Considering a Digital 2020 Census

Michael T. Thieme 

U.S. Census Bureau 

4600 Silver Hill Rd. 

Washington, DC 20233 - 7200 

Introduction

Every Decennial Census builds on the successes and works to address the challenges of the previous one. The scale 

of Decennial Census operations remains unparalleled by any other peacetime effort undertaken by the United States, 

but the goal remains the same: the Census Bureau must enable the location and enumeration of all US residents 

within a six month time period while meeting stringent demands for accuracy. As we look forward to the 2020 

Census, societal issues such as immigration, the complexity of the modern family, and the perceived role of 

government will impact our ability to perform an accurate count. At the same time we are faced with an

unprecedented opportunity to leverage the American society’s increasing willingness to incorporate technology into 

their lives in ways we could not have anticipated only a few years ago. With these things in mind, a question arises – 

should we continue to build on the past or should we try a different approach? 

Although the 2010 Census originally planned to capture data both on paper (through mail out/mail back operations) 

and digitally (through the Internet and handheld devices), in the end, we captured virtually all respondent data using 

paper. The initial plans for the 2020 Census propose a number of different combinations of technologies for data 

collection, including paper, Internet, and administrative records, with the intent to give respondents maximum 

flexibility and encourage self-response. While this is an admirable goal, the increase in available modes of response 

also comes with increased complexity, as each of the options will require a greater level of integration between 

groups and operations. 

Given the observed evolution of technology and its impact on the Census, it seems more important than ever for us 

to analyze the true costs and benefits that greater complexity will bring to the next Census. Though a complex 

process is not inherently “good” or “bad”, overly complex processes can unnecessarily increase costs, lower agility, 

cause unnecessary confusion among respondents, and present a greater level of risk. We are faced with an 

opportunity here at the beginning of 2020 planning to make a decisive move in the direction of simplicity. Though 

such a move will bring us out of our familiar comfort zone, it is the position of this paper that the Census Bureau 

should consider performing a virtually “All Digital” response Census and do away with the use of paper for data 

response in 2020. 

Has the Decennial Census Gotten too Complex?

How We Arrived At the Current Census 

How can something that sounds so simple: “count everyone once, only once, and in the right place,” be so complex? 

The answer lies in the gradually increasing number and complexity of the specific operations we have designed over 

the years to address the individual needs of our many stakeholders. Since the initial execution of the Census in 1790, 

the degree of complexity incorporated to achieve the Census mission has continued to increase along with the 

expanding and changing population of the United States. Likewise, the 2020 Census is expected to continue a trend 

Page 1 
of increasing cost in its attempt to deal with the complexities involved with “increased population diversity and 

decreased willingness to cooperate with self-response and non-response followup”.1

In order to account for the new population challenges that 2020 holds, the Bureau is in the midst of evaluating 

alternative modes for data collection to reduce costs while maintaining quality and coverage. Though prior to the 

2000 Census we suggested that the use of statistical sampling for non-response could significantly reduce the cost 

and operational complexity of that Census, the courts at that time ruled that statistical sampling is not a permissible 

means of obtaining Census data for the purposes of apportionment. In a similar attempt to reduce cost, initial 2020 

Census design plans include research on the increased use of administrative records to supplement Census data 

collection. This is currently under review by the Bureau. 

The True Complexity of a Paper-Based Response – Not as Simple as it Seems 

As an organization, the Bureau is well accustomed to 

paper-based responses. Through the years, the 

limitations of paper have become so familiar as to 

seem normal and employees are very comfortable with

its tangible nature. 

 

Industry Comes to Realize the True Cost of Paper 

Industry has realized that the true cost and 

implications of the use of paper is often buried in

operational costs and inefficiencies that are not 

immediately apparent. As a result, organizations are 

going paperless and realizing significant benefits – 

from the financial services industry to hospitals 

storing life-critical patient information in digital files. 

Within the next decade, the trend away from paper 

will continue, with many businesses eliminating paper 

or making paper correspondence a paid option.

But what is the true operational burden of processing a 

paper form? At great cost, hundreds of millions of 

paper forms have to be printed, stored, mailed out, remailed out, returned to processing centers, opened, 

optically converted to images, “read” by software, 

validated or keyed in by human beings, archived and

eventually destroyed – all in a fashion that preserves 

privacy and security of sensitive information. The cost of the printing and scanning forms alone comes to 

approximately two billion dollars, showing us that the true cost of printing, sending and processing a paper response 

is somewhere between $12 and $14 (see Appendix 2). 

