The Farm Producer Survey: 

Unit and Item Nonresponse

Linda J. Young and Barbara R. Rater

United States

Department of

Agricultural

National

Agricultural

Statistics

Service

Research and

Development Division

Washington, DC 20250

RDD Research Report

Number RDD-22-01

July 2022

The findings and conclusions in this report are those of the author and should not be construed to represent any

official USDA or U.S. Government determination or policy.
2 

Introduction

The USDA’s National Agricultural Statistics Service (NASS) conducts the quinquennial Census 

of Agriculture in years ending in 2 and 7. The Census is the leading source of information about 

farms and ranches and the people who operate them. It is the only uniform, comprehensive 

agricultural data set for every state and county or county equivalent in the United States, 

including detailed data at the county level with respect to race, ethnicity, and sex. 

Since acquiring the census from the US Census Bureau in 1997, NASS has revised and added 

questions to more fully capture the characteristics of farm producers. NASS now collects data on 

up to four producers on a single farm. Questions identifying veterans and new or beginning 

producers have been added. Beginning in 2017, the roles of females, minority, and other 

underserved producers have been more fully captured through decision-making questions, which 

enables USDA program agencies to measure progress in serving those traditionally underserved. 

NASS is considering adding questions on disability and sexual orientation and gender identity 

(SOGI) for the 2027 Census of Agriculture. As a first step in this process, in December 2021, 

NASS conducted the Farm Producer Study to assess the potential effect of disability and SOGI 

questions on the Census of Agriculture’s response rates and measurement error. The results of 

the study may lead to a more robust demographic data product and assist regulatory agencies, 

producers, state governments, processors, and other USDA agencies in administering and 

monitoring program effectiveness. These data could also allow NASS to further support other 

USDA agencies in conducting educational and outreach activities; coordinating related activities 

helps maximize limited resources and better serve the needs of all producers. The study data 

have the potential to help determine baseline numbers for outreach efforts to producers with 

disabilities and lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer (LGBTQ+) producers. 

The separate data collection of agricultural decision makers’ disability and SOGI status is also 

consistent with the Executive Order on Advancing Racial Equity and Support of Underserved 

Communities through the Federal Government. 

Study

The Farm Producer Survey was designed to address the following research questions: 

1) Does the presence of disability questions affect either unit or item response rates? 

2) Does the presence of SOGI questions affect either unit or item response rates? 

3) If both disability and SOGI questions are present, is the effect on unit response rates 

additive or is some interaction between the sets of questions present? 

4) What is the measurement error associated with asking the SOGI questions? 

A set of six disability questions were identified (see Figure 1). These have been well tested and 

used by other government agencies, e.g., the Social Security Administration. Three SOGI 

questions were identified after cognitive testing that built upon the experiences of others (see 

Figure 2). The consensus panel of the Committee on National Statistics (CNSTAT), convened to 

study measurement of sex and SOGI, proposed a set of questions to collect sex and SOGI data 

(National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine 2022). The questions in this study, 
3

for which data collection began prior to the release of the consensus panel’s report, are similar, 

but differ from those the panel proposed. The control questionnaire did not have any disability 

questions, and it had a single question to determine the sex (male or female) of the respondent. 

Only information on the respondent was collected; the respondent was not asked to respond on 

behalf of any other producer associated with that farm.

Figure 1. Disability Questions Tested.

Figure 2. SOGI Questions Tested

The target population for the Farm Producer Study was all U.S. producers. The sampled 

population is the responding producer from all active farms on NASS’s list frame. The study’s 

sampling frame – like the Census of Agriculture’s sampling frame – is comprised of all active 

farms on NASS’s list frame. Four treatment groups were identified: (1) control (none of the test 

questions were included); (2) only disability questions; (3) only SOGI questions; and (4) both 
4

disability and SOGI questions. 

