you tell us what the cost per person would be to collect that same 

sample in representatives states (Alaska, Hawai’i, Wyoming, Kentucky, California, 

for instance)? 

Question 2. How is household or individual data typically collected by the federal 

government? Are there best practices or technologies—in use by the federal government, in use by other governments or institutions worldwide, or emerging—that can 

make such collection more accurate, more efficient, less costly? Are such technologies 

available for use in the U.S. territories? 

Question 3. Could artificial intelligence play a role in extrapolating information 

about the U.S. territories that could be used as a reliable stand-in for data that may 

be collected directly or by other means in the rest of the United States? 

Question 4. Prior to statehood in 1959, what data collected by the federal 

government in the 48 states was not collected in Alaska and Hawai’i? 
20 

Question 5. For agencies and departments GAO surveyed, which have policies on 

record or are statutorily barred from collecting data in the U.S. territories? And what 

are those policies or statutes, if any? 

Question 6. What data compiled by the federal government originates from state 

data collections and what data is collected directly by the federal government itself? 

Questions Submitted by Representative Vela ́ zquez 

Question 1. Did your audit consider data gaps related to the use and impact of 

federal funding allocations to Puerto Rico, including funds for emergency response 

and/or post-disaster recovery and reconstruction? If so, what is GAO’s evaluation of 

the available data? How does it differ from data gaps in tracking the use and impact 

of recurring federal funds? 

Question 2. Non-profit organizations, community-based entities, and scholars have 

contributed to highlighting Puerto Rico’s primary needs through data collection, 

analysis, and publications. However, GAO’s audit relies heavily on the insight of 

public officials for its data gaps assessment. To what extent do the gaps identified 

by GAO address the primary needs at the community level in Puerto Rico, and what 

can be done to ensure that the voices and needs of people on the ground are present 

in federal data? 

Question 3. Resources are an important aspect when talking about collecting, 

analyzing, and disseminating data. In the case of Puerto Rico, recent austerity 

measures hinder these abilities. To that end, could you provide some information as 

to why the $60 million allocated to other territories for improving their data were 

not available to Puerto Rico? What specific technologies are needed in Puerto Rico 

to address internal limitations? 

Question 4. According to your presentation, Department of the Interior (DOI) 

officials were unaware they could include U.S. territories in their data. What specific 

actions could be taken by the Office and Management and Budget (OMB) to address 

this situation? 

Question 5. GAO stated in its report that a mix of cost, geographic, technical and 

other issues have contributed to the exclusion of the U.S. territories from federal 

statistical products. Do you consider this lack of data a leading contributing factor 

to the neglect of federal agency attention to the needs of the territories? 

Ms. HAGEMAN. Thank you for your testimony. The Chair now 

recognizes Ms. Leon Guerrero for 5 minutes. 

STATEMENT OF LOLA LEON GUERRERO, DIRECTOR, BUREAU 

OF STATISTICS AND PLANS, GOVERNMENT OF GUAM, 

HAGATNA, GUAM 

Ms. LEON GUERRERO. Good morning, Chairman Hageman, 

Ranking Member Ferna ́ndez, and distinguished members of the 

Subcommittee. It is an honor to appear before you and the 

Members to provide Guam’s testimony on examining GAO’s 

findings to address data gaps and improve data collection in the 

territories. 

I will present testimony on the critical issue of data equity and 

the exclusion of the U.S. territories from many Federal statistical 

products, unlike Puerto Rico and the 50 states. This exclusion 

leaves Guam reliant on administrative data and periodic local and 

Federal surveys to meet community needs. 

Data collection is crucial for insight to key topics, predicting 

trends, and developing sound policies. This is especially important 

for island economies like Guam, which depend on tourism, military 

spending, and Federal funding. Despite extensive data collection 

efforts, we face challenges due to limited resources and skilled 
21 

personnel impacting our ability to obtain meaningful data. I 

commend the GAO for highlighting these issues. 

Consistent, reliable, and up-to-date demographic, social, and economic information is essential for effective government planning 

and resource allocation. The Bureau of Statistics plan supports 

recommendations to address data equity for the U.S. territories. 

Examples of data inequities and disparities. Exclusion from surveys. U.S. territories do not participate on ongoing Federal surveys, 

such as the American Community Survey, the current population 

surveys, consumer expenditure surveys, and other surveys conducted by the Bureau of Labor Statistics and other Federal programs. Instead, the U.S. territories rely on the decennial census to 

obtain critical housing and population statistics. While the decennial census provides comprehensive information for the U.S. territories, the lack of current statistics hinders the territories’ ability 

to address immediate and long-term issues accordingly. 

On the decennial census, the census provides critical data on 

Guam’s demographics, socio-economic, and housing characteristics 

every 10 years. However, limitations in outdated information 

impacts funding allocation formulas for territories, as well as for 

planning purposes. For instance, the 2020 census had fewer details 

than the 2010 census. We have villages without demographic data, 

no detail on military members and their households, which affects 

data on income and housing conditions. 

On the IMPLAN. IMPLAN is an economic modeling software the 

Department of Labor’s Chief Economist uses. We were informed 

IMPLAN is no longer generating data sets for American Samoa, 

Guam, and CNMI, due to changes in the U.S. Census Bureau’s disclosure policies. This affects our ability to estimate economic 

impacts accurately. 

On the gross domestic product, this is funded by the U.S. Department of the Interior and contracted to the Census Bureau. We were 

recently informed that the funding for the GDP is temporarily suspended or paused due to the cost. OIA officials were on our island 

to review and address Guam’s existing administrative and economic data to produce the GDP and economic statistics. 

On the Justice40 initiative’s climate and justice screening tool. 

Under the Justice40 initiatives, the climate and economic justice 

screening tool lacks sufficient data for Guam in most categories, 

which affects our ability to qualify for funding under the Bipartisan 

Infrastructure Law and Inflation Reduction Act for disadvantaged 

communities. 

On hazard mitigation, territories face challenges in meeting 

FEMA’s data requirements for hazard mitigation plans due to inadequate data and tools. The FEMA’s National Risk Index Mapping 

and FEMA’s hazards programs are not populated with the data 

and layers for American Samoa, Guam, and CNMI as they are for 

the states, USVI, and Puerto Rico. These tools provide the type of 

mapping, data, and reporting needed for a hazard mitigation plans. 

Since they are not readily available to Guam, we have had to 

develop the mapping and tools and the reporting on our own. This 

is not a simple task, and this involves developing a Social Vulnerability Index for Guam, building stock for Guam, GIS tools, and 

much more. While Guam is able to accomplish this, it should not 
22 

be necessary, and the territories should not be held to the same 

standards as the states for Federal funding opportunities when 

they are not given the same resources and tools to make them 

eligible. 

On the Social Vulnerability Index. Guam developed its SVI using 

CDC’s methodology, but there is missing data from the 2020 census 

which hinders updates crucial for disaster management. 

Recommendation. To address these issues, we need legislative 

mandates and funding to share consistent data collection and support for the territories on guidance from other Federal agencies on 

acceptable methodologies to follow to obtain data where the territories are excluded. 

Most importantly, improved coordination with the Office of the 

Chief Statistician of Federal Agencies to include the U.S. territories 

in the major statistical products is crucial to bridging these gaps 

and enhancing data collections in the U.S. territories. 

Thank you for the opportunity to present Guam’s perspective. 

[The prepared statement of Ms. Leon Guerrero follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF LOLA E. LEON GUERRERO, DIRECTOR, BUREAU OF

STATISTICS AND PLANS, GOVERNMENT OF GUAM

Good morning! Chairwoman Hageman, Ranking Member Fernandez, and distinguished members of the Subcommittee, it is an honor to appear before you and the 

members to provide Guam’s testimony on ‘‘Examining GAO’s Findings to Address 

Data Gaps and Improve Data Collection in the Territories’’. 

I am presenting testimony to address the critical issue pertaining to the lack of 

data equity and exclusion of the U.S. Territories in many of the federal statistical 

products that is afforded to Puerto Rico and the 50 states. This exclusion leaves 

Guam and the U.S. Territories with limited access to current information and are 

left to rely on administrative data and/or local and federal resources to conduct 

periodic data collection and surveys to address the priority needs of the community. 

Data collection is fundamental to gaining and drawing valuable insights on 

critical topics, predicting trends, preventing risks, making informed decisions and 

in developing critical and sound policy. Good data is especially important for island 

economies with limited resources and who are dependent on external factors such 

as tourism and federal spending for sustained economic growth. Guam, being the 

farthest western-most territory, and second in land area, is dependent on three pillars for economic growth: tourism, military spending and federal funding. Although 

extensive data is collected, relevant labor market and population files are not often 

readily available to facilitate data analysis. The lack of resources to facilitate the 

data capture along with the skilled data technicians or analysts to define, analyze, 

and evaluate the process are challenges faced by U.S. Territories to obtaining meaningful data. 

I commend GAO for addressing this long-standing issue recognizing the unique 

challenges the U.S. Territories face when making decisions. Whether we live in 

small island communities, populous states, or nations, we are all driven by data and 

the absence of consistent, reliable and up-to-date demographic, social and economic 

information impacts the government’s ability to plan effectively and secure the 

resources needed for a sustainable future. 

The Bureau of Statistics and Plans (BSP) is in support of the recommendations 

to the subcommittee regarding the lack of data equity for the U.S. Territories. We 

recognize that the U.S. Territories do not participate in the ongoing surveys conducted in the United States including the American Community Survey (ACS), the 

Current Population Survey (CPS), Consumer Expenditures Survey, Current Employment Statistics Survey, and other surveys conducted by the Bureau of Labor Statistics and other federal programs. As such, the U.S. Territories rely on the once a 

decade census to obtain critical housing and population statistics. 

While the decennial census provides comprehensive information for the U.S. 

Territories, the lack of current statistics does not present a clear picture of the current condition of the U.S. Territories to address immediate and long-term issues 

accordingly. 
23 

Presented are some examples pertaining to the data inequities and disparities 

regarding the exclusion of the U.S. Territories from the federal statistical data 

products. 

Decennial Census. The Decennial Census data provides a major source of comprehensive information about Guam’s demographic, socio-economic and housing 

characteristics. Because Guam receives this data once every 10 years, the more 

detailed the information that is made available, the better the understanding of the 

housing and population make-up for Guam. 

The U.S. Census Bureau reported a population decline between 2010 and 2020 for 

Guam and the territories. The population decline from 2010 and the impact of the 

coronavirus pandemic on the 2020 Census results draws serious concerns for the 

government of Guam. While we recognize that there are limitations to the census 

data, we are concerned how the data will impact funding allocation formulas for the 

island and the territories. We have villages without demographic data, no detail on 

military members and their households, and there is less detail than in the 2010 

Census of Guam. For example, the Bureau of Statistics and Plans notes the impact 

of data tables released by the Census Bureau reporting ‘‘N’’ cases in a number of 

municipalities (villages) as it pertains to certain data like income. This signifies that 

the ‘‘data is not available for selected geographic areas due to concerns with statistical reliability.’’ 

Many agencies rely on income data to determine eligibility for programs (i.e. 

HUD’s Community Development Block Grant (CBDG) relies on low/moderate 

income data to determine if an area meets the criteria of having at least 51-percent 

of the population meeting HUD’s definition of those falling in the low to moderate 

income category.) For the island areas, the decennial Census is used to determine 

low/moderate income (LMI) areas. As such, these ‘‘eligible’’ areas do not change until 

the next decennial census. HUD works directly with the Census Bureau to prepare 

the LMI eligible areas of which 51-percent of the residents are low-moderate income 

individuals or households. HUD, however, does allow a jurisdiction to conduct 

income surveys to determine the percentage of LMI persons in the service area. 

HUD provides guidelines to do this. Like HUD, other federal agencies should provide guidance on acceptable methodologies to follow to obtain data that is acceptable 

to justify funding requests. 

In preparations for the decennial census, Guam worked closely with Census 

Bureau officials in reviewing and updating census topics, questionnaire content, 

geography and the like. With respect to the census questionnaire, I want to point 

out that several census questions in Guam’s ‘‘long form’’ were removed for the 2020 

Guam Census, and these questions include ‘‘use of battery-operated radios, airconditioning, main type of material used for the roof, and main type of material 

used for the foundation.’’ The Bureau of Statistics and Plans requested to retain the 

census questions; however, our request was not considered, and the questions were 

removed in the 2020 Guam Census. The use of battery-operated radios is critical 

in times of emergency when there is a loss of power, internet and telecommunication services. This was evident in May 2023 when Guam was struck with 

Category 4, Typhoon Mawar, and internet and phone communication were lost. 

Residents lacked information about the condition of the storm and impact to the 

municipalities, flooded areas where roads were impassable, when the power and 

water will be restored, and where services can be obtained. It is important to note 

the Guam Homeland Security/Office of Civil Defense lists battery-powered radios 

and NOAA weather radios as part of the emergency supply list to Get Guam Ready 

in preparation for an emergency or natural disaster. This and the other topics specific to the Island Areas needs are necessary for emergency preparations and 

response planning and to determine the level of housing structure conditions on 

Guam. 