The use of paper also has significant effects on other Decennial operations. For instance, since paper can’t be 

processed in real-time and has to be converted into a digital format before it is useful for processing activities, many 

workarounds have been developed. For example, the Bureau worked with the USPS to get real-time information 

from distribution centers on forms en route to the Bureau to overcome the time lag that the mail system generates. 

The USPS information was used to minimize the mailing of duplicate forms to households that had already returned 

a completed questionnaire. 

A little bit of paper won’t hurt...will it? 

It has been proposed that both a paper and digital response option be made available in 2020 in order to give 

respondents a greater degree of flexibility while capitalizing on the benefits of digital response. Though this solution 

may appear to be a fair compromise to reduce complexity by decreasing paper responses, our analysis suggests that 

it is quite the opposite: offering both has a higher level of complexity than offering digital or paper alone.2

 The 

reality is that any introduction of paper, even with the intention of using it on a small scale, will require Census to 

plan and size contracts for the largest volume response possible for each option. As a result, offering both a paper 

and digital response will be both resource and cost intensive, and will create redundant processes and operations. On 

the other hand, a desirable and acceptable use of paper would be to make the initial contact through the mail and 

provide a unique code for respondents to use for self-response over the Internet, as Canada has done in their Census. 

Defining Complexity 

In the context of the Census, complexity can generally be defined as the degree to which people, processes, and 

systems must be coordinated, taking into account the number of touchpoints and handoffs required to successfully 

1

 Daniel H. Weinberg, Plan for the Research and Testing Phase of the 2020 Census, (International Census Forum, 

2010).

2

 Sylvia Fisher, Jean Fox, William Mockovak and Christine Rho, Usability Issues Associated with Converting 

Establishment Surveys to Web-Based Data Collection, (Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2003) 1-2. 

Page 2 
execute all operations. In the Census, as with other large operations, some process areas embody sub-functions that 

increase complexity; for instance, the need to integrate multiple technology systems. For the purposes of this paper 

we have identified three areas that will be discussed at greater length later in the document: management 

complexity, information systems complexity, and organizational complexity. 

It is important to note that complexity does not increase in a linear fashion; any increase on a single dimension 

impacts the complexity of all dimensions.3

 For example, as the complexity of information systems security 

increases, there are secondary and tertiary impacts on the capture, systems integration, and responsiveness 

dimensions. Adding additional security measures to one system can make integrating data in the overall control 

system more complex, require changes to interfaces and ultimately impact the delay of receiving time-sensitive data. 

The Hidden Cost of Complexity 

Stephen A. Wilson, who has conducted extensive research on complexity costs, states “complexity costs are those 

costs in a business associated with having too many parts, products, services, systems, processes, business lines, 

plants, stores, vendors, customers, organization functions, relationships...”4

 Census must carefully consider if 

offering two fundamentally different technologies, paper and digital, merit the additional complexity costs that they 

bring. The decision to use paper, digital, or both to collect respondent data pervades many other processes that may 

not be immediately clear. For instance, the exclusive use of digital technology will likely decrease the complexity of 

NRFU, due to the enhanced ability to determine the non-response universe in real-time, saving unnecessary 

enumerator visits. 

Research on the topic leads us to believe complexity costs can become significant very fast, and often times without 

notice.5

 While the first Census, in 1790, was relatively simple with enumeration required for each individual 

household, the mission has since ballooned in scope and scale requiring new operations in order to serve the variety 

of constituencies of Census data. For instance, Group Quarters (GQ) Enumeration is responsible for counting 

populations such as college dormitories, nursing homes, military barracks, prisons, juvenile institutions, migrant 

worker dormitories, convents, and group homes. There are 27 types of GQs, each requiring special processes in 

order to ensure complete coverage. For example, jails and prisons employ various enumeration processes where 

corrections staff become sworn enumerators. Further, the precise enumeration procedures vary site to site due to the 

unique demands of each facility. The need to create dedicated processes to count certain population groups 

significantly impacts complexity costs. It is reasonable to believe that additional operations will be needed to reach 

special population groups as the US becomes more diverse. 

As the Bureau prepares for the 2020 Census, increased attention should be given to how the various population 

groups can be counted more efficiently though the use of different processes (i.e. using administrative records for 

prisons instead of counting individuals who are already closely monitored in IT systems) and new technologies.