The total sample size was 75,262. The sample size was approximately 12,500 for the control 

group (treatment 1) and for the treatment group receiving only the disability questions (treatment

2). The sample size for each treatment group with the SOGI questions (treatments 3 and 4) was 

about 25,000. The two treatment groups with SOGI questions were each split into two 

subgroups: respondents in one subgroup were asked a confirmation question if their recorded sex 

at birth differs from their present gender and if they responded via web or computer-assisted 

telephone interviewing (CATI); respondents in the other subgroup were not asked the 

confirmation question. Notice that the total sample sizes for the disability and SOGI questions 

were, respectively, about 37,500 and 50,000. With this design, it was possible to assess whether 

each set of new questions (disability or SOGI) had an impact on response rates and whether the 

presence of both sets of new questions had an additive impact on response rates or whether some 

interaction was present. Dividing the treatment groups with SOGI questions into two subgroups 

allowed measurement error to be assessed when respondents reported a difference in their sex

recorded at birth and their current gender identity.

Separate strata were formed for groups with historical response rates lower than the overall 

census response rate: LGBTQ+, American Indians/Alaska Natives, Asians/Native Hawaiians and 

Pacific Islanders, Blacks, Hispanics, and females (farms with only female producers). Based on 

their 2017 Census of Agriculture response, farms were assigned to the LGBTQ+ stratum if only 

two producers of the same sex, living in the same household, and with an age difference of no 

more than ten years were involved in decision making for the farm. Brothers who are the only 

producers on a farm could satisfy this definition, and a sole producer who is a member of the 

LBGTQ+ community would not. That is, the LBGTQ+ stratum (stratum 1) definition is an 

imperfect identifier of farms that should be in that stratum. For strata based on race or ethnicity, 

the most recent information collected was used to determine stratum membership. As an

example, a primary producer could have reported being black and non-Hispanic for the 2017 

Census of Agriculture. Unless additional information had been obtained that would lead to a 

recorded change in race of that producer or a change to another primary producer who is of a 

different race, that producer’s farm would be placed in the black stratum. The strata for 

American Indians/Alaska Natives (stratum 2), Asians/Native Hawaiians and Pacific Islanders

(stratum3), and Blacks (stratum 4) were populated with farms that were not in stratum 1 and 

whose primary decision maker was of that stratum’s race. The Hispanics stratum was comprised 

of those farms that were not in one of the first four strata and that reported the primary producer 

was of Hispanic origin. All farms with only female decision makers, as reported in the 2017 

Census of Agriculture, and that had not been included in one of the first five strata were placed 

in the female stratum. Error is also involved with definitions of strata two through six. The 

responder may not be the decision maker with the characteristic upon which the stratum 

assignment was based. As an example, the producer who is the primary decision maker could be 

a black male with a partner who is a white male, placing the farm in the Black stratum; however, 

the white partner could be the one who responded to the survey. All other farm records were in 

the final stratum (see Table 1). Notice that farm records were assigned to strata in the order 

specified. For example, if a farm had an Asian female principal producer, then that farm was 

assigned to the Asian stratum. Each of these seven strata were further stratified by Census region 

(see Table 2), state, farm type groups, and farm value of sales groups. 
5 

Table 1. Demographic Strata

Stratum Number Group

1 LGBTQ+

2 American Indians/Alaska Natives

3 Asians/Native Hawaiians and Pacific Islanders

4 Blacks

5 Hispanics

6 Females

7 Others

Table 2. Census Regions

Region 1 Region 2 Region 3 Region 4 Region 5 Region 6 Region7

Arizona

California

Colorado

Nevada

New Mexico

Utah

Hawaii

Connecticut

Delaware

Maine

Maryland

Massachusetts

New Hampshire

New Jersey

New York

Pennsylvania

Rhode Island

Vermont

Idaho

Montana

Oregon

Washington

Wyoming

Alaska

Iowa

Kansas

Minnesota

Missouri

Nebraska

North Dakota

South Dakota

Alabama

Arkansas

Louisiana

Mississippi

Oklahoma

Texas

Florida

Georgia

Kentucky

North Carolina

South Carolina

Tennessee

Virginia

West Virginia

Illinois

Indiana

Michigan

Ohio

Wisconsin

The control treatment group received a standard four-page questionnaire. In contrast, all other

treatment groups received one or more sets of test questions (disability or SOGI). The length of 

the questionnaire for each treatment group was four pages. 

Data Collection

The data collection plan for this Farm Producer Study consisted of the following: 

(1) Mailed a traditional paper questionnaire with a cover letter. This mailing also 

encouraged reporting on the web. 