In addition, we had requested for the release of the Public Use Microdata Sample 

(PUMS) for Guam based on the 2020 Census of Guam; however, the PUMS is not 

listed as part of the 2020 Island Areas Data Products release schedule, and we are 

unclear if the Census Bureau will make available the PUMS at a later date. The 

10-percent sample of housing and population records allows users to run specified 

tabulations at the Guam level. The PUMS is a useful data application tool that 

allows the data user to run frequencies and cross any variable by other population 

and housing variables. In this regard, the user can run cross tabulations and frequencies at the Guam (island-wide) level when information is not available from the 

standard set of tables released by the Census Bureau. 

The Census Bureau serves as ‘‘the primary U.S. government source of population 

estimates and projections for the U.S. Island Areas.’’ Because many government and 

civic organizations use population projections for program planning and application 

for federal assistance, we have requested the Census Bureau to provide projection 
24 

updates. Currently, we are waiting for the Bureau officials to update the population 

projections since the release of the detailed results from the 2020 Census of Guam. 

We recognize that the Census statistics that Guam receives serves as the most 

valuable, comprehensive resource and reference tool used by government, community officials, students and the public for research, planning, and for access to 

federal funding opportunities. Having to rely on a once a decade census data set 

leaves little for our policy and community leaders to work with to effectively plan 

and lead our island for the next 10 years. Presently, Guam does not have the 

resources to bridge the gap. Had the territories been able to participate in the 

ongoing federal statistical surveys such as the American Community Survey (ACS), 

Current Population Survey (CPS) and Consumer Expenditure Survey (CES), federal 

funds could have been better allocated to meet the present and ever-changing needs 

of our communities. 

IMPLAN. IMPLAN is the leading provider of economic impact data and analytical 

software and utilizes an economic modeling technique called Input-Output analysis. 

Through US EDA funding, BSP procured a one year subscription for the Department of Labor. Last year, my office was informed that due to a change in the disclosure policy in the U.S. Census Bureau, the IMPLAN data sets will ‘‘no longer be 

generating data sets for American Samoa, Guam, and the Commonwealth of the 

Northern Mariana Islands (CNMI).’’ This economic software contains populated data 

elements from a variety of federal sources that is available in the United States and 

can be used to estimate economic impact of past or existing economic conditions of 

an area. The intent is to use existing data sets in the economic model software from 

federal or state sources as well as input other locally obtained data to calculate the 

effects to local industries or income change to the economy. The IMPLAN data sets 

are available for the 50 states, the U.S. Virgin Islands, and Puerto Rico, but are 

not available to the territories of American Samoa, Guam, and CNMI. This lack of 

the IMPLAN data sets for the three territories may adversely impact grant projects 

and programs that use IMPLAN to analyze and forecast impacts of proposed economic development events influenced by changes in economic conditions. 

Economic Census. The Economic Census is a census of every paid employee in the 

United States and territories. Conducted once every 5 years in the years ending in 

‘‘2’’ and ‘‘7’’, the Economic Census for the Island Areas is funded by the U.S. Department of Interior and contracted to the Census Bureau to conduct the census of all 

business establishments in the area. Historically, the Economic Census has been 

funded by the Department of Interior. We understand that former Guam delegate, 

Madeleine Bordallo, during her tenure had drafted legislation for Congress to mandate the Census Bureau to conduct the mandatory census of economic activity for 

the territories. However, we are not aware that legislation has ever been enacted 

to legally mandate the Census Bureau to fund and conduct the Economic Census 

for the territories. Moreover, the Government of Guam had been informed by 

Interior officials that they will be suspending its contract with the Census Bureau 

in this matter due to financial limitations. Currently, Interior officials have been coordinating with Guam officials to review and assess administrative and economic 

data to produce GDP and other economic statistics. Again, the U.S. Territories do 

not have the adequate representation nor funding resources to ensure this survey 

continues so that our local government officials and business sector maintain access 

to critical economic statistics necessary to make sound business decisions and to 

promote economic development initiatives. 

Justice40 Initiative—Climate and Economic Justice Screening Tool (CEJST). The 

Biden Administration created the Justice40 Initiative to address the decades of 

underinvestment in disadvantaged communities. It requires forty percent of the 

overall benefits of certain Federal climate change, clean energy, affordable and sustainable housing and other investments covered programs under the Bipartisan 

Infrastructure Law (BIL) and Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) funding opportunities 

to flow to disadvantaged communities that are marginalized by underinvestment 

and overburdened by pollution. The CESJT was created with an interactive map 

and uses datasets that are indicators of burdens in eight categories (climate, energy, 

health, housing, legacy pollution, transportation, water and wastewater, and workforce development). However, the CEJST does not illustrate nor provides for a noburden threshold metrics for Guam in 7 of the 8 categories. It only applies for 

workforce development and is specific to unemployment. Most of the data used to 

make the underserved determination were from surveys and databases that Guam 

was not included in. These include but are not limited to the ACS, FEMA National 

Risk Index, US Department of Energy LEAD Tool, Centers for Disease Control and 

Prevention (CDC) places data, and HUD Comprehensive Housing Affordability 

Strategy dataset. In reference to the sources used for the CEJST, again the majority 
25 

of the sources are not available for American Samoa, Guam, the Northern Mariana 

Islands, and the U.S. Virgin Islands. 

There are 70 data points used to determine ‘‘disadvantaged’’ eligible categories 

where there was insufficient data for Guam. The only data qualified as sufficient 

for Guam applied primarily to income, race, and educational attainment. This 

meant that categories related to Climate Change, Environmental Hazards, Energy 

Burden, Health Risks, and proximity to hazardous facilities were not categories that 

Guam would apply for under the BIL and IRA funding opportunities. These are categories that Guam’s census tracts should qualify as disadvantaged, however, Guam 

did not meet the criteria. Since FEMA is also following this for the Social Vulnerability Index (SVI) requirements that apply to resilience funds, Guam is going to 

have issues with those FEMA programs as well. 

Hazard Mitigation. Data inequities for the territories also impact emergency management and hazard mitigation. To be eligible for Hazard Mitigation and Building 

Resilient Infrastructure and Communities Grants, Guam must have an active and 

FEMA approved Hazard Mitigation Plan. This plan needs to be renewed every 5 

years. A major component of developing this plan is hazard mapping, and a spatial 

vulnerability analysis of hazards to government assets and vulnerable populations. 

Like EPA’s CJEST, FEMA’s National Risk Index Mapping and FEMA’s Hazus 

Program are not populated with the data and layers for American Samoa, Guam, 

and CNMI as they are for the states, USVI, and Puerto Rico. 

These tools provide the type of mapping, data and reporting needed for a Hazard 

Mitigation Plan for the states. Since they are not readily available to Guam, we 

have had to develop the mapping, the tools, and the reporting on our own. This is 

not a simple task since this involved developing a Social Vulnerability Index for 

Guam, building stock for Guam, GIS tools, and much more. While Guam was able 

to accomplish this, it should not be necessary, and the territories should not be held 

to the same standard as the states for federal funding opportunities when they are 

not given the same resources and tools to make them eligible. 

Social Vulnerability Index (SVI). The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention 

and Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry Social Vulnerability Index 

(hereafter, CDC/ATSDR SVI or SVI) developed this tool (SVI) to identify and provide emergency response to vulnerable communities. This tool serves as a database 

and mapping application designed to identify and quantify communities experiencing social vulnerability (demographic and socioeconomic factors such as poverty, 

lack of access to transportation, and crowded housing) based on data collected from 

the American Community Survey. Because Guam does not participate in the ACS, 

Guam developed and calculated its Social Vulnerability Index using CDC methodology and an adjusted SVI using CDC-modified method incorporating additional 

Guam-specific characteristics on housing structure and other relevant indicators 

specific to the island. In 2021, Guam released the ‘‘Calculating the Social Vulnerability Index for Guam’’ report using the data from the 2010 Guam Census to rank 

and identify the most vulnerable communities on the island. The Guam SVI results 

serve as an important step in providing reliable insights on how to solve community 

issues. The information helps to increase knowledge and awareness of vulnerable 

communities and inform strategies for disaster management. Specific census subjects such as building materials used for walls and roof, telephone service availability, access to computer/laptop and internet use, and battery-operated radios 

provide critical planning and support service information needed for areas prone to 

natural disasters including hard-to-reach areas and wooden and metal housing 

structures. Of interest to note is that the 2020 Census of Guam results will not 

include data on building materials, air conditioning, and access to battery-operated 

radios which could have contributed to updating Guam’s Social Vulnerability Index. 

As such, critical data distinct to the island areas will not be available. 

Equal Employment Opportunity Plan (EEOP). Under the U.S. Department of 

Justice, grant recipients are required to develop an Equal Employment Opportunity 

Plan which is a workforce report for funding authorized by the Omnibus Crime 

Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968. The EEOP’s purpose is to ensure that recipients of financial assistance from the Justice Department are providing full and 

equal participation of women, men and minority individuals regardless of sex, race 

or national origin in employment opportunities in the criminal justice system. To 

help recipients comply with the EEOP regulations, recipients utilize the online 

EEOP Utilization Report that collects and analyzes key employment data, organized 

by race, national origin and sex. 

Although the U.S. Census Bureau has collected extensive data on Guam, the 

relevant labor market files for preparing an EEOP Utilization Report are not readily 

available and are published several years following the decennial census. The 
26 

Bureau of Statistics and Plans analyzes and collects labor market statistics, however, the Bureau of Statistics and Plans and its US DOJ subrecipients cannot use 

the US DOJ, Office for Civil Rights Equal Employment Opportunity (EEO) 

Reporting System (EEOP online system) for developing the EEOP Report because 

the Bureau of Statistics and Plans uses racial and national origin categories that 

are more extensive than the ones used in the EEOP Report. The disparity in the 

data reported cannot be measured in a systematic manner to ensure accuracy and 

facilitate data analysis. Since the data collected is meant to provide content for data 

analysis, the information must be of the highest quality for it to be of value. Thus, 

it is important the Census Bureau include the PUMS in the 2020 Island Areas Data 

Products to release as Guam utilizes the PUMS to prepare the community workforce 

utilization report. 

National Incident-Based Reporting System (NIBRS). In FY 2016, the FBI formally 

announced its intention to sunset the Uniform Crime Report (UCR) program’s traditional Summary Reporting System (SRS) and replace it with National IncidentBased Reporting System (NIBRS) by January 1, 2021. By statute, Bureau of Justice 

Assistance (BJA), Justice Assistance Grant (JAG) awards are calculated using summary part 1 violent crime data from the FBI’s UCR program. Specifically, the 

formula allocations for JAG rely heavily on the ratio of ‘‘the average number of part 

1 violent crimes of the UCR of the FBI reported by such State for the three most 

recent years reported by such State to the average annual number of such crimes 

reported by all States for such years’’ (34 U.S.C. 10156(a)(1)(B)). Guam achieved 

NIBRS certification in 2022, however, challenges are experienced with the mobile 

field reporting and the continued manual reviews to properly categorize crime 

offenses using the NIBRS offense code and related arrest information of the offense. 

As such, potential limitations may result in the underreporting of crimes, limited 

coverage of certain demographics, and reliance on self-reported data. Recorded crime 

statistics may not provide reliable measures in the levels or trends in crime and 

victimization making it difficult to create appropriate law enforcement budgets, programs and policies. With the transition to NIBRS, the Byrne JAG formula calculations will be based on NIBRS reporting. Without reliable and accurate statistics, it 

would be difficult to create appropriate law enforcement budgets or resource allocation to help determine which programs or communities will receive criminal justice 

grants. 

US Bureau of Labor Statistics Programs. According to the Guam Department of 

Labor, the specific statement about Guam’s participation in US Bureau of Labor 

Statistics (BLS) programs is in error. It states that Guam does not participate in 

the US BLS Current Employment Statistics (CES) program because of the nonexistence of a permanent unemployment insurance program. That is incorrect. 

Guam is legally eligible to apply for the US BLS CES program and was seriously 

considered at one time years ago. Guam BLS reviewed the Cooperative Federal/ 

State statistical programs with the BLS regional office in depth. According to the 

Chief Economist of the Guam Department of Labor, Guam decided to not submit 

an application for this cooperative program because 1) Data collection is done primarily centrally by phone and the call center hours did not align with Guam’s business hours; 2) The BLS program is monthly whereas the Guam version is quarterly 

(DOL did not believe there was a need for monthly data for Guam and the workload 

for the department and employers did not seem to be justifiable); and 3) The US 

CES BLS timelines for CES requirements are very short and frequent. The DOL 

would have great difficulty and stress in attempting to meet the requirements without a lot of funding beyond the program allocations. Further, it would require more 

regional and national office support. It would not be impossible to operate the US 

CES program with a lot of support, but with the existing circumstances it would 

be unrealistic. 