What’s on the Table for 2020

Modes are the fundamental tool used to facilitate data 

collection from the population and have far reaching 

implications. We have compiled the potential modes for the 

2020 Census based on the operational design alternatives 

under consideration, as well as those modes that were used 

during the 2010 Census and those that could be used for a 

“Digital” Census. 

It is almost without question that an Internet response option 

must be offered in the 2020 Census, and likely that mobile 

devices will be used by Census enumerators to record 

interview results. Though the use of an Internet response 

 

ODAs 1-6

All Digital

All Paper 

(2010)

Potential Modes for 2020

• Paper form via USPS

• Internet via web browser

• Field enumerator with paper

• Field enumerator with mobile device

• Telephone IVR

• Call center enumerator

Figure 1: 2020 Options 

3

 Stephen A Wilson and Andrei Perumal, Waging War on Complexity 

4

 Wilson 70 

5

 Wilson 36 

Costs, (New York: McGraw Hill, 2010).

Page 3 
option has already been established, the precise role of a digital response technology combined with the use of paper are still 

unknown and under consideration for 2020. 

Considering the role of paper and digital in 2020 is important because they vary greatly in terms of how respondents 

interact with them and how the Bureau collects and 

integrates data from each source. The limited timeframe 

to complete the Census requires moving millions of 

people, surveys and systems across the country in a

systematic and timely fashion. All moving pieces must 

be tightly secured and traceable. In the 2010 Census, 

millions of paper forms were mailed to housing units and 

then returned via mail for processing at various sites. In 

the case of the non-response operation, the LCO must 

get the right enumeration materials to the appropriate 

enumerators and then ship the completed enumerator 

questionnaires to Data Capture Integration (DCI) for 

capture. 

 

Using Administrative Records... 

The increased use of administrative records is under 

consideration for the 2020 Census to supplement data

collected directly from respondents. Administrative

records can be used in two ways: for characteristic

imputation (supplement/verify data already collected) 

and for count imputation (to establish a count). The 

use of administrative records in either role will 

impact the scale of collection and/or validation 

operations, but does not alter the fundamental costs 

and resulting complexity of the response options 

selected for 2020.

Can We Make Do Without Paper? 

Paper has played a significant role in recording Census data from respondents since the start of the 1790s. Indeed, 

the use of paper to make the initial contact with respondents and to provide a code that allows for response over the 

Internet will be a given in 2020. Though a Digital response survey appears to be more technologically advanced 

than an All Paper response survey, many fail to consider the immense amount of technology required to ultimately 

capture responses for inclusion in the Census. The technology needed to scan, capture, and digitize forms is quite 

advanced and complex, bringing significant costs and consuming valuable time needed to complete the process. 

The Decennial program considered the use of an Internet response option in 2010. Though the Bureau determined 

that an Internet response Census was feasible, the Bureau ultimately chose not to proceed with it citing various 

challenges at the time. The advancements in technology and cultural changes that will take place by 2020 will likely 

ease the introduction of a digital response option.6

Studying Survey Modes

In order to gain a better understanding of how survey modes affect the Decennial program and influence operations, 

we decided to further examine the composition of what a mode is. Based on our research and analysis, we 

determined there are two basic dimensions that hold unique characteristics and are independent from one another: 

the response technology and the collection channel.

What is a Response Technology? 

A response technology is the actual interface, whether paper or digital, used to capture data about the respondent. 

When analyzing response technologies we are primarily concerned with how easy it is to capture the data and then 

integrate it in to the greater Census universe, while the collection channel looks at the logistics, management, and 

operations behind getting the technology to the respondent. 

6

 Digital Nation: Expanding Internet Usage, (U.S. Department of Commerce National Telecommunications and

Information Administration, 2011) 1-4.

Page 4 
What is a Collection Channel? 

Though many survey modes use the same underlying response technology, there may be variance in the delivery 

mechanism, or collection channel, involved. For instance, the use of paper to capture responses can be delivered via 

mail for self response, or be completed by a staff enumerator on behalf of respondents. The collection channel 

addresses the means in which respondent data is communicated to the Census. Though paper may be the response 

technology used to record the response, USPS is the collection channel to actually return the data to Census. In the 

case of digital, the Internet would be the collection channel and an Internet website is the response technology. 

The table below depicts the breakdown of modes into their two comprising parts. Each of these dimensions share 

common features in terms of characteristics and complexity. 

Figure 2: Survey Modes Combine a Collection Channel and a Response Technology 

While we defined that a survey mode consists of a collection channel and a response technology, the response 

technology is our principle focus for this analysis. 