(2) For all non-respondents, mailed a second traditional paper questionnaire with a cover 

letter. This mailing also encouraged reporting on the web. 

(3) Conducted nonresponse follow-up with enumerators via CATI. 

Respondents in the confirmation question subgroup of the two treatment groups with SOGI 

questions were asked a confirmation question if their recorded sex at birth differs from their 

reported present gender identity and they responded via the web or by CATI. Respondents in the 

other subgroup of those treatment groups were not asked the confirmation question. It was 

anticipated that, with this design and for these two treatment groups, approximately half of the 

web or CATI respondents who had differing responses to the two questions (sex recorded at birth 

and present gender identity) would receive the confirmation question. 

Results

The analyses used to address these questions reflect the study design. For unit and item 

nonresponse, the response variable was whether or not there was a response. The treatments were 
6

in a 22 factorial arrangement of treatments. The two factors were disability questions (present or 

absent) and SOGI questions (present or absent). Demographic stratum was the third factor in the 

model. All main effects as well as two-way and three-way interactions were also included. The 

data were too sparse to include the Census region. A generalized linear model with a Bernoulli 

response and a logit link function was fit in each analysis. When F-tests are conducted, the pvalue is the probability of observing an F-value at least as large as that observed if the null 

hypothesis is true. Unit and item response rates were estimated by back transforming the least 

squares means and their associated standard errors, which were on the logit scale. The traditional 

5% significance level was used to assess significance. However, p-values are provided should 

the reader want to consider some other level of significance.

All analyses were conducted on the unweighted data, which provides sample average treatment 

effect (SATE) estimates. These estimates tend not to differ substantially from the population 

average treatment effects (PATE), i.e., weighted, estimates, and they avoid the loss in statistical 

power that accompanies a weighted analysis (Miratrix, et al. 2018).

Unit nonresponse for both disability and SOGI questions will be evaluated first. Item 

nonresponse for disability and SOGI questions will be considered next. Finally, measurement 

error associated with respondents reporting a difference in sex at birth and current gender 

identity will be addressed.

Unit Nonresponse

Of the 75,262 sampled farms, responses were obtained from 34,059, giving a cooperation rate of 

45.3%. Of the responders, 2,184 reported that they were out-of-business. These records were 

included as responders for the analysis of unit nonresponse but were excluded for the item 

nonresponse analysis.

For the unit response rate, the main effects of the presence of SOGI questions and demographic 

stratum were significant (respectively, p < 0.0001 and p < 0.0001, see Table 3). Note: a main 

effect is the difference in levels of a factor (e.g., presence/absence of SOGI questions) averaged 

over all other factors. The effect of including disability questions and all two- and three-factor 

interactions were not significant.

Table 3. Tests of Fixed Effects in the Model of Unit Nonresponse 

Type III Tests of Fixed Effects

Effect Num DF Den DF F Value p-value

SOGI 1 75234 42.74 <.0001

Disability 1 75234 1.08 0.2991

Stratum 6 75234 63.68 <.0001

SOGI *stratum 6 75234 1.02 0.4067

disability*stratum 6 75234 0.99 0.4292

SOGI *disability 1 75234 0.15 0.6983

SOGI *disability*stratum 6 75234 0.55 0.7669
7

Adding disability questions did not have a significant impact on the overall response rates (p = 

0.2991). The estimated response rate when disability questions were present was 44.5% (±0.3%) 

compared to a response rate of 45.0% (±0.3%) when they were not.

The presence of the SOGI questions led to an overall decrease in response rates from 

46.3% (±0.4%) when the SOGI questions were not included to 43.3% (±0.3%) when they were, a 

reduction of an estimated 3%. 

The LGBTQ+ stratum response rate of 50.6% was the highest (see Table 4). The response rates 

for the female (47.0%) and others (48.2%) strata were not significantly different from each other 

but differed significantly from the response rates of the other strata. The Hispanics (44.8%), 

Asians/Native Hawaiians and Pacific Islanders (43.5%), and Blacks (43.2%) had response rates 

that were not significantly different from each other but differed from those of the other strata. 