Guam does not participate in the Quarterly Census of Employment and Wages 

(QCEW) program because of a lack of an Unemployment Insurance (UI) program. 

Guam also does not participate in the Local Area Unemployment Statistics (LAUS) 

program because of the lack of the UI and lack of the US Current Population 

Survey (CPS) and Current Employment Statistics (CES) survey. The Unemployment 

Insurance program database is needed to operate the QCEW and Local Area 

Unemployment Statistics LAUS programs. 

Guam did begin to apply for the US BLS program and began participating in the 

BLS Occupational Employment and Wage Statistics (OES), now OEWS, program 

and added the Census of Occupational Fatalities (CFOI) program to the existing 

Survey of Occupational Injuries and Illness (SOII) program. Some federal statistical 

programs are handled exclusively by the Federal Government and others are Cooperative Federal/State programs in which the US BLS provides program guidelines, 
27 

software and administration with local government participation to collect data and 

provide input to the statistical program. 

The Current Population Survey (CPS) is a household survey to collect information 

as a component to the LAUS unemployment model estimates. It is a US DOL BLS 

program which contracts the Census Bureau to collect unemployment information 

in the 50 states, the USVI and Puerto Rico. This is not conducted in Guam. In such 

absence the Guam Department of Labor, BLS conducts a similar locally funded survey to collect information and publish unemployment rates for Guam. Inclusion of 

Guam in the US CPS and/or technical support for the survey could enhance the 

quality and timeliness of the data for Guam. 

The US Consumer Price Indexes produced by the US DOL BLS collect price information in select US cities, but not Guam. Guam funds and conducts its own consumer price index survey program with support from DOI for periodic market 

basket adjustments with the Household Incomes and Expenditures survey (HIES). 

Guam is presently conducting the HIES in efforts to update the consumer price 

index and contribute to the GDP for Guam. The last HIES was conducted in 2005 

and there are new items that exist in the market that would need to be identified 

and classified. This project was made possible through technical assistance funding 

from the Department of the Interior. US BLS technical and administrative support 

could make this program more precise and comparable with the US price indexes. 

Increasingly a great deal of information exists in Government and private sector 

databases. Increasing the use of already collected administrative data should be a 

primary focus for tremendous improvements in quality and quantity of statistical 

data rather than imposing the costs and burdens of survey collected data. 

A prime opportunity for this is with the CPI market basket updates. Instead of 

hundreds or thousands of households determining the quantity of goods consumed, 

the availability of comprehensive, electronically obtained trade import statistics 

would provide more accurate and timely adjustments to consumption patterns. This 

is a unique opportunity for the islands as virtually all of the major volumes of 

imports are documented at the ports of entry, air and shipping. Additionally 

updated price information could be obtained in mass electronically from various vendors, government and private without survey workers shopping for relatively few 

items to check their prices periodically. This would improve the real—inflation 

adjusted GDP figures. 

Similarly, adding electronic income tax filing capacity beyond the basic forms 

would provide more current, more detailed information on the economy and serve 

as inputs for the GDP estimates. These items on the business tax form include 

wages, profits, expense rents and expense categories such as capital investments. 

Some of these items are not manually typed into the Tax computers as it is too 

expensive and not required for refund administration. 

A US legislative mandate to task and fund the US Bureau of Economic Analysis 

(BEA) to produce GDP estimates for the Island Areas would produce institutional 

stability and consistency to the production of GDP estimates. Freeing up DOI funds 

could make them available to support technical improvements to the data production systems so that the statistical information inputs for these reports would be 

more accurate and timelier. 

If a federal government agency was able to share or provide technical information 

or systems for secure, confidential, electronically reported and collected data to the 

Island Areas, that would assist expedite the transition from paper data collection 

through mail, fax, email, phone and personal visits. This would reduce the collection 

cost for respondents and the island areas. It would also avoid data entry costs and 

provide instant error checking and correction by pointing out missing or invalid 

items. The federal government has transitioned to such electronic web-based 

reporting systems for its own data collection with the Economic Census and with 

US BLS survey programs such as the Occupational Employment and Wage 

Statistics (OEWS) program. 

These are just some of the examples and challenges that Guam and the territories 

face to make decisions based on limited information, resources and/or access to limited federal data sets. We agree that improved coordination and cooperation with 

the Office of the Chief Statistician of the United States is necessary to address this 

long-standing issue and ensure adequate representation of the U.S. Territories in 

federal data collection programs and statistical products. On behalf of Governor Lou 

Leon Guerrero, we look forward to working with federal agencies to address the 

data gaps and improve data collection efforts in the U.S. Territories. 

Again, I thank the Chair and Ranking Member for the opportunity to appear 

before you today and I look forward to your questions. 
28 

QUESTIONS SUBMITTED FOR THE RECORD TO MS. LOLA LEON GUERRERO, DIRECTOR, BUREAU OF STATISTICS AND PLANS, GOVERNMENT OF GUAM

Ms. Leon Guerrero did not submit responses to the Committee by the 

appropriate deadline for inclusion in the printed record. 

Questions Submitted by Representative Westerman 

Question 1. What data gaps are the most immediate concern for Guam and why? 

Question 2. Does the Government of Guam currently have the capacity to fill gaps 

in data on Guam by collecting its own data? 

2a) Please elaborate why or why not? 

Question 3. Guam is particularly prone to severe weather incidents. 

3a) How do gaps in federal data collection for Guam affect disaster recovery 

efforts? 

Question 4. Why is important for the federal government to address the gaps in 

data collection for Guam sooner rather than later? 

Question 5. During the hearing, an idea for a pilot program or demonstration 

program for federal data collection in the territories being run by the territories 

themselves was brought up. You mentioned that you would support that idea if there 

were the federal resources to do so. 

5a) Please clarify, would you support Guam managing federal data collection via 

a pilot program or demonstration? 

5b) Why or why not? 

5c) What specific federal resources do you think are needed for this idea to be 

successful? 

5d) Are there any other factors you see as being needed for this idea to be 

successful? 

Ms. HAGEMAN. Thank you for your testimony. The Chair now 

recognizes Mr. Orenstein-Cardona for 5 minutes. 

STATEMENT OF JACOBO ORENSTEIN-CARDONA, EXECUTIVE 

ASSISTANT, PUERTO RICO INSTITUTE OF STATISTICS, 

GOVERNMENT OF PUERTO RICO, SAN JUAN, PUERTO RICO 

Mr. ORENSTEIN-CARDONA. Good morning. 

High-quality statistics are fundamental to a functioning democracy because they provide a factual foundation for informed 

decision making. In a democratic society, the ability of citizens to 

make educated choices about their governance and policies is 

paramount. 

Moreover, high-quality statistics help in the allocation of government resources, as they indicate where investment is needed most, 

whether in education, health care, infrastructure, or other areas. 

They also promote a culture of accountability, where public officials 

are answerable for their decisions and the resulting outcomes. In 

addition, complete and standardized statistics facilitate 

comparability between different jurisdictions. 

The Puerto Rico Institute of Statistics, or PRIS, is an independent public agency of the Government of Puerto Rico. It works 

tirelessly to ensure universal and timely access to comprehensive 

and reliable statistics on Puerto Rico. PRIS has been instrumental 

in correcting Puerto Rico’s mortality statistics, eliminating an 

upward bias in Puerto Rico’s consumer price index, identifying 
29 

millions of dollars in recurring cost savings for the Government of 

Puerto Rico, and documenting a statistical bias of the formulas 

used by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services. Additionally, price represents the Government of Puerto Rico for statistical 

purposes before Federal agencies and acts as an effective 

intermediary. 

Despite the fundamental importance of statistics, Federal statistical products often contain gaps in data for Puerto Rico. These 

gaps limit the local and Federal Government’s understanding of 

the jurisdiction’s needs, and how to best distribute resources and 

evaluate the effectiveness of public policy interventions. For example, for estimates of Puerto Rico’s gross domestic product, the 

Bureau of Economic Analysis relies heavily on information provided by Puerto Rico Government agencies to fill as best as possible 

several gaps in Federal statistical agency data. 

PRIS has encountered specific and significant gaps of statistical 

information regarding Puerto Rico in Federal statistical products in 

diverse topics such as employment, unemployment, and labor force 

characteristics, local government expenditures, timely and quarterly GDP calculations, statistics about the educational system, 

infrastructure such as motor vehicle registration and building 

permits, child abuse, the economic impact of the high rate of homicides, and statistics regarding the penal system. 

This is by no means an exhaustive list of topics for which Puerto 

Rico lacks complete, standardized, reliable, timely, and accessible 

statistics due to not being included in Federal statistical products. 

However, we would like to emphasize two key Federal statistical 

products or programs in which we consider vital for Puerto Rico to 

be included. 

The first one is the current Population Survey conducted by the 

Bureau of Labor Statistics and the U.S. Census Bureau, which provides comparable and reliable information regarding employment 

statistics. This information becomes particularly salient following 

natural disasters and adverse events such as Hurricane Maria in 

2017 and the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020. 

The second product or program is the Census of Governments, 

conducted by the U.S. Census Bureau, which provides information 

regarding expenditures at all levels of government. 

PRIS supports the Government Accountability Office’s recent 

report that recommends that the Director of the Office of Management and Budget should ensure that its Chief Statistician develop 

a coordinated, government-wide approach for Federal statistical 

agencies to use in consultation with the U.S. territories and other 

stakeholders to examine the costs, benefits, and feasibility of 

including territories and statistical products and, as appropriate, 

identify ways to address any data gaps. 

To improve statistical reliability, Puerto Rico should be included 

in more Federal statistical products, complementing local efforts to 

mitigate data gaps. This would permit comparability with other 

U.S. jurisdictions. It is crucial to fill the existing Federal statistical 

gaps to ensure that Puerto Rico’s social and economic needs are 

correctly understood and addressed effectively. Greater inclusion in 

Federal statistical products would provide Puerto Rico with valuable data that would inform a wide range of decisions, from 
30 

1 BEA, Technical Report: Gross Domestic Product for Puerto Rico, 2021 (Washington, D.C.: 

July 31, 2023): https://www.bea.gov/sites/default/files/2023-07/prgdp0723-tech.pdf 2 Current Population Survey, conducted by the U.S. Census Bureau and the U.S. Bureau of 

Labor Statistics: https://www.census.gov/programs-surveys/cps.html. 

disaster response to economic planning, and lead to more accurate 

resource allocation and policy making. 

Through collaboration with Federal and local governments, PRIS 

can serve as an intermediary and significantly contribute to the 

inclusion of Puerto Rico in Federal statistical products. Thank you 

for your time. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Orenstein-Cardona follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF JACOBO M. ORENSTEIN-CARDONA, EXECUTIVE ASSISTANT, 

PUERTO RICO INSTITUTE OF STATISTICS

High-quality statistics are fundamental to a functioning democracy because 

they provide a factual foundation for informed decision-making and public debate. 

In a democratic society, the ability of citizens to make educated choices about their 

governance and policies is paramount. Reliable and accurate statistics ensure that 

these choices are based on evidence rather than conjecture or misinformation. They 

enable voters to assess the performance of their government, understand economic 

and social trends, and hold elected officials accountable. Moreover, high-quality 

statistics help in the allocation of government resources, as they indicate where 

investment is needed most, whether in education, healthcare, infrastructure, or 

other areas. High-quality statistics are also complete and standardized, permitting 

comparisons between different jurisdictions. 

Furthermore, in the context of governance, high-quality statistics are crucial for 

transparency and trust. They allow for the monitoring of government actions and 

the measurement of policy outcomes against stated objectives. This transparency 

fosters trust between the government and the governed, as citizens can see the 

direct impact of their participation in the democratic process. It also promotes a culture of accountability, where public officials are answerable for their decisions and 

the resulting outcomes. In essence, high-quality statistics are not just numbers; they 

are the pillars that uphold the principles of democracy, enabling it to function with 

integrity and responsiveness to the needs of its people. 

The Puerto Rico Institute of Statistics (PRIS) is an independent public entity 

of the Government of Puerto Rico with authority over the statistical policy of Puerto 

Rico’s public entities. It works tirelessly to ensure universal and timely access to 

comprehensive and reliable statistics on Puerto Rico. PRIS has been instrumental 

in correcting Puerto Rico’s mortality statistics, eliminating an upward bias in Puerto 

Rico’s Consumer Price Index, identifying millions of dollars in recurrent cost savings 

for the Government of Puerto Rico, and documenting a statistical bias in the 

formulas used by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services. PRIS also maintains a publicly available database of statistical products generated by local government and facilitates access to federal data sources. Continuously, PRIS advises the 

Legislature and the Governor of Puerto Rico on statistical issues and answers statistical petitions presented by key stakeholders and the general public. Additionally, 

PRIS represents the government of Puerto Rico for statistical purposes before 

federal agencies and acts as an effective intermediary. 