A Closer Look at Analyzing Modes 

In order to gain a better understanding of the implications of employing multiple survey modes to collect data, we 

must look closer at the aspects that make modes complex. Modal complexity can be assessed by evaluating the 

response technology and collection channel independently in order to ascertain, and delineate, components of 

complexity and how they impact the greater process. 

The collection channel and response technology have very different complexity components. While collection 

channel complexity focuses on logistics and management, response technology is more concerned with how the data 

is captured and integrated. In order to better focus our discussion around a Digital Census, we are going to 

concentrate on the complexity of different response technologies. Though channel complexity is an important 

consideration, it becomes more prevalent when evaluating actual modes rather than generalized response options. 

In order to perform an analysis of the response technology alternatives for 2020, we identified critical subcomponents specific to the Decennial program that are likely to have a significant impact on an option’s overall 

complexity. The following table outlines principle areas of complexity that we are going to explore in order to 

analyze variances in options for 2020. 

Page 5 
Response Technology Areas of Complexity

Management Complexity

Data Availability 

Complexity associated with the delays in managing operations if data is not 

available. Quicker data availability enables more timely decision making and 

better resources allocation while preventing waste (for instance, preventing an 

enumerator from visiting a household that submitted a questionnaire late). 

Data Management 

Complexity associated with management of the data for the Decennial and 

effort required to manage data privacy and security, to prevent data loss, to 

improve data accuracy, to reduce fraud and to improve data reliability. 

Respondent Support 

Complexity associated with the need to provide assistance to respondents to 

support them in successfully complete a questionnaire accurately, including 

the need to provide access to a proper questionnaire (such as a form in a 

different language or a duplicate form). 

Information Systems Complexity

Response Capture 

Complexity associated with capturing responses from questionnaires for 

integration in to the Census universe, whether provided via self-response, an 

enumerator, or other means. 

Systems Integration 

Complexity associated with the number and types of information systems that 

must be integrated in order to successfully capture, store and manage 

respondent data. 

Organizational Complexity

Organizational Scale Complexity associated with managing a number of disparate parties (internal 

or external) required to support the response technology. 

Organizational Experience Complexity associated with managing new, updated or changed response 

technology(ies) and supporting systems at an organizational level. 

Table 1: Response Technology Evaluation Criteria 

Page 6 
Evaluating Options for the 2020 Decennial

Three High Level Response Alternatives for 2020 

In order to simplify the analysis we have 

created three high level response technology 

alternatives: Paper Only, Mixed Paper and 

Digital, and Digital Only. The Mixed Paper 

and Digital alternative represents the current 

alternative being considered for the 2020 

Census design. It is important to note that this 

discussion focuses on how Census responses 

are returned to the Census Bureau. Paper will 

likely be used in all scenarios in order to 

inform respondents of the upcoming Census and provide response instructions. Table 2 illustrates the breakdown of 

response technologies used under the three high level design alternatives. We are also able to see the technology 

used for self response and enumeration. 

Self Response Enumerator 

Assisted 

Paper Only Paper Paper 

Mixed Paper and Digital Paper/Digital Digital 

Digital Only Digital Digital 

Table 2: Technology & Response Channel Matrix 

Analyzing the Alternatives 

In order to evaluate the relative complexity of our three groups, we will apply the criteria to an All Paper, a Mixed 

Paper and Digital Census, and a Digital Census. The following radar charts illustrate the relative complexity of these 

three options. The scale being used is low, medium and high complexity. The further the points and lines extend 

outward in each table, the greater the complexity of that given response technology. The rating rationales can be 

found in Appendix 1. 

Evaluation of an All Paper Response Survey

At a first look, “All Paper” seems to be 

low-tech and simple: a form is mailed 

out, the respondent completes it, and 

then mails it back. The complexity of 

paper is largely a result of the data 

availability, response capture, and data 

management complexity resulting from 

the delay incurred when the respondent 

mails back the Census form, until it is 

processed and captured. Paper requires a 

high level of support due to the systems 

that are needed to capture and store data 

that is communicated on the Census 

form. Figure 2 depicts the complexity of 

an All Paper Census. We can clearly see 

that the All Paper Census has a low 

degree of organizational experience complexity as a result of the Bureau’s extensive experience using paper and 

capture technologies. 