The American Indians/Alaska Natives stratum had the lowest response rate of 36.4%.

Table 4. Unit Response Rates and Standard Errors for the Demographic Strata

Demographic Stratum Least Squares Means

Stratum Number Demographic Group

Unit

Response

Rate*

Standard

Error

1 LBGTQ+ 0.5065 a 0.007332

7 Others 0.4819 b 0.002940

6 Females 0.4696 b 0.006115

5 Hispanics 0.4478 c 0.006085

3 Asians/Native Hawaiians and Pacific Islanders 0.4353 c 0.006072

4 Blacks 0.4321 c 0.006060

2 American Indians/Alaska Natives 0.3643 d 0.005885

 *Unit response rates with the same letter are not significantly different from each other.

Because the effects of adding the disability or SOGI questions to the Census of Agriculture could 

differ among the demographic groups, the effects were evaluated within each demographic 

stratum (see Table 5). 

For American Indians/Alaska Natives, Blacks, and Hispanics, the interaction between the 

presence of disability and SOGI questions was not significant (p = 0.2594, 0.5839, 0.1008, 

respectively). The presence of a significant interaction between the presence of disability and 

SOGI questions for the LGBTQ+, Asians/Native Hawaiians and Pacific Islanders, female, and 

others strata indicates that, for these strata, the presence of disability and SOGI questions each 

had an effect and that effect differed depending on whether the other set of questions was present

(see Figure 3). In addition, the presence of the SOGI questions had a significant effect on 
8 

Table 5. Tests of the Effects of the Presence of Disability and SOGI Questions and the 

Interaction of the Two within Demographic Strata on Unit Nonresponse

Stratum

Number

Demographic

Group

Disability*SOGI

p-value

Disability

p-value

SOGI

p-value

1 LGBTQ+ 0.0339 0.1086 0.0169

2 American Indians/Alaska Natives 0.2594 0.5187 0.0616

3 Asians/Native Hawaiians and Pacific Islanders 0.0251 0.1263 0.0169

4 Blacks 0.5839 0.4408 0.4972

5 Hispanics 0.1008 0.4375 0.0182

6 Females 0.0013 0.9388 <.0001

7 Others <.0001 0.7144 <.0001

Figure 3. Plot of Treatment Unit Response Rates for Each Stratum

response rates within the Hispanics stratum (p = 0.0182) and a marginal effect within the 

American Indians/Alaska Natives stratum (p =0.0616). Adding disability questions alone had no 

significant effect within any of the demographic strata. 

For the LGBTQ+ stratum, the effect of adding both disability and SOGI questions to the 

questionnaire had a smaller impact on the response rates than the sum of the effects for adding 

only SOGI or only disability questions (see Table 6, Figure 3). Compared to control, adding both 

disability and SOGI questions resulted in an estimated decrease in response rate of 5.8% (p = 

0.0047). Adding the SOGI questions to either the control or the disability questions resulted in a 

marginally significant decrease in estimated response rate of 3.4% (p = 0.0981) and 3.6% (p = 

0.0847), respectively. Unit Response Rate

Stratum

Control

Disability Questions

SOGI Questions

Both Disability and 

 SOGI Questions
9

Table 6. The Estimated Unit Response Rate for Each Treatment-Stratum Combination.

Stratum Demographic Stratum Control 

Unit Response 

Rate (SE)

Disability Unit 

Response Rate 

(SE)

SOGI Unit 

Response Rate 

(SE)

Disability and SOGI 

Unit Response Rate 

(SE)

1 LGBTQ+ 0.535 (0.017) 0.513 (0.017) 0.501 (0.012) 0.477 (0.012)

2 American Indians/

Alaska Natives

0.382 (0.014) 0.369 (0.014) 0.354 (0.010) 0.352 (0.010)

3 Asians/Native 

Hawaiians and Pacific 

Islanders

0.431 (0.014) 0.469 (0.014) 0.421 (0.010) 0.421 (0.010)