Despite the fundamental importance of statistics, there exist significant federal 

statistical gaps with respect to Puerto Rico. Federal statistical products often 

contain gaps in data for Puerto Rico. These gaps limit understanding of the conditions and resource needs of Puerto Rico. Filling these gaps is critical for Puerto 

Rico. These gaps limit the local and Federal government’s understanding of the 

jurisdiction’s needs and how to best distribute resources and evaluate the effectiveness of policy interventions. For example, for estimates of Puerto Rico’s Gross 

Domestic Product (GDP), the Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA) relies heavily on 

information provided by Puerto Rico government agencies to fill, as best possible, 

several gaps in federal statistical agency data.1

PRIS has encountered specific and significant gaps of statistical information regarding Puerto Rico in federal statistical products in diverse topics such as: 

employment, unemployment and labor force characteristics,2 local government 
31 

3 Census of Governments, conducted by the U.S. Census Bureau: https://www.census.gov/ 

programs-surveys/cog/about.html. 4The Bureau of Economic Analysis reports GDP data annually for Puerto Rico, but quarterly 

for States. 5Puerto Rico is not fully included in the National Center for Education Statistics’ National 

Assessment of Educational Progress, also known as The Nation’s Report Card: https:// 

www.nationsreportcard.gov/ndecore/xplore/nde. 6Federal Highway Administration State motor vehicle registration: https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/ 

policyinformation/statistics/2021/mv1.cfm. 7 Building Permits Survey, conducted by the U.S. Census Bureau: https://www.census.gov/ 

construction/bps/index.html. 8 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s child abuse statistics: https://www.cdc.gov/ 

child-abuse-neglect/programs/index.html. 9 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s Web-based Injury Statistics Query and 

Reporting System (WISQARS): https://wisqars.cdc.gov. 10 National Prisoner Statistics, conducted by the Bureau of Justice Statistics: https:// 

bjs.ojp.gov/data-collection/national-prisoner-statistics-nps-program#publications-0. 11GAO, U.S. Territories: Coordinated Federal Approach Needed to Better Address Data Gaps, 

GAO-24-106574 (Washington, D.C.: May 9, 2024): https://www.gao.gov/assets/gao-24-106574.pdf. 12Please refer to: https://estadisticas.pr/en/Agricultura. 

expenditures,3 timely and quarterly GDP calculations,4 statistics about the 

educational system,5 infrastructure, such as motor vehicle registration 6 and 

building permits,7 child abuse,8 the economic impact of the high rate of homicides,9

and statistics regarding the penal system.10 This is by no means an exhaustive list 

of topics for which Puerto Rico lacks complete, standardized, reliable, timely and 

accessible statistics due to not being included in federal statistical products. 

However, we would like to emphasize two key federal statistical products, or programs, in which we consider it vital for Puerto Rico to be included. The first 

one is the Current Population Survey, conducted by the U.S. Census Bureau in 

conjunction with the Bureau of Labor Statistics, which provides comparable and 

reliable information regarding employment statistics. This information becomes particularly salient following natural disasters and adverse events, such as Hurricane 

Marı ́a in 2017 and the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020. The second product, or program, is the Census of Governments, conducted by the U.S. Census Bureau, which 

provides information regarding expenditures at all levels of government. The data 

collected from the Census of Governments are crucial for federal agencies, state and 

local governments, and researchers to measure economic and financial performance, 

develop programs and budgets, assess financial conditions, and conduct public policy 

research. These two statistical products, or programs, are essential for Puerto Rico’s 

sustained economic development, including helping to resolve Puerto Rico’s high 

level of public indebtedness. 

In general, PRIS supports the findings of the General Accountability 

Office’s recent report.11 We proceed to share the following comments regarding 

these findings. 

• It is important to note, as does the report, that Puerto Rico has almost 3.3 

million residents which represents a population greater than 21 states and 

a land area close to the size of Connecticut. Additionally, Puerto Rico’s GDP 

in 2021 was greater than 14 states, as can be gathered from Figure 2 of the 

report. 

• We observed the total number of federal statistical products provided by the 

13 principal statistical agencies as listed in appendix I of the report. We calculated that there are a total of 449 federal statistical products and Puerto 

Rico is only included in 81 products (18%). Particularly notable is the case 

of the National Agricultural Statistics Service which produces 52 statistical 

products, and of that amount, Puerto Rico (as well as the rest of the territories) is included in only 1 product. This is concerning given that agriculture 

is an important sector of the economy but has faced immense challenges in 

the last few decades. PRIS has studied and generated a website that offers 

information on all agricultural products produced by Puerto Rico from 1990 

to 2019.12

• It is understandable that a mix of cost, geographic, technical, and other issues 

contribute to the federal statistical gaps with respect to U.S. territories, 

including Puerto Rico. However, it is of upmost importance to accurately 

specify and characterize these issues to be able to address them and thereby 

strive to increase Puerto Rico’s inclusion in federal statistical products. 

• Puerto Rico does face enormous economic challenges, which are similar to the 

other 4 permanently inhabited territories. As indicated in the report, these 
32 

13Please refer to: https://www.census.gov/programs-surveys/cps/about/supplemental-surveys 

.html. 

challenges include outmigration, the high cost of energy and imported goods, 

vulnerability to extreme weather, an undiversified economy, dependance on 

tourism and its vulnerability to natural disasters and adverse events (such 

as the COVID-19 pandemic), governmental indebtedness, and shrinking governmental revenues. This highlights the need for Puerto Rico to be included 

in federal statistical products in order to accurately measure these challenges 

and formulate effective public policies thereby enabling increased investment 

in the jurisdiction. 

• We agree that technology and automation can help overcome geographic 

challenges associated with in-person data collection. 

• The problem of the lack of use of standardized address formats can limit 

Puerto Rico’s inclusion in federal statistical products, but the local government, with the assistance of the U.S. Census Bureau, is currently working to 

address this challenge. 

• The U.S. Census Bureau’s Puerto Rico Community Survey does include topics 

on employment, veteran, and disability status, but not to the extent and level 

of detail provided by the Current Population Survey, especially with its 

Supplemental Surveys.13

• We concur that numerous factors prevent precisely quantifying the effects of 

data gaps on federal funding to the territories, including Puerto Rico. 

However, an effort involving federal agencies and local government must be 

attempted to measure the extent of these effects. 

• We recognize that there exist current initiatives on behalf of federal statistical agencies to address existing data gaps, including the upcoming establishment of a Federal Statistical Research Data Center in Puerto Rico. Local 

government also strives to respond to Puerto Rico’s statistical needs. 

However, we agree that a concerted federal government effort, in collaboration with local government, is necessary to effectively address statistical data 

gaps. Furthermore, the inclusion of Puerto Rico in a greater number of 

federal statistical products would ensure that data is collected independently, 

rigorously and enabling comparability with other U.S. jurisdictions. 

PRIS supports the recommendation of the General Accountability Office 

that the Director of the Office of Management and Budget should ensure that its 

Chief Statistician develop a ‘‘coordinated, government-wide approach for federal 

statistical agencies to use, in consultation with the U.S. territories and other stakeholders, to examine the costs, benefits, and feasibility of including territories in 

statistical products and, as appropriate, identify ways to address any data gaps.’’ To 

improve statistical reliability, Puerto Rico should be included in more federal 

statistical products, complementing local efforts to mitigate data gaps. This would 

permit comparability with other U.S. jurisdictions. 

It is crucial to fill the existing federal statistical gaps to ensure that Puerto 

Rico’s social and economic needs are correctly understood and addressed effectively. 

Greater inclusion in federal statistical products would provide Puerto Rico with valuable data that would inform a wide range of decisions, from disaster response to 

economic planning. It would also ensure that Puerto Rico is equitably represented 

in federal statistical products, which would lead to more accurate resource allocation 

and policy making. Through collaboration with federal and local governments, PRIS 

can serve as an intermediary and significantly contribute to the inclusion of Puerto 

Rico in federal statistical products. 
33 

QUESTIONS SUBMITTED FOR THE RECORD TO MR. JACOBO ORENSTEIN-CARDONA, 

EXECUTIVE ASSISTANT, PUERTO RICO INSTITUTE OF STATISTICS, 

GOVERNMENT OF PUERTO RICO

Mr. Orenstein-Cardona did not submit responses to the Committee by the 

appropriate deadline for inclusion in the printed record. 

Questions Submitted by Representative Westerman 

Question 1. Does the Government of Puerto Rico currently have the capacity to fill 

gaps in data on Puerto Rico by collecting its own data? 

1a) Please elaborate why or why not? 

Question 2. In your written statement, you mention that increasing automation 

and technology usage for Puerto Rico’s data collection can help overcome 

geographical challenges. 

2a) Has your office used automation for data collection? Please elaborate how, and 

what have been the results? 

Question 3. Puerto Rico is particularly prone to severe weather incidents. 

3a) How do gaps in federal data collection for Puerto Rico affect disaster recovery 

efforts? 

Question 4. Why is important for the federal government to address the gaps in 

data collection for Puerto Rico sooner rather than later? 

Question 5. As a witness from a U.S. territory, you see and feel firsthand the 

impacts that stem from the gaps in federal data collection for the U.S. territories. 

5a) How has the lack of or outdated data affected Puerto Rico’s government and 

local communities? 

Question 6. During the hearing, an idea for a pilot program or demonstration 

program for federal data collection in the territories being run by the territories 

themselves was brought up. You mentioned that you would support that idea if there 

was the federal resources and territorial outreach to do so. 

6a) Please clarify, would you support Puerto Rico managing federal data collection 

via a pilot program or demonstration? 

6b) Why or why not? 

6c) What specific federal resources and territorial outreach do you think is needed 

for this idea to be successful? 

6d) Are there any other factors you see as being needed for this idea to be 

successful? 

Questions Submitted by Representative Gonza ́lez-Colo ́n 

Question 1. You mention in your testimony that the Puerto Rico Institute of 

Statistics ‘‘has encountered specific and significant gaps of statistical information 

regarding Puerto Rico in federal statistical products in diverse topics. . .’’. How did 

the Puerto Rico Institute of Statistics encounter these gaps? 

Question 2. One of the federal statistical products Puerto Rico is currently excluded 

from is the Current Population Survey, which is jointly sponsored by the Census 

Bureau and the Bureau of Labor Statistics. Can you discuss what is the Current 

Population Survey, the data it collects, and why the inclusion of Puerto Rico in that 

survey is so important? And what kind of benefits will policymakers have if Puerto 

Rico is included? 

Question 3. You also mention in your testimony the Supplemental Surveys of the 

Current Population Survey. Can you offer some examples of these supplemental 

surveys? Has the Puerto Rico Institute of Statistics explored collecting data locally 

for some of these specific topics? 

Question 4. As GAO’s report mentions, territories have taken steps to mitigate data 

gaps through local data collection efforts. In Puerto Rico, for example, the Puerto 

Rico Department of Labor conducts the local Labor Force Survey, or Encuesta de 

Grupo Trabajador, in Spanish. Some may see this and argue that expanding the 
34 

Current Population Survey to include Puerto Rico would therefore be unnecessary 

or duplicative. 

How would you respond to such a statement? What are the differences between the 

Current Population Survey and the Puerto Rico Department of Labor’s Labor Force 

Survey? Are they duplicative? 

Question 5. Another federal statistical program Puerto Rico is currently excluded 

from is the Census of Governments. In fact, I understand Puerto Rico was included 

in this product until the early 1980s. Can you discuss why including Puerto Rico 

again in the Census of Governments would be important? And how would it help 

improve transparency? 

Question 6. Are there any examples of the recent inclusion of Puerto Rico in a 

survey or statistical data product? 

Question 7. In addition to the Current Population Survey and the Census of 

Governments, are there other federal statistical products that exclude Puerto Rico 

that you would like to briefly mention or discuss? 

Questions Submitted by Representative Vela ́ zquez 

Question 1. According to your statement, the PRIS has authority over the 

statistical policies of Puerto Rico agencies. In recent years, Puerto Rico has received 

significant funds for emergency response, as well as disaster recovery and reconstruction efforts, in addition to recurrent allocations. Federal funds represented 43% of 

Puerto Rico’s budget for FY 2023–2024. Who is responsible for tracking the use of 

federal funds? How do you evaluate their effectiveness in collecting all necessary data 

and developing metrics to assess the community-level impact of these federal allocations and investments? What is PRIS’ evaluation of the data-sharing platforms of the 

CDBG and COR3 transparency portals, especially when it comes to collecting and 

reporting data about the use and impact of these funds? 

Question 2. The Puerto Rico-based organization Sembrando Sentido has identified 

more than 60 federal data sources with information related to federal funds in 

Puerto Rico. Your statement mentions that 81 out of 449 federal statistical products 

include information about Puerto Rico. What are PRIS’ defining elements for a 

dataset to be considered a data or statistical product and what technologies or 

methodologies does PRIS have to track Puerto Rico’s inclusion in federal data? 