Figure 2: All Paper

Data Availability Data Management

Respondent Support

Response Capture

Systems Integration

Organizational Scale

Organizational 

Experience

One of the key challenges of paper is the lag of data due to the time required to digitize the paper forms. As a result, 

management does not always have the most accurate, up-to-date data to make timely decisions. At times, this can 

cause inefficiencies, especially when non-response follow ups are deployed while forms were in route by mail. 

Though paper provides the greatest accessibility for self-response due to its portability, the back-end complexities 

and processing challenges may in-fact pose greater risks and threats than a Digital response option. 

Page 7 
Evaluation of a Mixed Paper & Digital Response Survey

A Census that employs paper and 

digital response technologies will 

naturally be more complex than a 

Census that only uses one response 

technology. The level of complexity 

increases exponentially with the 

addition of a second response 

technology due to the need to manage 

a separate set of systems, but also due 

to the higher level of coordination and 

integration required between capture 

systems. 

 

Figure 3: Mixed Paper and Digital

Data Availability Data Management

Respondent Support

Response Capture

Systems Integration

Organizational Scale

Organizational 

Experience

Figure 3 illustrates the complexity of 

the Mixed Paper and Digital option. 

All but one area of complexity is 

scored as “high,” primarily because 

the limitations of paper hold true in 

addition to the increased complexity of having to manage and integrate two key disparate systems. 

The perception is that more response technology options will lead to a higher self-response rate and better quality 

data by making it easier to “do business” with the Census Bureau. The reality is that it can likely cause confusion 

among respondents and studies have demonstrated that offering multiple response technologies does not necessarily 

increase response rate.7

 Research also indicates that operating a multimode survey presents data consistency 

challenges due to “mode change,” where the respondent’s answer may vary depending on the response channel 

used, even when questions are worded exactly the same.8

 Similarly, a study conducted by the ACS in 2001 found 

that “...offering multiple modes of response in a mailing led to a drop in overall response.”9

Evaluation of a Digital Response Survey

Based on our evaluation criteria, a Digital response Census bears the least complexity. This is primarily due to the 

elimination of the paper capture operations and the better data integration that results from collecting data in a 

digital format from all sources. 

Advancements in technology have brought digital media to the forefront of every life. Americans are becoming 

increasingly comfortable with the Internet and it is reasonable to expect for the Internet to become even more 

prevalent than it is today. 

One of the key advantages to a digital 

response is that a digital questionnaire 

can enable alternate presentations of the 

form (such as larger fonts for Americans 

with Disabilities Act (ADA) compliance 

and alternate language support) that 

may ease the completion of the form and 

ultimately lead to a higher level of 

Figure 4: Digital

Data Availability Data Management

Respondent Support

Response Capture

Systems Integration

Organizational Scale

Organizational 

Experience

7

 Edith D. De Leeuw, To Mix or Not to Mix Data Collection Modes in Surveys, (Journal of Official Statistics, 2005) 

240-41.

8

 D.A. Dillman and L.M. Christian, Survey Mode as a Source of Instability in Responses across Surveys, (2003) 12. 

9 Deborah H. Griffin, Donald P. Fischer, and Michael T. Morgan, Testing an Internet Response Option for the 

American Community Survey, (Washington: U.S. Bureau of the Census, 2001) 16.

Page 8 
respondent-provided data accuracy.10 For instance, a “wizard” format may be 

used where the user is guided through a series of screens depending on prior responses. “Screen tips” can enable the 

respondent to receive help on a specific form field right on the form. 

Figure 4 represents the Digital option. The overall complexity is relatively lower than All Paper in all areas except 

for systems security, risk management and customer support. The Digital option is highly complex in customer 

support because many demographics will require significant training and customer support. 

Other Key Factors for the Bureau

While complexity is a key factor that we have applied to 2020 Decennial design options, other key factors include 

cost, quality and coverage. Each of these factors are broad in scope and are topics for future analysis. The 

technology or combination of technologies that is used will have sweeping impacts on the Decennial. Some 

examples of the questions that need to be explored are: 1) How will use of the Internet impact coverage?; 2) Can 

Internet self-response and enumerator with mobile device reach the same, or greater coverage, than paper based 

collection?; 3) Will upfront investments that are required for building out digital infrastructure drive down long-term 

costs of executing the 2020 Census and future Decennials?; and 4) Does digital or paper lead to a higher quality of 

data? 