4 Blacks 0.437 (0.014) 0.435 (0.014) 0.437 (0.010) 0.420 (0.010)

5 Hispanics 0.470 (0.014) 0.455 (0.014) 0.436 (0.010) 0.432 (0.010)

6 Females 0.496 (0.014) 0.492 (0.014) 0.442 (0.010) 0.449 (0.010)

7 Others 0.499 (0.007) 0.499 (0.007) 0.467 (0.005) 0.463 (0.005)

Now consider the Asians/Native Hawaiians and Pacific Islanders stratum. Adding disability 

questions was marginally significant (p = 0.0587), leading to an increase in estimated response 

rate from 43.1% (±1.4%) to 46.9% (±1.4%). Including only SOGI questions did not have a 

significant effect on unit response rate compared to the control (p = 0.5553). However, having 

both disability and SOGI questions or only SOGI questions resulted in a significant reduction of 

an estimated 4.8% when compared to having only disability questions (p = 0.0055 and p = 

0.0052, respectively). 

Those in the Hispanics stratum had a significant decrease in unit response rate when SOGI or 

both disability and SOGI questions were added. The effect of adding SOGI questions resulted in 

a significant decrease of 3.4% (p = 0.0469) if only SOGI questions were added and 3.8% (p = 

0.0263) if both disability and SOGI questions were added.

In the female stratum, adding the SOGI questions resulted in a significant decrease in the 

response rate of 5.3% (p = 0.0020) if no disability questions were present and 4.7% (p = 0.0063) 

if disability questions were also present. 

For the final stratum consisting of all other records, adding the disability questions did not have a 

significant impact on response rate. Adding SOGI questions with or without disability questions 

resulted in a significant decrease of 3.7% (p < 0.0001) and 3.3% (p < 0.0001), respectively.

The estimated response rates were consistently higher for all strata when the SOGI questions 

were not included (see Figure 4). The extent to which the SOGI questions led to lower unit 

response rates varied with demographic stratum.
10

Figure 4. Effect of the Presence of SOGI Questions on Unit Response Rate by Stratum

In summary, compared to the control, adding the disability questions did not result in a 

significant decrease in response rates for any stratum: LGBTQ+ (p = 0.1086), American 

Indians/Alaska Natives (p = 0.5187), Asians/Native Hawaiians and Pacific Islanders (p = 

0.1263), Blacks (p = 0.4408), Hispanics (p = 0.4375), females (p = 0.9388), and others (p = 

0.7144). Compared to the control, adding SOGI questions resulted in a significant or marginally 

significant decrease in response rates for the LGBTQ+ (p = 0.0981), Asians/Native Hawaiians (p

= 0.0052), Hispanics (p = 0.0469), females (p = 0.0020), and other strata (p < 0.0001). The 

response rate decreased by more than 5% when (1) both disability and SOGI questions were 

present for the LGBTQ+ stratum and (2) SOGI, but not disability, questions were added for the 

female stratum.

Item Nonresponse

Disability Questions

The control and only SOGI questions treatments were not included in this analysis as they had no 

disability questions on their questionnaires. The factors considered in the analysis were question 

(6 disability questions), treatment (disability only and disability and SOGI questions). For the six 

disability questions, the item response rate varied significantly with treatment (p < 0.0001) and 

stratum (p < 0.0001), but not with question (p = 0.9922). None of the two- and three-way 

interactions were significant (p > 0.9966) (see Figure 5). Thus, the response rates to the disability 

questions are reported by treatment and stratum averaged over question (see Tables 7 and 8). Unit Response Rate

Stratum

Control

SOGI Questions
11

Table 7. Response Rate to Disability Questions by Treatment *

Treatment

Group

Item Response 

Rate

Standard

Error

Only Disability Questions 0.963 a 0.001

Disability and SOGI Questions, Confirming Question 0.958 b 0.002

Disability and SOGI Questions, No Confirming Question 0.951 c 0.002 *

Treatments with different letters had significantly different item response rates to the SOGI questions.

Table 8. Response Rate to Disability Questions by Demographic Stratum *

Stratum

Number

Demographic

Group

Item Response 

Rate

Standard

Error

2 American Indians/Alaska Natives 0.975 a 0.002

4 Blacks 0.969 a 0.002

5 Hispanics 0.962 ab 0.002

3 Asians/Native Hawaiians and Pacific Islanders 0.959 bc 0.002

1 LGBTQ+ 0.954 c 0.002

7 Others 0.942 d 0.001

6 Females 0.921 e 0.003 *

Strata with different letters had significantly different item response rates to the SOGI questions.