Question 3. In your statement, you emphasize the importance of identifying issues 

causing federal data gaps that affect the availability of critical information for 

Puerto Rico. Does PRIS share GAO’s view that the reasons for federal data gaps in 

Puerto Rico are associated with economic, geographic, and technical issues? If so, can 

you provide specific examples illustrating how these issues affect the inclusion of 

Puerto Rico in federal-level data? 

Question 4. Multiple public services have recently been privatized in Puerto Rico, 

through public-private partnerships. For example, a private enterprise now operates 

maritime transportation to Vieques and Culebra. Additionally, Puerto Rico’s power 

distribution and generation were privatized, a move that remains under public 

debate due to frequent power outages and rising costs of said service. These private 

enterprises often have access to federal funds and yet, their contractual agreements 

lack requirements around data collection and disclosure mechanisms to assess use 

and impact of public funds. How are these privatizations impacting Puerto Rico’s 

capacity and prerogatives to track the use of these funds? 

Ms. HAGEMAN. Thank you for your testimony. The Chair now 

recognizes Dr. Levin for 5 minutes. 

STATEMENT OF MICHAEL LEVIN, MANAGING PARTNER, 

PACIFICWEB LLC, HONOLULU, HAWAII 

Dr. LEVIN. Good morning, Chair and distinguished members of 

the Subcommittee. My name is Dr. Michael Levin. 

I did my field work for my dissertation on an extremely small 

atoll in Micronesia. Later, I coordinated statistical activities in the 

insular areas at the Census Bureau during my 28 years there. I 
35 

spent 8 more years continuing the work at Harvard University’s 

Population Center before my working retirement in Hawaii. 

Today, I will outline suggested statistical enhancements in the 

Pacific Territories. My comments do not cover Puerto Rico or the 

U.S. Virgin Islands. 

I commend this Committee for holding this hearing to focus on 

strategies for statistical work in these territories. Each territory 

needs a statistical system that encompasses three general areas: 

decennial and other censuses, intercensal surveys, and administrative records. As the GAO report shows, Federal Statistical Agency 

coverage in the U.S. territories remains very limited. Since local 

government statistical efforts have filled gaps in the coverage, gaps 

still remain. 

Territorial statistical offices vary in terms of their capacity and 

needs. Each of the three areas has specific solvable needs, which 

I describe in the paper. 

The three elements in a territorial statistical system include, for 

the census, Federal agency coverage that appears in the decennial 

census, the agricultural census, the economic census, and county 

business patterns. 

For surveys and administrative records, the Office of Insular 

Affairs, OIA, started the Statistical Enhancement Project in the 

mid-1980s through the Census Bureau. This program improved territorial statistical collections and filled Federal data gaps. Formal 

training through territory-wide and in-country workshops provided 

capacity building. The surveys also improved capacity and 

addressed Federal data gaps. The project used Census Bureau conventions throughout the surveys. Examples of the kinds of surveys 

appear in the written testimony. The program closed about 2005. 

Currently looking at OIA, the territories would benefit from new 

funding for a program like the previous one, but with central 

supervision. The program would allow the individual territories to 

improve their labor force surveys, fund administrative records 

collection and dissemination, and build general capacity. 

OIA should look specifically at two areas. One is mapping. Both 

CNMI and American Samoa do continuous updating as funding is 

available, so they can select survey samples as required. For the 

Guam Household Survey conducted in 2019, Guam’s power authority provided a spreadsheet of units on Guam with electricity for 

sampling and sample selection. 

None of the three Pacific territories and the U.S. Virgin Islands 

have complete street addressing. They cannot draw samples based 

on a list of physical addresses. The Census Bureau previously overcame this hurdle by, for example, selecting enumeration blocks in 

Guam and the CNMI for the Micronesian migrants surveys. So, 

this method is appropriate for ongoing surveys. 

For the Census Bureau and Congress, the experience with 

Micronesia migrant surveys shows that Census Bureau-run 

surveys cost much more than surveys that OIA funds directly to 

the territories. The Census Bureau could help by developing and 

using updated maps in the three territories and to help select samples for surveys. But clearly, the territories can administer the surveys themselves when governments provide funds. And for 

Congress, congressional interest in territorial statistics is certainly 
36 

welcome. Addressing the gaps found in the GAO report and then 

mandating that agencies respond will improve statistical coverage. 

In closing, I thank the Subcommittee for this opportunity to 

speak with you today. The territories are integral to U.S. security 

interests and the needs in the Pacific. Statistics are crucial for 

making policy decisions for the territories and for the United 

States. Congress should be proactive to strengthen statistics in the 

U.S. Pacific Territories. 

I look forward to your questions. Thank you. 

[The prepared statement of Dr. Levin follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF MICHAEL J. LEVIN, MANAGING PARTNER, 

PACIFICWEB, LLC 

I. Introduction 

Good afternoon, Chair, Ranking Member, and distinguished members of the 

subcommittee. 

My name is Michael Levin. I worked at the U.S. Census Bureau for 28 years and 

spent 8 more years at Harvard University’s Population Center, before my workingretirement to Hawaii. 

Today, I will outline needed statistical enhancements in the U.S. Pacific 

Territories of American Samoa, the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana 

Islands (CNMI), and Guam. My comments do not cover Puerto Rico and only briefly 

touch on the U.S. Virgin Islands. I commend this committee for holding this hearing 

to focus on strategies to support statistical work in these territories. 

II. Statistics in the Territories 

Every country and major civil division, in our case, every U.S. state and territory, 

needs a statistical system that encompasses three general areas. These areas are: 

(1) censuses, (2) intercensal surveys, and (3) administrative records. Censuses, 

surveys, and administrative data all contribute to these data areas. 

As the GAO report shows, Federal agencies limit statistical coverage in the U.S. 

territories. Local government statistical efforts fill gaps, but gaps remain. 

Federal Data 

Federal agency coverage of the territories includes population data collected by 

the Decennial Census, quinquennial Census of Agriculture and the Economic 

Census, and annual data on County Business Patterns. 

This leaves extensive gaps in Federal territorial data. For the U.S. states, Census 

administers the continuous American Community Survey-collecting demographic 

and household data, the Census of Governments, annual surveys of State and Local 

Governments, and surveys collecting economic data on retail trade, manufacturing, 

and services. The government collects none of these data in the territories. The 

Department of Labor’s Bureau of Labor Statistics is almost absent in the territories, 

providing no price indices for consumers and producers and almost no employment 

and workforce data. 

Office of Insular Affairs Support of Territorial Data Collection 

The Office of Insular Affairs (OIA), Department of the Interior, started the Statistical Enhancement Project in the mid-1980s to support the statistics offices of the 

territories and to fill Federal data gaps. OIA funded the Census Bureau each fiscal 

year to provide technical help to the U.S. Virgin Islands in the Caribbean, and the 

6 Areas in the Pacific: American Samoa, the Commonwealth of the Northern 

Mariana Islands (CNMI), Guam, and what became the three Freely Associated 

States of the Federated States of Micronesia (FSM), the Marshall Islands, and 

Palau. 

From 1988 to 2003 I led Census Bureau work to support OIA statistical efforts 

in the territories and FAS—building local statistics capacity through formal training 

and through direct and in-person work on surveys and censuses. I continued 

working with the Pacific territories and FAS region after I left Census, and even 

now in retirement. 

Training: Formal training was a key part of capacity building. Training occurred 

through a series of workshops where territorial statistical staff would meet at the 
37 

East-West Center or at the Census Bureau’s International Programs Center (IPC). 

The workshops included: Developing Statistical Yearbooks (1988), Intercensal surveys (1991), Census processing (editing and tabulation) (1992), Workshop and 

Conference of results of the 1990 censuses in the Insular Areas (1993), Population 

Estimates Workshop (1993), Vital Statistics Workshop (1993), Advanced Census 

Processing (1994),Trade, Medical Yearbooks, Cause of Death Coding, and Statistical 

Yearbooks (1995). 

Surveys: Conducting surveys further built capacity and addressed Federal data 

gaps. The project used Census Bureau conventions for questionnaires, enumerator 

instructions, monitoring, and training. Local statistics offices monitored and 

executed survey enumeration, coded survey results, and keyed the data. I used 

Census Bureau procedures to edit and tabulate the data and draft the reports on 

survey results. 

The Census/OIA project supported: 

Household Income and Expenditures Surveys (HIES). The HIES provides 

information on consumer income and expenditure patterns by income, birthplace, ethnicity, education, and labor force participation. If the territories were 

States, the U.S. would include them in consumer expenditures surveys (CES). 

The HIES is critical to prepare local price indices and to offset the lack of 

Bureau of Labor Statistics price indices in the territories. These surveys have 

also been a ‘‘work-around’’ for exclusion from the U.S. American Community 

Survey and provide population an estimate within the 10-year Census interval. 

Wage and Labor Force Surveys. If the territories were States, the U.S. 

would conduct wage and labor force surveys, but they currently exclude the territories. These missing U.S. surveys include the Current Population Survey 

(CPS), Survey of Program Participation (SIPP), and, especially, the American 

Community Survey (ACS). 

Behavioral Risk Surveys. The territories started annual behavioral risk 

surveys. 

Micronesian Migrant Surveys. Beginning in 1992, and every 5 years, I 

supervised full censuses of FAS migration to the CNMI, Guam, and Hawaii 

(beginning in 1998) using Micronesian enumerators and supervisors. This provided OIA with counts and characteristics of the migrant populations in CNMI, 

Guam, and Hawaii. 

GDP and CPI. Other Census and other Federal staff worked with the territory 

statistics offices to prepare Gross Domestic Product benchmark information for 

2002 and consumer price indexes. 

Over time, OIA reduced its support to build insular statistics office capacity. 

While OIA continued to fund insular survey costs, its funding committed to paying 

for expensive Census Bureau productions of FAS migration data and to pay the 

Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA) to produce annual territory GDP data. 

FAS migration data. While the Census 2003 FAS migration data cost OIA 

about $300,000 to cover Guam, CNMI, and Hawaii, the Bureau charged OIA 

$1.2 million for the 2008 FAS migration data. OIA and the Bureau limited the 

items on the CNMI and Guam questionnaires to only provide counts of 

migrants and not collect information on education, employment, and other characteristics. For Hawaii, Census had detailed information from the ACS. For the 

2013 report, the Census Bureau used 2010 CNMI and Guam Census data and 

Hawaii ACS data. Census returned to its 2008 procedure for the 2018 data 

round. Compact III does not include compact impact funds, so they no longer 

require enumerations to distribute funds. 

Territorial GDP. Beginning in 2008, OIA annually pays BEA to produce territorial GDP. These are data produced by BEA for the 50 U.S. States and the 

District of Columbia each quarter. 

The practice of OIA paying BEA to produce GDP contrasts with the Puerto Rico 

experience. In 2018, BEA started a project to calculate the GDP for Puerto Rico 

to support its economic recovery following devastating hurricanes in 2017. The 

project addressed recommendations from the Congressional Task Force on 

Economic Growth in Puerto Rico and from GAO that BEA calculate the GDP 

for Puerto Rico. 

Territorial Statistics Office Activities 

As OIA reduced its engagement and support for territorial statistics offices, offices 

reduced their own data efforts. 
38 

Statistical Yearbooks. One important contribution of territorial statistics 

offices is to pull together government administrative records and publish annual 

Statistical Yearbooks. Most countries publish Statistical Yearbooks to provide 

information from administrative records in a timely manner and using accepted 

statistical conventions. Common administrative records include vital statistics 

(births and deaths), education (school enrollments), labor force activities, and 

migration through immigrants and emigrants. Statistics collected internally, 

like school enrollments, are important for planning schools and classrooms. 

When the OIA program started, only American Samoa produced Statistical 

Yearbooks regularly and Guam produced a series of tables in the back of its 

annual Economic Review. The CNMI and the Freely Associated States did not 

produce annual yearbooks. By the mid-1990s, under the OIA program, most 

territories were producing at least limited yearbooks, and they improved year 

by year. Unfortunately, they lost momentum. 

Labor surveys. American Samoa has not done labor force surveys. CNMI did 

periodic labor force surveys until 1995 and did quarterly labor force surveys 

from 1996 to about 1998. These then drifted off into semi-regularity, and then 

mostly unfunded, not done at all. Guam had quarterly labor force surveys, 

starting at least during the 1980s. The Guam’s Bureau of Labor’s website shows 

quarterly reports from 1993 to September 2023. 

The statistical offices could design labor surveys to maintain a smaller and professional group of enumerators. To organize such a survey, I would suggest 

pulling a 6 percent sample from the complete housing listing, and then dividing 

it into 3 parts. If the territory centers the quarterly labor force survey in 

February, the enumerators would go to one-third of the units in January, then 

one-third in February, and then the last one-third in March, making the 6 

percent sample centered in February. When they select the next 6 percent sample (or use the same sample again over a year), the first one-third in April can 

combine with the February and March samples to get a 6 percent sample centered on March. Because the surveys would need few enumerators for these procedures, a group of super-enumerators could work continuously over the year 

with appropriate payment. 