Summary of Findings 

Figure 5 illustrates the relative complexity of each high level option. As described above, All Paper and Mix of 

Paper and Digital are relatively more complex than the Digital alternative. Our analysis of the Mixed Paper and 

Digial illustrates that combining technologies causes a significant increase in complexity due to the replication of 

systems and processes nessesary to drive the response option. Simply put, the scale of a given response option has 

little effect on the resulting complexity. 

 

Data Availability Data Management

Respondent Support

Response Capture

Systems Integration

Organizational Scale

Organizational 

Experience

All Paper 

Digital

Mixed Paper & Digital

Figure 5: Summary of Findings 

10 Daniel Castro, e-Census Unplugged: Why Americans Should Be Able to Complete the Census Online, 

(Washington: The Information Technology & Innovation Foundation, 2008) 5. 

Page 9 
There are certain pros and cons inherent to the All Paper, Mixed Paper and Digital, and Digital alternatives that we 

touched on above. The following table analyzes select pros and cons in areas of the likely response rate, data 

capture and data integration. Those pros and cons are highlighted in Table 3. 

Pros Cons 

Paper 

Only 

Response 

• Tangible 

• User friendly (at least to subsets of the 

population) 

• Broader reach 

• Perceived as more secure than digital 

• Less change management required within 

the Bureau – “tried and tested” approach 

• Logistics involved with printing, mailing and 

scanning paper forms can be time consuming, 

expensive and resource intensive 

• Data visibility is not in real-time 

• Need to print and support multiple languages 

• Cost of converting results to digital format 

Mixed 

Paper and 

Digital 

Response 

• Provides greater flexibility to respondents 

• Built-in redundancy 

• Multiple response channels has the potential 

to cause confusion among respondents and 

increase integration complexity 

• Coordinating across multiple response 

channels can dramatically increase 

complexity 

• More susceptible to duplicate responses 

• Paper mode capacity, cost and complexity 

needs to be scaled for maximum possible 

paper response rate 

• Paper to digital conversion would still be 

required 

Digital 

Only 

Response 

• Logistics involved with printing, mailing, 

managing, archiving and scanning paper 

forms get eliminated 

• No need to convert from paper to digital 

• Integration is seamless and near real-time, 

providing improved ability to respond to 

changes 

• Reduces human error through 

standardization

• Provides respondents with instant access 

to alternate language and customized help 

(screen tips) 

• Not physically tangible like paper 

• Less reach than paper – potential to reduce 

self-response rate as older populations and 

low income households may either not have 

access or could be not digitally savvy 

• Perceived risk of fraud is higher 

• Increased customer service/helpdesk 

capabilities required at the Bureau 

• Requires new process for authentication 

Table 3: Paper and Digital Pros & Cons 

Page 10 
Envisioning a Digital Census

While the specific details of how a Digital Census would function have yet to be determined, the following 15 points 

provide a basic, high level approach as a starting point for discussion: 

1. The Communications Directorate creates a Communication Plan to socialize/advertise the Digital Census 

design to the American public starting early in the decade. 

2. Geography Division’s GSS initiative facilitates a highly accurate and complete address frame by the end of 

the decade. 

3. Perform a mail-out of letters/postcards to distribute the unique codes required for use with Internet or 

phone Census response. The code links the respondent’s address and Census data with a Master Address 

File ID (MAFID). 

4. After the letter/postcard mail-out, the public begins self-response using the Internet, or using the phone 

(both options result in digital data collection). 

5. After a predetermined time period, or after Internet and phone response rates decline to a predetermined 

threshold, begin Nonresponse Followup in the field using secure smartphones equipped with a Censusdesigned data collection application. Internet and phone response should stay open during NRFU in order 

to continue removal of completed responses from the NRFU workload. 

6. Use of secure smartphones for data collection should take advantage of wireless communication capability, 

but not be critically dependent on it to complete operations. 

7. The smartphone data collection application should be streamlined enough to work for both Housing Units

and Group Quarters, and should include payroll capability. 

8. Field physical infrastructure should be minimized to incorporate a higher number of “micro-offices” 

equipped with minimal accommodations and staff. Enumerators should work out of their homes. 

9. Make use of administrative records available in a digital format as appropriate to reduce NRFU workload, 

but do not make the overall Census design dependent on administrative records. 

10. Research strategies to minimize the number of potential responses per MAFID. 

11. Permit addition of new addresses during NRFU, using the smartphone technology equipped with GPS 

12. Advertise for those “missed” in the Census to respond using the phone. Verify these added addresses and 

responses during NRFU. 