Figure 5. Item Response Rate to the Disability Questions by Stratum

 Question

Sight

Hearing 

Walking

Concentrating 

Self-Care

Communicating

Stratum

Item Response Rate
12

The number of producers reporting a level of disability as “a lot of difficulty” or “cannot do at 

all” varied with the type of disability and stratum (see Table 9). The observed counts from the 

study are reported and not the weighted values. Thus, these data cannot be used to estimate the 

prevalence of disabilities in the population of producers.

Table 9. Number of Producers Reporting Some Level of Disability

Disability Stratum

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Totals

Sight 21 46 30 37 30 43 135 342

Hearing 38 91 53 58 57 50 365 722

Walking 57 98 59 102 92 98 335 841

Concentrating 17 41 36 35 21 27 115 292

Self-Care 7 19 13 22 10 14 47 132

Communicating 4 19 23 16 9 6 43 120

SOGI QUESTIONS

SOGI Questions Considered as One Item

Recall that all versions of the questionnaire had at least one question about sex or gender. For the 

control and disability only questionnaires, only one question was asked: “What is your sex? ”

The options provided were male and female, and a response occurs if either option is selected. 

This question has appeared on previous NASS surveys and the Census of Agriculture. Three 

SOGI questions were present on the questionnaires with disability and SOGI and SOGI only 

questions. This initial analysis considers the three questions as a unit, and a response is said to 

occur if the producer responded to at least one of the three questions.

The item response rate did not differ with the presence of the SOGI questions. The observed item 

response rate was 96.0% if the SOGI questions were not present and 95.9% when they were. The 

item response for the sex/SOGI questions differed with stratum (p < 0.0001). No other main 

effect or two- or three-way interaction was significant (p > 0.4111). The Blacks and American 

Table 10. Item Response Rate for SOGI Questions for Demographic Strata*

Stratum

Number

Demographic

Group

Item Response 

Rate

Standard

Error

4 Blacks 0.975 a 0.003

2 American Indians/Alaska Natives 0.971 a 0.003

5 Hispanics 0.964 b 0.003

1 LGBTQ+ 0.956 bc 0.004

3 Asians/Native Hawaiians and Pacific Islanders 0.955 bc 0.004

7 Others 0.947 c 0.002

6 Females 0.933 d 0.005

 *Strata with different letters had significantly different item response rates to the SOGI questions.
13

Indians/Alaska Natives strata had the highest item response rates (97.5 and 97.1, respectively), 

and the female and others strata had the lowest item response rates of 93.3% and 94.7%, 

respectively (see Table 9). 

Potential differences in item response rate for the individual SOGI questions were explored 

within each stratum (see Table 11). No main effect of the presence of disability or SOGI 

questions or the interaction of the two was significant within any of the demographic strata.

Table 11. Test of the Effects of the Presence of Disability and SOGI Questions and the

Interaction of the Two within Demographic Strata on

Item Nonresponse to the SOGI Questions

Stratum

Number

Demographic

Group

Disability*SOGI

p-value

Disability

p-value

SOGI

p-value

1 LGBTQ+ 0.2164 0.1136 0.1566

2 American Indians/Alaska Natives 0.3985 0.9940 0.1858

3 Asians/Native Hawaiians and Pacific Islanders 0.8470 0.7879 0.8008

4 Blacks 0.6770 0.2545 0.7616

5 Hispanics 0.8078 0.5891 0.8364

6 Females 0.2165 0.3708 0.1064

7 Others 0.2833 0.4163 0.1188

Individual SOGI Questions

To evaluate the item response rates for the three SOGI questions, only the questionnaires with 

SOGI questions (with or without the disability questions) were considered. A generalized linear 

model was used to explore whether item response differed with question and stratum. The 

response variable was one the question was answered and 0 otherwise. The factors evaluated 

were the question, the demographic stratum, and the interaction between stratum and question. 

The interaction between stratum and question was not significant (p = 0.4373). Question and 

stratum were significant (p < 0.0001). 