Migration data. Among the most problematic statistics are those concerning 

migration. Guam has experimented in the past with entry and exit ‘‘cards’’ or 

sheets. Currently, both Guam and CNMI collect entry forms, including agriculture and voluntary tourism and returning resident information, but they are 

not making efforts to collect exit information. Considering that tourists overwhelm this data collection, it is not surprising that the territories do not make 

more efforts to collect these data. But, given the responses to changing economic 

conditions, governments might make more effort. And the statistical summaries 

might then appear in the yearbooks. 

Territorial Statistics Office Needs 

Today the Territorial Statistical Offices vary in terms of their capacity and needs. 

Guam has capable statisticians in both the public and private sectors who can 

generate the statistics it needs for planning and policy development. Guam’s problem is the dispersion of statistical activities among the agencies, with the Bureau 

of Statistics and Plans, Department of Labor, Public Health and Social Services, and 

the University of Guam each taking part in separate ways in collecting and disseminating statistical activities. The government should designate one office as the central agency, with all statistical activities going through it to eliminate duplication 

and to make sure that agencies cover appropriate areas. A single agency, like those 

in American Samoa and CNMI, would enhance the communication between government agencies and produce better and more reliable statistics. 

The CNMI government does not understand the need for constant and consistent 

statistical work. The CNMI government is not providing sufficient staff to cover 

work on the CPI, labor force, and other surveys, or their statistical yearbook. 

Congress and the OIA might fund a couple of positions to assist in at least bringing 

the program up to a minimal level. The CSD Director is exceptional, but he cannot 

do it alone. 

American Samoa has a different challenge. The chief statistician recently retired 

after 40 years in that position. The office has few employees, but because it is in 

the Department of Commerce, it uses staff from other areas when needed. Since 

they do not undertake labor force surveys (although they should), and only have a 

single survey in the mid-decade, most work goes to administrative data and 

publishing their yearbook. 
39 

The Freely Associated States (FAS): Although the GAO report does not cover 

the Federated States of Micronesia, the Marshall Islands, and Palau, their need for 

technical help is even greater than the remaining U.S. Areas. None of the three 

National Statisticians were university trained in statistics, and that shows. Palau 

publishes a good annual yearbook, but FSM and the Marshalls do not. The Pacific 

Community (SPC) assists the FAS with their surveys, especially the HIES. SPC 

uses UN statistical conventions rather than U.S. conventions, so that FAS data is 

not always compatible with U.S. Federal agency program requirements. For example, the SPC considers subsistence activities as working, whereas the U.S. uses paid 

employment. Thus, FAS employment and unemployment data are not compatible 

with U.S. measures. Previously, the OIA Statistical Enhancement Project included 

the FAS. 

Even without direct technical help, the FAS governments should track the flow 

of the emigrants to Guam, Hawaii, and the U.S. Mainland, using scanned passport 

information. The flow is extraordinarily strong: the Marshall Islands’ population 

decreased from 55,000 to 42,000 over a decade and it looks like FSM will report a 

similar decrease if they finish processing their late census. Periodic surveys of the 

migrants or inclusion in labor force surveys could provide valuable information to 

Guam on these migrants from the FSM. 

III. Are street addresses a survey problem? 

Sample selection. As noted in the GAO report, the Census Bureau cites the lack 

of street addresses as an excuse for excluding the territories from Census survey 

work. None of the three Pacific territories (and the U.S. Virgin Islands) have complete street addresses, allowing for sample selection based on a list of physical 

addresses. 

However, the Census Bureau overcame this hurdle in the past. For both the 2008 

and 2018 Micronesian Migrants Surveys for Compact impact reporting, the Census 

Bureau selected blocks and attempted to enumerate all housing units in those 

blocks in Guam and Saipan. Further, part of the effort to implement the 2020 

Census in the territories required the mapping and listing each home, apartment, 

and shelter by enumerators before door-to-door in-person household interviews. 

Guam has other sources for sample selection. For its Labor Force surveys, Guam 

continuously updated maps to assist enumerators in locating survey sample housing 

units. Coastal Zone management was also making detailed maps and staff in the 

administration were attempting to combine the two. For the 2019 HIES, we used 

the Guam Power Authority’s Excel spreadsheets of all housing units on the island 

attached to electric power and drew a 5 percent sample from that. 

Mapping. As noted in the GAO report, the Census Bureau claims none of the 

three territories has a proper mapping for sample selection. This excuse excludes 

the territories from Census survey work. But the areas do have workable maps. 

Both CNMI and American Samoa do continuous map updating, so they select 

samples as required for surveys. The 2015 Household Income and Expenditures 

(HIES) in American Samoa derived a 20 percent sample of housing units, as it also 

did in 1995 and 2005. American Samoa’s Department of Commerce has developed 

samples for health and other surveys. The CNMI maintains GIS shape files for 

islands (Saipan, Tinian, and Rota), villages, political boundaries (districts), census 

blocks, roads, and housing units and updates them periodically to use them as the 

sampling frame for surveys. CNMI keeps Excel workbooks listing housing units for 

sample selection. Most samples are 5 or 10 percent of the units. CNMI used these 

samples for the 2012 survey of Federated States of Micronesia (FSM) migrants, the 

2016 HIES, and the 2017 Labor Force Survey. Both American Samoa and CNMI 

have an advantage over Guam for sample selection ‘‘on the ground’’ because neither 

has the level of apartment buildings that Guam has. 

In 2019, when we started the Guam HIES, Guam’s Power Authority provided an 

Excel spreadsheet of the housing units on Guam with detailed address information. 

I selected a 5 percent sample, by starting with a random number and then selected 

each 20th household after that. Because the enumerators were unlikely to go to 

2,500 units, I then made 5 one percent samples. Despite the success of the sample 

selection, the survey failed because of the lack of enumerators, the lack of publicity, 

and worries about crime, making people not open their doors for interviews. 

IV. Suggested actions for OIA, Census, and Congress 

Office of Insular Affairs. The Department of the Interior’s Office of Insular 

Affairs is the lead agency to support statistical work in the Pacific territories. The 

OIA Statistical Enhancement Project through the Census Bureau in the late 1980s 
40 

through the early 2000s got continuing statistical data through surveys and 

improved administrative records. The territories would benefit from funding a similar program with central supervision, allowing the individual territories to improve 

their statistical work, and to share their results with the other territories, with 

Federal agencies, and the Congress. 

One example of work for OIA to support is labor force surveys. Guam is undertaking a form of quarterly labor force surveys. OIA might provide funding to 

American Samoa and CNMI to do quarterly labor force surveys. The questionnaire, 

other materials, training, editing, and tabulation should follow Census Bureau 

standards so be compatible with the Census and other surveys. 

There is again a need for OIA to focus on building capacity. The CNMI and 

American Samoa currently have limited capacity within their statistical offices. OIA 

could assist in developing capacity through placing territorial staff in work-study 

programs at the Census Bureau, Department of Labor, and other appropriate agencies. Also, U.S. agencies would place appropriate staff in the territorial statistical 

offices to enhance the use of statistical procedures and staff development. 

U.S. Census Bureau. The Census Bureau has a mandate to do the Decennial 

Census and its enabling legislation allows for collecting survey information if 

Congress provides funds for these activities. The experience with the Micronesian 

migrants surveys shows that Census run surveys cost more than surveys that OIA 

funds as projects directly with the territories. 

However, all Federal agencies recognize Census Bureau data, so OIA should selectively fund the Bureau. The Census Bureau and the CNMI are now using (and 

updating) the same maps (shape files) for villages, census blocks, political boundaries. But they do not share the housing units’ shape files. The Census Bureau 

could develop and use updated maps in the three territories to develop samples for 

surveys. 

Congress. Congressional interest in territorial statistics is welcome. Requesting 

follow-up work from the GAO on the statistical needs of the territories and tracking 

Federal agency actions could be among the next steps. Congress should fund needs 

discussed above. 

V. Conclusion 

In closing, I thank the subcommittee for this opportunity to speak with you today. 

The territories of American Samoa, the CNMI, and Guam are integral to U.S. 

security interests and needs in the North and South Pacific. Statistics are crucial 

for planning and for making policy decisions for the territories themselves and for 

the United States as a whole. Congress can take pro-active steps to strengthen 

statistics in the U.S. Pacific territories. I look forward to any questions you may 

have. 

QUESTIONS SUBMITTED FOR THE RECORD TO DR. MICHAEL LEVIN, INDEPENDENT

CONSULTANT, PACIFICWEB LLC 

Dr. Levin did not submit responses to the Committee by the appropriate 

deadline for inclusion in the printed record. 

Questions Submitted by Representative Westerman 

Question 1. In your experience having worked for the Census Bureau, what 

challenges do federal agencies face when collecting data on the U.S. territories? 

Question 2. In your written testimony, you pointed out that formal training was 

a key part of capacity building efforts by the U.S. government, such as training 

programs hosted by the Census Bureau. 

2a) Is formal training no longer provided by U.S. agencies for the territories? If 

so, why are they no longer provided? 

Question 3. According to your written testimony, the Office of Insular Affairs 

reduced its support for capacity building for the territorial statistic offices. While the 

Office of Insular Affairs continued to fund insular survey costs, it seems funding was 

committed to paying for expensive Census Bureau and Bureau of Economic Analysis 

products. 
41 

3a) How much more does it cost for the Office of Insular Affairs to outsource data 

collection to agencies like the Census Bureau for surveys such as Freely Associated 

States migration data that was used for Compact Impact Grant funding? 

Question 4. When looking at the Census Bureau’s data collection for Freely 

Associated States migration data from 2003 to 2018, was this data reliable and 

consistent? 

Question 5. Would it be fair to say that capacity building is a more cost-effective 

solution than funding these expensive projects in the long run? 

5a) Is it also fair to say that outsourcing this data to other agencies does not 

guarantee high quality data? 

Question 6. In your written testimony, you state that the territorial statistic offices 

reduced their own data efforts, including on the statistical yearbooks. 

6a) In your opinion, is this a capacity issue or something else? 

Question 7. The GAO report notes that the Census Bureau cited the lack of street 

address data as a reason for the lack of data collection for the territories. 

7a) Do you believe this reason is justified? 

7b) Has the Census Bureau overcome this hurdle in the past? If so, how? 

Question 8. The GAO report notes that the Census Bureau claims that none of the 

Pacific territories have proper mapping for sample selection. 

8a) Do Guam, American Samoa, and the CNMI have workable maps? 

8b) If so, why was this claim made? 

Question 9. The Department of the Interior used to play a larger role in supporting 

federal data collection for the U.S. territories. However, this role has largely 

decreased by the mid-2000s as the Department of the Interior shifted from proactive 

support to reactive grants. 

9a) As someone who has worked in the U.S. federal statistical system during this 

period and continues to collect data on the Pacific territories, how has this affected 

the availability and quality of data for the Pacific territories? 

Question 10. Do you have any recommendations for addressing the gaps in federal 

collection for the U.S. territories? 

Ms. HAGEMAN. Thank you, Dr. Levin, for your testimony, and I 

apologize for mispronouncing your name earlier. 

Dr. LEVIN. That is fine. 

Ms. HAGEMAN. The Chair will now recognize the Members for 5 

minutes of questions, and I am going to begin with me. 

The U.S. territories vary in population and size, geography, economic conditions, and needs, something that I think every one of 

you have addressed today. And this often means that policy for the 

territories should be tailored for each of the territories to ensure 

that it achieves the intended effect. I would like to address my 

questioning to Ms. Braybrooks and Ms. Love-Grayer. 

Does addressing the gaps in Federal data collection for the 

territories require a similar approach, or is that unnecessary? 

Ms. Braybrooks? 

Ms. BRAYBROOKS. Thank you for the question. To date, the 

review of how to include the territories has examined the assumption that we should fit them into the existing products. But I think 

what has been shared and what we observe is that there are data 

needs, but we should look at the existing products, as well as alternative ideas on how to include the territories. Their size makes 

them unique, and we see the technical issues of running surveys 

and sample sizes there. 
42 

One of the areas to provide an example is, when we look at the 

economic statistics we have recently been working to understand, 

well, how does it work in other island nations? What are they doing 

in lieu of not being included in surveys? And how can we better 

extract information from administrative data to move towards 

more timely and meaningful information? 

So, OIA would advocate that, while we talk about addressing the 

gaps, we think about doing it outside of the box to recognize the 

unique situation and attributes of the U.S. territories. 

Ms. HAGEMAN. Ms. Love-Grayer, does addressing gaps in the 

Federal data collection for the territories require a similar 

approach, or is that unnecessary? 

Ms. LOVE-GRAYER. I agree with my colleague here from DOI. I 

do believe that the territories have different needs. They have different data gaps, as well, and different demographics. So, there is 

not a one-size-fits-all answer. 