13. Through QA design and application coding for the Internet and the smartphone, correct data issues as close 

to the source (the HU/GQ) as possible, not on the back-end. 

14. Minimize the number of HQ database systems needed to conduct the Census. 

15. Discourage data collection of any kind using paper. 

Page 11
Conclusion

Complexity costs are not only related to what we might call “bad” complexity, but also include the costs across the 

portfolio and throughout the enterprise that result from all the complexity in the business. Therefore, attacking 

complexity costs requires a combination of removing bad complexity as well as removing non value-added costs 

across all complexity dimensions.11

Based on the positive momentum driving us to transform the way that the Bureau executes the Census, and the basic 

assumption that at least some digital technology will be used in 2020, we must critically evaluate the options on the 

table. The deliberation and decision making process must consider how the introduction of digital technology will 

impact all stakeholders. 

Finalizing the initial 2020 plan that calls for using both paper and digital modes invariably increases complexity 

especially in the areas of data integration, capture, responsiveness, and customer support. This conclusion is clearly 

illustrated in Figure 5 above. Moreover, the hidden costs for paper (both time and materials) must be considered. 

Most vital is the fact that the introduction of any quantity of paper for data collection requires the Bureau to build a 

capacity to handle the maximum scale of response. 

The decision that Bureau leadership must consider is whether it is in its best interest to pursue a mixed paper and 

digital Census or whether a digital option is a better approach. While this paper provides only a general outline of 

how the Bureau could conduct a Digital 2020 Census, the hope is that it demonstrates, at a minimum, that a Digital 

Census is not only a feasible option, but a desirable option for the Bureau and the general public. The transition to a 

Digital Census design will require major systems development and integration work, change management, and 

training. However, a Digital Census design arrived at early in the decade will provide a clear and defined set of 

goals and challenges that we can approach with a sense of stability and a spirit of enthusiasm. The Digital approach 

will also likely be well received by organizations charged with Census oversight. Finally, moving decisively to a 

Digital Census will signal the Census Bureau’s willingness to take part in the inevitable and continuing expansion of 

the role of digital technology in American society, allowing us to produce a more responsive, efficient, and 

manageable program for 2020 and beyond. 

 

11 Wilson 72 

Page 12
Appendix 1

Complexity of All Paper Response 

Dimension Criteria Analysis Rating 

(High/Med/Low)

Management 

Complexity 

Data Availability An All Paper response produces the 

greatest lag time between the 

questionnaires being completed and the 

data being integrated in to the response 

universe. As a result, operations such as 

NRFU are increasingly difficult to plan 

and execute due to the unavailability of 

timely response data. Workarounds such 

as working with the USPS to try to 

determine what questionnaires are enroute leads to inefficiencies that are 

inherent to paper. 

High 

Data Management An All Paper response lacks certain data 

management capabilities that are 

available in other options. The risk of 

respondent data loss is highest compared 

to a digital response due to: 

a. Responses lost due to mail or 

sorting problems 

b. Handwriting that cannot be 

interpreted 100% accurately 

c. Stray markings that otherwise 

result in a misread, preventing 

complete data capture. 

Similarly, there is no redundancy of the 

data until it is captured by DRIS. Finally, 

paper brings the least control of access to 

the data. While digital response 

technologies can employ the use of 

authentication, encryption, and logging, 

paper is dependent on physical security. 

Medium 

Respondent Support An All Paper response requires that the 

Census send forms in an alternate 

language and/or assist respondents with 

completing the questionnaire. 

Low 

Information 

Systems 

Complexity 

Response Capture An All Paper response requires a complex 

process in order to prepare the paper 

forms for capture, and then to digitize the 

data. Forms have to be opened, optically 

converted to images, “read” by software, 

validated or keyed in by human beings, 

archived and eventually destroyed. Forms 

requiring translation or that otherwise 

cannot be scanned must be manually 

transcribed and re-processed. 

Medium 

Systems Integration An All Paper response requires a 

relatively moderate level of systems 

integration, compared to the other two 

options, due to the need to integrate the 

DRIS data capture systems with the 

greater response universe. 

Medium 

Page 13 
Organizational 

Complexity 

Organizational Scale An All Paper response requires crossfunctional support from internal 

departments and external contractors. For 

instance, the party responsible for 

developing the questionnaire must work 

closely with DRIS in order to ensure that 

the form design is optimized for scanning 

(in addition to respondent usability). 