The item response rate for the questionnaires that had the traditional sex question with male and 

female response options was 95.7% (±0.2%), which was significantly greater than the item 

response rates to any of the three SOGI questions. Further, the item response rates for the three 

SOGI questions were significantly different from each other (see Table 12 and Figure 6). The 

item response rate to sex recorded at birth was 0.7% less than the response rate to the gender 

identity question (p =0.0094). The questions on how the respondent’s current gender identity and 

what sex was recorded for them at birth were significantly greater than the response rate to the 

sexual orientation question (p < 0.0001). The item response rate varied with stratum but, because 

there was no interaction in item response by question and by stratum, the main effect of stratum 

is reported here (see Table 13).
14

Table 12. Response Rates for the SOGI Questions

Question

Number

Question Item Response 

Rate

Standard

Error

1 Gender identity 0.953 a 0.002

2 Sex recorded at birth 0.946 b 0.002

3 Sexual orientation 0.903 c 0.002

Table 13. Response Rate to the SOGI Questions by Demographic Stratum *

Stratum

Number

Demographic

Group

Item Response 

Rate *

Standard

Error

4 Blacks 0.958 a 0.003

2 American Indians/Alaska Natives 0.956 a 0.003

5 Hispanics 0.943 b 0.003

3 Asians/Native Hawaiians and Pacific Islanders 0.933 c 0.003

1 LGBTQ+ 0.930 c 0.004

7 Others 0.920 d 0.002

6 Females 0.900 e 0.004

 *

Strata with different letters had significantly different item response rates to the SOGI questions.

Figure 6. The Item Response Rate for the SOGI Questions by Stratum

 Question

Gender at Present

Sex at Birth

 Sexual Orientation

Stratum

Item Response Rate
15

The item response rates were significantly different within each stratum (p < 0.0001). In all but 

the others stratum, the response rates to the questions on current gender identity and sex recorded 

at birth were not significantly different from each other but were significantly different from the 

response rate on sexual orientation, which was consistently lower (see Figure 6). For the others 

stratum, the response rate of 93.7% to the gender identity question was significantly greater than 

the response rate of 92.9% to the sex at birth question.

Current Gender Identity vs Sex Recorded at Birth

Of those who received the SOGI questions, some reported current gender identity that was 

different from their sex recorded at birth (see Table 14). Respondents also reported a spectrum of 

sexual orientations (see Table 15). All entries in Tables 14 and 15 are unweighted values and 

cannot be used to provide corresponding estimates of population characteristics.

Table 14. Sex Recorded at Birth and Gender at Present

Sex Recorded at Birth Gender at Present

Male Female Transgender Something Else Totals

Male 15,067 18 6 27 15,118

Female 23 4,211 6 2 4,242

Totals 15,090 4,229 12 29 19,360

Table 15. Sexual Orientation Reported by Respondents

Sexual Orientation Number Responding

Gay or Lesbian 298

Straight 16,775

Bisexual 84

None of these 537

I am not sure 108

I don’t know what this question means 1,034

Total 18,836

Measurement Error

The respondents who received the SOGI questions were randomly assigned to either receive or 

not receive a confirming question if their current gender was different from their sex recorded at 

birth. Of the 19,360 responding to both the sex at birth and current gender identity questions, 82

reported a current gender identity different from sex at birth. Only 33 of the 82 were assigned to 

a treatment subgroup that was to receive a confirming question. Of these 33, only 7 responded 

via the web or CATI; the others responded by mail and could not be asked a confirming 

question. Six (6) of the 7 responded to the confirming question, and all confirmed that their 

response of having a current gender identity different from the sex recorded at birth was correct. 

These numbers are too small to draw general conclusions as to the potential measurement error 

associated with the gender identity questions.
16

Discussion

The demographic strata were determined based on data collected from prior Censuses of 

Agriculture or surveys. Some changes could have occurred in these data. Also, because the 

disability and SOGI questions were only asked of the person responding and not for other 

producers on the farm, a producer from an underserved demographic group may not have been 

included in the responses. 