However, we do believe that OMB can play a major role in 

pulling all of the Federal agencies together to understand how to 

assess the feasibility of conducting data and conducting more data 

collection in each of the territories, so that there can be a sharing 

of lessons learned where data has been collected, where some of the 

challenges that exist at collecting the data have been overcome. So, 

while there is not a one-size-fits-all approach, there does need to 

be a coordinated approach. 

And we also do believe that that coordination should include 

coordinating closely with the territories to understand their highest 

priorities and understanding their data needs and their data gaps, 

and what is available even locally to assist with the data collection. 

And a coordinated approach, even with some of the parties that are 

stakeholders like universities, who often have the capacity to do 

some of the statistics that maybe the officials do not have. So, onesize-fits-all approach doesn’t work, but a coordinated approach 

certainly does. 

Ms. HAGEMAN. Well, I am going to stick with you for a moment. 

Do you have any specific concerns or factors that you can identify 

as you sit here today that Congress should consider when 

attempting to address the gaps in Federal collection for the 

territories? 

Ms. LOVE-GRAYER. Yes, there are a few I think are important to 

take into consideration. 

One is what we just talked about, that there are different needs, 

that there isn’t a one-size-fits-all approach, that it will take collaboration with all of the levels, and OMB should play a role in that. 

But another is that there are a myriad of statutes that really 

authorize these different statistical agencies in collecting the data. 

So, understanding what those legislations outline, what they do 

and don’t include, and really considering that in any solution is 

going to be important, as well, and also that we do need to engage 

the territories in this. This cannot be something that the Federal 

Government does on its own. 

Ms. HAGEMAN. Ms. Guerrero, as a witness from the territories, 

you both see and feel firsthand the impacts that stem from the 

gaps in Federal data collection for the territories. How has the lack 
43 

of or outdated data affected the territorial governments and local 

communities? 

Ms. LEON GUERRERO. Basically, there are funding opportunities 

that we are unable to apply for because of the data gap. And we 

have had to improvise to actually—— 

Ms. HAGEMAN. Could you give me a specific example of 

something like that? 

Ms. LEON GUERRERO. The CEJST Justice tool, the IRA funding, 

there are some grant opportunities that we can’t apply because we 

are only eligible for one category, and that is workforce. And in 

general, the areas located in the categories basically, in some 

areas, do not represent underserved communities or disadvantaged 

communities. We have areas that should have been identified but 

were not included. So, that is a really good example. 

So, with regards to U.S. Department of Justice grants, there are 

things there with regards to crime statistics, and the data is based 

on population. So, with the 2020 census, we see a reduction in population, so we are going to see a reduction in Federal resources 

coming to Guam. 

Ms. HAGEMAN. Thank you for that information. I now recognize 

Mr. Sablan for 5 minutes of questioning. 

Mr. SABLAN. Thank you. Good morning, everyone. 

Madam Chair, thank you for holding this important hearing. I 

welcome all the witnesses. 

Before I start, I would like to recognize Dr. Underwood, a former 

member of this Congress, who has spent the entire time he was 

here on this Committee also. So, Dr. Underwood, welcome back. 

Now, this is a good hearing. I like all the witnesses and testimonies, but I am going to start with Ms. Latesha Love-Grayer, did 

you just add another last name? Because I think you did, right? 

[Laughter.] 

Ms. LOVE-GRAYER. It has been updated. It was Latesha Love for 

a while. 

Mr. SABLAN. OK, all right. Congratulations, then. 

Thank you for GAO’s work on producing this report and many 

other reports that have been very useful to me in my time here. 

But this report was important also. 

We all know that data policymakers can take for granted for the 

states often does not exist for the territories. And the question is 

often why, why don’t we have that data for the territories? 

And in your report, it says it is because of our small populations, 

one of them, right, a larger percentage of the population, for example, has to be sampled in the territories versus the states to get the 

same statistical margin of error. 

[Slide.] 

Mr. SABLAN. So, here is the chart from your report on the screen. 

About 25 percent of the population of Guam, for example, has to 

be sampled to get the same margin of error as sampling just 0.85 

percent of the population of Kentucky. Now, that seems like a big 

difference, you know? 

So, help me here with the math: 25 percent of Guam’s population 

is 38,000; .85 percent of Kentucky’s population is 38,000. So, in 

your example, the sample size for Guam is the same as the sample 
44 

size for Kentucky, 38,000. So, wouldn’t the cost of collecting data 

be about the same? 

Ms. LOVE-GRAYER. That is a great question, thank you for it. 

One of the things that we wanted to highlight here is it is about 

the cost per capita, so the cost relative to the size of the territory 

or the state. When there is a smaller population, and you have to 

sample a larger percentage of it for the same level of precision, so 

the cost overall and the number of individuals that you sample 

overall might be the same, but relative to the size of the entire 

population there is a higher cost per person. 

Mr. SABLAN. OK. 

Ms. LOVE-GRAYER. And I do want to clarify that in our report we 

wanted to highlight that this is one of the challenges that we hear, 

that we heard from statistical agencies. But it is not a challenge 

that we think should necessarily stop you from collecting the data. 

And currently what many agencies do is collect a smaller sample, 

which leads to less precision. 

Mr. SABLAN. Yes, and I need to move on, but thank you. And 

hopefully, we can continue to work on this issue. 

Ms. Braybrooks, welcome. In your testimony you stated, for 

example, the territories’ lack of local capacity should not be a reason to exclude them from surveys. The Federal Government’s reliance on OIA for technical assistance is not sustainable or sufficient, 

as it unduly places the burden on territories to solve data deficiencies themselves—I am running out of time—population, and 

land area. Thank you, I agree with all of that. 

But GAO also reports that the insular areas have access to TAP 

money, T-A-P money, and suggests that the money could be used 

to improve Federal data collection. So, GAO says that nearly $62 

million in TAP was provided from Fiscal Year 2019 to 2023. That 

sounds like a lot, $62 million divided by 5 years, and divided 

among the four territories and some Federal agencies, too. I would 

say about $3 million, on average, for each territory, except that I 

know the Northern Marianas got about half of that this year. 

So, do you know how much of this technical assistance is going 

to data collection improvements, Ms. Braybrooks? 

Ms. BRAYBROOKS. On average, it is about $1 to $2 million out of 

a pot of $22 million. 

Mr. SABLAN. All right, not much, right? 

Ms. BRAYBROOKS. But that is with competing priorities. 

Mr. SABLAN. Not much. So, these technical assistance grants can 

be used for a wide range of purposes, right? 

Ms. BRAYBROOKS. Correct. 

Mr. SABLAN. They compete. And collecting data may not be the 

highest priority for the insular areas. 

Earlier this month, grants were awarded for fluoroscopy equipment for our hospital in the Marianas and for improving tax collections. Ms. Braybrooks, would you say paying for data the Federal 

Government collects in the states should be a higher priority for 

the territories than taking care of the people’s health, or making 

sure our government is solvent? 

That is a rhetorical question, really. I am just saying if my late 

friend, Eni Faleomavaega, was here, he would remind me again 

that until Delegates here have votes on the Floor, this problem is 
45 

going to continue to remain because agencies do not have responsibilities to Delegates in the territories. Let’s make that go away, 

please. Thank you. 

Thank you, Madam Chair. 

Ms. HAGEMAN. Thank you. The Chair now recognizes Mr. Moylan 

for 5 minutes of questioning. 

Mr. MOYLAN. Thank you, Madam Chair. Thank you to our panel. 

This data collection problem, it has been a long problem, ongoing. 

And without the correct data, as we understand from the panel, we 

just can’t get what we are supposed to have. And the GAO’s report 

finally came out and said that the local groups may not apply for 

grants and programs as Ms. Leon Guerrero has stated, as well, 

which we would have qualified for these programs if we were able 

to be included. And we are not included in this. It is just totally 

unacceptable. I am glad to see there is some action, but it is really 

long overdue. 

And Guam particularly suffers from these effects. SNAP payments are based on the Federal Poverty and Consumer Price data, 

and the approach not taken for any of the states. So, this lack of 

composite data hinders our efforts to identify needed resources and 

delays what we need for the island. 

The Office of Insular Affairs is meant to advocate for our territories. And I hear it coming. But again, we are just way behind, 

and we have to do more. We have to advocate louder. And I hear 

it from our panels, too, but I want to hear a little bit more from 

Director Leon Guerrero. 

The GAO report identified these barriers toward accurate data 

collection in the territories, especially within Guam. What barriers 

does the Government of Guam find most troublesome in the accurate data collection and transmission to the Federal agencies? 

Ms. LEON GUERRERO. I think the most important thing is the 

need for improved coordination between the Federal agencies and 

the Government of Guam to ensure compliance with the required 

standards and methodology when conducting federally administered surveys and census. 

So, we do need Federal territory relationships to be in place, and 

there needs to be that line of communication between the entities 

when we are conducting. So, on surveys we just need to make sure 

we are informed of the proper methodology in order so that we can 

also take action to implement those things and provide the necessary information to the Federal agencies. We need to work 

together to bridge the gap. 

Mr. MOYLAN. Excellent. Thank you. And I hear the same from 

Puerto Rico, as well. We are excluded. We are just not included. We 

are excluded from all these things. You are trying to raise your 

voice to say, include us, include us. And this is just terrible. So, 

now at least we finally got to sit down, and we are talking, based 

on this report, on how we can make the corrections. So, that is a 

good thing. 

But also Director Leon Guerrero, what actions could the Federal 

Government take to best support data collection in the territories? 

Ms. LEON GUERRERO. Resources. We need Federal resources in 

order to include for the territories, Guam, for major statistical 

products. 
46 

And the other thing also is to educate the Federal entities about 

the territories. That is very important. 

And the other one is also to conduct a comprehensive review of 

the territories’ data gaps, as well as, again, resources and funding 

support for capacity building for Guam, as well as the other 

territories. 

Mr. SABLAN. Thank you. 

Ms. Braybrooks, this problem of data collection has been known 

since at least 2018, though I would not be surprised if this issue 

has been occurring for far longer. Why has the OIA been so stagnant in its response to address data gaps in the territories? 

OIA’s mission statement is to coordinate Federal policies for 

American Samoa, Guam, Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana 

Islands, and the U.S. Virgin Islands with the aim to support and 

develop an efficient and effective government. So, why has this 

Administration basically, to me, ignored such a critical problem? 

Ms. BRAYBROOKS. Thank you for the question. 

Regarding our resources in OIA, we have used our available 

resources. From the funding resources, TAP is $22 million a year. 

In reality, we get over $100 million in grant requests that range 

from public safety, to education, to health. So, we do reflect back 

to the priority of the territories when we make the decisions of 

where to fund, but we are using it to fund data and advocate. 

Other resources that we use include leveraging and advocating 

to our Federal partners. But we are not in a position to tell the 

Federal partners how to use their resources. So, that is the role 

that we are taking, is making awareness and trying to leverage 

where we can, but we are simply not in a position to fill the gap 

by ourselves. 

Mr. MOYLAN. Thank you. So, I suggest to the Administration 

that they need to assist you folks to fill that gap, because this is 

just unacceptable. 

I also think, just for the last few seconds, I think these Federal 

agencies that are excluding the territories, that they should have 

a territories class 101 every 6 months until they get it in their 

mind, or we put up maps in their offices to say this is Guam, this 

is Puerto Rico, so they don’t forget. It is just so simple. We need 

to be included in these things. 

If you need more money, then talk to the Administration and get 

yourself more money to support the territories. We are really 

important. We must get this done. We have the Indo-Pacific region 

that is very important. We can’t let this happen again. But I appreciate all your statements. Thank you very much. 

Director Leon Guerrero, thank you for the long trip coming to 

from Guam. Thank you. 

Thank you, Madam Chair, I yield back. 

Ms. HAGEMAN. The Chair now recognizes Ms. Vela ́zquez for 5 

minutes of questioning. 

Ms. VELA ́ ZQUEZ. Thank you so very much, and I want to take 

this opportunity to thank all the witnesses that are here. 

It is kind of painful to be here, and to hear Federal agencies 

talking about their responsibility toward the territories. In my 

case, my homeland of Puerto Rico is a colony, so it is the responsibility of the U.S. Government. It is the responsibility of the U.S. 
47 

Congress to provide the funding so that the Federal agencies 

include Puerto Rico and the territories on the data collection. How 

could we possibly develop any kind of public policy that could have 

life or death consequences for the people who live in the territory 

if we don’t have data collection? That is totally wrong. 

Mr. Orenstein-Cardona, you mentioned in your testimony that 

the Puerto Rican Institute of Statistics is prioritizing Puerto Rico’s 

inclusion in the Current Population Survey and the Census of 

Governments, due to their importance to employment statistics and 

government spending. Can you tell us which Federal surveys or 

studies could be most helpful to advance disaster recovery efforts 

in the territory? 

Mr. ORENSTEIN-CARDONA. The CPS, or the Current Population 

Survey, and the Census of Governments are very comprehensive, 

allow comparability, and are very reliable. So, we have those two 

as the most important Federal statistical products we would like to 

be included in. 