The frequency with which each stratum captured the demographic group of interest was explored 

(see Table 16). The columns in Table 16 represent the sampling strata, which were determined 

based on NASS list frame control data. The rows are the demographic groups identified through 

responses to the questionnaire. An individual may be included in the counts of more than one 

stratum. For example, a black female would be included in the counts of both the black and 

female strata. For the LGBTQ+ stratum, only those questionnaires with the SOGI questions 

could be used to determine reported membership in that stratum. Membership in all other strata 

could be determined from responses to any of the questionnaires. When SOGI questions were 

present, sex reported at birth was used to determine membership in the female stratum. Note that 

these are all unweighted values and thus cannot be used to provide corresponding estimates of 

population characteristics. In all cases, more respondents of an underserved group were in the 

stratum established for that group than were in any other stratum. However, not all members of 

the underserved group were present in any of the sampling strata focused on that group. 

Therefore, some error in the estimated effects and response rates is present. 

Table 16. Number of the Demographic Groups in the Sampling Strata

Reported

Demographic

Group

Sampling Strata

LGBTQ+ American 

Indians/Alaska 

Natives

Asians/Native 

Hawaiians 

and Pacific 

Islanders

Blacks Hispanics Females Others Totals

LGBTQ+* 220 14 25 24 27 45 103 458

American 

Indians/Alaska 

Natives

54 1,918 29 50 92 41 190 2,374

Asians/Native 

Hawaiians and 

Pacific 

Islanders

30 17 2,489 14 32 17 73 2,672

Blacks 33 23 8 2,820 28 12 67 2,991

Hispanics 71 150 131 29 2,320 33 179 2,913

Females 607 583 634 448 434 2,454 1,402 6,562 *

Membership in this stratum could only be reported for those treatment groups with the SOGI questions.

The response rate decreased 5.8% and 5.3%, respectively, for the LGBTQ+ and female strata 

when the SOGI questions were present. The item response rate decreased from 95.3% for the 

gender identity question to 90.3% for the sexual orientation question, a drop of 5%. The item 
17

response rate to the question about sex recorded at birth was 94.6%, which is significantly 

different from, but similar to, that of the gender identity question. Depending on the need for the 

information, it may be that asking only the gender identity and sex-reported-at-birth questions 

would not have the negative impact on unit response rate that was associated with also including 

the sexual orientation question. 

The response rates were not significantly negatively impacted by the presence of the disability 

questions. Gaining insights into the rate at which various disabilities affect producers can be 

important to developing programs that can help them continue to farm. 

Further research is needed before determining whether these questions can be incorporated into 

the Census of Agriculture or other surveys. For the Census, information is gathered on up to four 

producers. Whether a respondent is able and willing to report disabilities or SOGI information on 

behalf of the other producers needs to be addressed. Further, if the person is willing to report the 

data, any measurement error associated with this proxy reporting needs to be understood. 

Acknowledgements

NASS’s Farm Producer Study Team conducted all phases of the study upon which this report is 

based, from cognitive testing to data collection to data cleaning to review of the report. We are 

deeply appreciative of the team’s efforts. The team members were as follows: Stacy Wills (team 

lead), Brenda Anderson, Marco Bedoni, Jeffrey Beranek, Danielle Bratton, Emily Burke, Donald 

Buysse, Adam Cline, Carlos Coleman, Rebecca Dubbs, Kim Faircloth, Hannah Friel, Joel Golz, 

Jodi Halvorson, David Hancock, Virginia Harris, Laurence Hartwig, LaKeya Jones Smith, Doug 

Kilburg, Jeffrey Kissel, Rebecca LaJoice, Judy McDermott, George Murnu, Matthew Neagley, 

Karie Nielson, Nicole Norris, Everett Olbert, Carol Pinto, Peter Quan, Heather Ridolfo, Beth 

Schlein, Cathryn Scherrer, Ryan Skipper, Vito Wagner, Margie Whitcotton, Teresa White, Tyler 

Wilson, and Audra Zakzeski. 

References

Miratrix, L., J. Sekhon, A. Theodoridis, and L. Campos. 2018. Worth weighting? How to think 

about and use weights in survey experiments. Political Analysis 26(3): 275-291. 

https://doi.org/10.1017/pan.2018.1. 

National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2022. Measuring Sex, Gender 

Identity, and Sexual Orientation. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. 

https://doi.org/10.17226/26424.