In our written testimony, we talk about other statistical products 

we have encountered in which Puerto Rico is not included in their 

data. 

Ms. VELA ́ ZQUEZ. And what type of implications it has for Puerto 

Rico? 

Mr. ORENSTEIN-CARDONA. Right, well, enormous implications. I 

will repeat the diverse topics that are not being covered: reliable 

employment and unemployment and labor force characteristics, 

local government expenditures at different levels and in different 

areas, timely and quarterly GDP calculations, statistics about the 

educational system, infrastructure, motor vehicle registration, 

building permits, et cetera. 

Ms. VELA ́ ZQUEZ. OK, thank you. Mr. Orenstein, you mentioned 

that Puerto Rico is included in only 18 percent of the total 440 

Federal statistical products. For instance, of the 52 statistical products produced by the National Agricultural Statistics Service, 

Puerto Rico is included in only 1. Could you provide some examples 

of how this limited inclusion adversely affects efforts at the community, local, and Federal levels to address food insecurity and 

agricultural development on the island? 

Mr. ORENSTEIN-CARDONA. Well, definitely, the agricultural sector 

of the economy is very important for Puerto Rico and has suffered 

a lot in the last few decades, and we don’t have reliable information about that area. PRIS, our agency, attempted to compile data 

from 2009 to 2019 on the production and consumption of agricultural products, but that is not enough. There is more information 

that we need in order to be able to—— 

Ms. VELA ́ ZQUEZ. Thank you. 

Ms. Love-Grayer, GAO’s report found that efforts to understand 

and address territorial data gaps across the Federal Statistical 

System has been uncoordinated and scarce. And I would like to add 

that there is a lack of urgency. We have a prime example with the 

American Housing Survey. Despite HUD expressing their interest 

in expanding the survey to include Puerto Rico, after I sent a 

letter, which will require a feasibility study estimated at $7 

million, the agency did not include this additional funding in its 

latest budget. 
48 

Could you please explain the social and economic benefits of 

implementing this survey in Puerto Rico, and why it should be 

prioritized by the pertinent Federal agencies? 

Ms. LOVE-GRAYER. Well, I am sure my colleagues in Puerto Rico 

will probably be able to answer this even better than I. 

Having accurate and timely housing data is important to making 

decisions both at the Federal and the local level. HUD makes decisions about its programing based on this data. Certainly, local 

governments make decisions about the allocation of resources in 

certain communities and who should get what based on this data. 

So, the lack of data limits decision making at all levels of 

government. 

Ms. VELA ́ ZQUEZ. And would you please bring that message back 

to your bosses in the Administration, why it is important? 

Life or death could be defined by the lack of data. And we saw 

this during Hurricane Maria. We are still facing a problem of 

30,000 homes in Puerto Rico not being rebuilt after Maria. How 

many years later? Shame on us. Thank you. 

Mr. MOYLAN [presiding]. Thank you. The Chair now recognizes 

the Full Committee Chairman, Mr. Bruce Westerman. 

Mr. WESTERMAN. Thank you, Chairman. Thank you to the 

witnesses for being here today. 

And the whole reason we are here is because of facts and data, 

because of a report that GAO did that looked at gaps with data. 

I come from an engineering background, and one thing you learn 

in engineering is that the results you produce are no better than 

the data that you start with. So, if you start with bad data, you 

are going to get bad results, no matter how well you do in between. 

So, it is critical that we start with good data. 

And I think this hearing is an example of a good use of congressional time, where we are really looking at a problem and trying 

to figure out a way to fix the problem. And I go back to the days 

when computers were just kind of getting off the ground, and there 

was this acronym, I think it was GIGO, garbage in, garbage out. 

So, we have to make sure we are not putting garbage into the 

equation, or else we will get bad results. 

With that said, my first question is for Ms. Braybrooks and Ms. 

Love-Grayer. Do you have any recommendations for how we can 

close the gaps in data collection for the territories, and do it in a 

fiscally responsible manner? 

Ms. BRAYBROOKS. Thank you for the question. 

My testimony lays out a number of specific recommendations. 

But generally, we support and encourage that a group of stakeholders, including the statistical community, but those that are 

entities that work with the territories and can represent their 

needs come together and have a coordinated discussion that 

discusses how to overcome the barriers and move towards more 

meaningful statistics. 

Some suggestions within that is understanding why they exist. 

Knowing why they exist helps us determine how we solve it. Is it 

statutory, administrative, or something other? 

And within that ‘‘other’’ category, we know a lot of that is related 

to technical infrastructure. So, working with organizations who are 

qualified and can help guide the territories and support them in 
49 

developing local capacity is essential. But that conversation really 

starts with a coordinated effort which we haven’t had to date. 

Ms. LOVE-GRAYER. And my answer will be very similar. We have 

recommended that OMB lead that coordinated effort that my colleague just mentioned. We think it is very important for there to 

be a coordinated, government-wide approach to assessing the feasibility of increasing or enhancing data collection in many of the 

territories. 

I don’t think there is a one-size-fits-all, so there needs to be a coordinated discussion between the territories, other stakeholders, 

the Federal agencies in order to identify the gaps that are the 

highest priorities, which may vary by the territories, and to discuss 

the costs of being able to address those gaps and the actions that 

need to be taken to do so. And those actions would include both 

Federal and local actions that would usually have to occur to 

address the barriers that exist now. 

So, that is our recommendation, and we will be following up with 

OMB to determine what actions they are taking to fulfill it. 

Mr. WESTERMAN. And if I can follow up with that, we kind of use 

the term ‘‘statistics’’ loosely, but a lot of what it seems we are 

talking about is more data collection than statistics. The science of 

statistics is basically examining the data to figure out what kind 

of confidence you have in the data and how much variation is in 

the data. 

So, is the problem at the root level of gathering data, or is the 

problem in analyzing the data that we have? 

Ms. LOVE-GRAYER. I think we think it is both. There is not 

enough data collection in many areas. And then, when data is collected, sometimes the accuracy of that data is not high. So, in those 

instances, the issue is with the type of data. 

As you mentioned, if the data is not good going in, the statistics 

are not great going out in terms of confidence, and what they 

mean, and the actions that should be taken in response to them. 

Ms. BRAYBROOKS. I agree with that. She hits right on the source 

data about what goes in is what you get out. 

But I also think that it is who is producing the statistics. Right 

now, we are using Office of Insular Affairs funds, a limited pool of 

funds to support the territories to stand up surveys, the Consumer 

Price Index, the Household Income and Expenditure Survey. We 

are funding GDP for four of the five territories. 

So, I think a conversation needs to be had about who is best 

suited to produce these statistics and guide these statistics, and we 

don’t know enough now, but that conversation is a worthy one to 

have. 

Mr. WESTERMAN. Thank you. 

The membership of the Interagency Council on Statistical Policy 

consists of 30 representatives of various U.S. Federal agencies, and 

the DOI is a member of the Interagency Council. Ms. Braybrooks, 

what is the DOI’s role in the Interagency Council on Statistical 

Policy? 

It is kind of a follow-up to what we were just talking about. 

Ms. BRAYBROOKS. I can’t speak to the depth of DOI’s participation. It is a big agency and there are a lot of data factors. 
50 

We have been involved to some degree with the Interagency 

Council in recent months, both representatives from the Census 

Bureau representing efforts in Puerto Rico and DOI. But to the 

best of my knowledge, it has largely been educating the Interagency Council about the territorial situation. And that is where 

we are at now. DOI, the Office of Insular Affairs, has gone to the 

table to explain the data issues to the Interagency Council. There 

is an interest there, but it hasn’t gone farther than that, as far as 

I understand. 

Mr. WESTERMAN. Yes, I am over time, I yield back. 

Mr. MOYLAN. Thank you, Mr. Westerman. The Chair now 

recognizes Mr. LaMalfa from California. 

Mr. LAMALFA. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I appreciate it. 

Apologies for parachuting in at this time, as dueling Committees 

is one of the curses we have around here. But I am glad to join, 

glad to have our panelists here today. Let me just launch into a 

couple of thoughts we have here with these data collection 

mechanisms. 

So, what resonates, really, is that the unique nature of life in the 

territories, as compared to the continental United States, and then 

the need to adapt to that, it is much like what we deal with in 

rural areas of the continent, and like my own state of California, 

for example. So, rural areas versus the urban areas, where the 

rules pretty much are made, like in Washington, DC or in my home 

state, in Sacramento at the state level, where it just seems like 

they are miles different on what priorities are or how the thinking 

even is, and when they create guidelines, et cetera, that, basically, 

rural folks, or maybe in your case the territories, would have a 

hard time dealing with to comply, or they don’t even make sense 

to be doing it that way. 

So, Ms. Love-Grayer, the report we are speaking of talks about 

how the methods for data collection used in states don’t always 

translate well to the territories. Many of these methods can be very 

specific prescriptions from the Federal agencies that oversee them. 

Do you think the overall goal of data collection could be met if we 

focused less on how the territories should carry out the programs, 

and more focused on what the goals of each set of data is supposed 

to be? What do you think? 

Ms. LOVE-GRAYER. We do think an important part of addressing 

this issue is understanding the needs of each of the territories, and 

the unique data needs they have, and the unique needs they have 

in their community. There is not a one-size-fits-all approach for all 

of the territories. There are different demographics, different economic circumstances, and different data collection capacities within 

each of the territories. 

So, we do think that there needs to be more time spent understanding those differences and thinking through how to address 

them where there is a highest priority for each of the territories. 

Mr. LAMALFA. What do we need in order to allow the entities 

involved to do that? What is holding them back from doing that? 

Is it just DC says do it this way and that is it, or are they allowed 

more locally to form their own prescription of doing that? 

Ms. LOVE-GRAYER. We think there has been a lack of a coordinated approach, which is why we made a recommendation to OMB 
51 

to create one. We don’t know that there has been enough dialogue 

between the Federal Government and the territories. 

I think my colleagues on this panel have all noted the lack of 

that coordination between the Federal Government and the territories and other stakeholders who could inform those decisions. 

So, our recommendation is that OMB pull in all of these stakeholders so that we can have a constructive conversation about what 

those needs are and how best to address them. 

Mr. LAMALFA. Has much been done in the work of a demonstration or pilot programs that can be experimented at the territory 

level to run these statistical and data programs in their own way? 

Is there that autonomy being done on a pilot level, at least, for 

again, Ms. Love-Grayer, and then I would like to throw that also 

to Ms. Leon Guerrero and Mr. Orenstein-Cardona. 

Ms. LOVE-GRAYER. To our knowledge, there have been instances 

where—for example, my colleague here, Department of the Interior, 

has helped fund technical assistance to local territorial statistical 

bodies, and that has helped them understand how to collect data 

better in their communities. 

And there have been some instances, some collaboration between 

the Census Bureau and the local or territorial census or statistical 

bodies to understand how to collect data. But we don’t think that 

is something that is happening across the board in a very 

comprehensive way. 

Mr. LAMALFA. But on a pilot level it is occurring, or can occur? 

Ms. LOVE-GRAYER. I don’t know if I would call it a pilot, but I 

would call it sort of individual one-off situations. And in some 

instances, it appears that the territories have to be the ones to 

initiate it. 

Mr. LAMALFA. OK, thank you. Let me allow some time for Ms. 

Leon Guerrero. 

Ms. LEON GUERRERO. We haven’t done any pilot programs for 

survey. We really rely on the Department of the Interior for 

funding to conduct our surveys. For example, the Household 

Income Survey, we actually got a grant funding from DOI for the 

Household Income Survey. So, we have not done any pilot survey 

programs. 

Mr. LAMALFA. OK. Mr. Orenstein-Cardona. 

Mr. ORENSTEIN-CARDONA. Sorry, in Puerto Rico we haven’t had 

piloted programs that I can think of. 

Mr. LAMALFA. OK. But amongst the two of you, do you welcome 

this sort of thinking, this sort of experimentation, or new idea? 

Ms. LEON GUERRERO. If there are Federal resources involved. 

Mr. LAMALFA. Yes, OK. 

Mr. Orenstein? 

Mr. ORENSTEIN-CARDONA. Yes, definitely resources are important. And also close collaboration with local governments is really 

important, too. 

Mr. LAMALFA. OK. My time is up. Thank you for answering my 

questions here on that, and I hope we can build upon this. I appreciate it. 

I will yield back, Mr. Chairman. 
52 

Mr. MOYLAN. Thank you, Mr. LaMalfa, and I want to thank the 

witnesses for their valuable testimony and the Members for their 

questions, as well. 

The members of the Committee may have some additional questions for the witnesses, and we will ask you to respond to these in 

writing. 

Under Committee Rule 3, members of the Committee must submit questions to the Subcommittee Clerk by 5 p.m. on Tuesday, 

June 18, 2024. The hearing record will be held open for 10 business 

days for these responses. 

If there are no further business, without objection, the 

Committee stands adjourned. 

[Whereupon, at 12:17 p.m., the Subcommittee was adjourned.] 

Æ