Medium 

Organizational Experience An All Paper response is highly familiar 

to the organization and the Bureau 

already has the experience and processes 

developed to execute an All Paper 

response. 

Low 

Table 4: All Paper 

 

Page 14
Complexity of a Digital Response 

Dimension Criteria Analysis Rating 

(High/Med/Low)

Management 

Complexity 

Data Availability A Digital response enables questionnaires 

completed by all actors to be immediately 

integrated in to the response universe. As 

a result, respondent data may be made 

available in real-time for better planning 

and decision making. 

Low 

Data Management A Digital response provides a high level 

of support for data management, 

including safe-guards to protect against 

data loss. Because the content of the 

questionnaire is immediately submitted 

electronically, it can be replicated and 

backed up with minimal risk of data loss. 

Further, encryption and access control 

techniques provide the Bureau with 

greater control and flexibility over who 

has access to what, and when. An 

electronic audit trail enables management 

to identify potential problems in the 

process and monitor data collection 

status. 

Low 

Respondent Support A Digital response will require the 

Bureau to provide a basic level of 

technical support for respondents 

responding via the Internet. Conversely, a 

digital questionnaire can enable alternate 

presentations of the questionnaire that 

may ease the completion of the form and 

ultimately lead to a higher level of 

respondent-provided data accuracy. For 

instance, a “wizard” format may be used 

to guide the respondent through a series 

of screens depending on prior responses. 

“Screen tips” can enable the respondent 

to receive help on a specific form field 

right on the questionnaire. 

Medium 

Information 

Systems 

Complexity 

Response Capture A Digital response will enable the Bureau 

to capture respondent data digitally, 

eliminating the need to perform a timeconsuming and complex digitization. 

Digital questionnaires enable real-time 

validation and ensure standardization of 

data, permitting the instantaneous 

integration of respondent data in to the 

response universe. 

Low 

Systems Integration A Digital response eases systems 

integration as a result of the data already 

being digital and the ability for 

respondent data to be directly entered in 

to the response universe. 

Low 

Organizational Organizational Scale A Digital response would likely require a 

relatively moderate level of 

Medium 

Page 15 
Page 16 

Complexity organizational coordination in order to 

implement supporting systems such as 

firewalls, security, etc. 

Organizational Experience A Digital response will require the 

Bureau to develop new processes and 

procedures to support the use of this new 

technology. 

High 

Table 5: Digital Response 

 
Mixed Paper and Digital Response 

Dimension Criteria Analysis Rating 

(High/Med/Low)

Management 

Complexity 

Data Availability A Mixed Paper and Digital response will 

enable management to make more timely 

decisions based on responses submitted 

via digital means. The use of paper will 

limit management’s ability to fully 

capitalize on the benefits of a digital 

response since paper will still be used. 

Medium 

Data Management A Mixed Paper and Digital response will 

likely increase the complexity involved 

with managing data. The use of two 

response technologies will result in the 

need to develop tracking, storage, and 

security procedures for both sources of 

data. 

High 

Respondent Support A Mixed Paper and Digital response 

increases the resources needed to provide 

support for respondents using paper and 

digital. The degree of complexity will be 

dependent on the role of paper, though 

respondent support will inevitably be 

more complex than the use of paper or 

digital alone. 

High 

Information 

Systems 

Complexity 

Response Capture A Mixed Paper and Digital response 

increases the effort and resources 

required to support a dual-technology 

response. 

High 

Systems Integration A Mixed Paper and Digital response 

requires a high degree of systems 

integration due to the number and variety 

of systems needed to support a digital and 

paper response. A high degree of 

coordination is required to ensure the 

proper integration and flow of data. 

High 

Organizational 

Complexity 

Organizational Scale A Mixed Paper and Digital response 

requires cross-functional support from 

internal departments and external 

contractors to a higher degree than either 

paper or digital alone. 

High 

Organizational Experience A Mixed Paper and Digital response is 

new to the Bureau. Though the Bureau 

has significant experience with handling 

paper responses, the introduction of a 

digital response will require new 

procedures to be introduced to handle the 

interaction of the two systems. 

High 

Table 6: Mixed Paper and Digital Response 

Page 17
Page 18 
Appendix 2

The following table of lifecycle costs was derived from a study conducted by the National Academy of 

Sciences which breaks down major costs from the 2010 Decennial Lifecycle (2002-2013). We have added 

the Estimated Percentage Cost from Paper and Estimate Paper Lifecycle Cost columns to attempt to 

capture a conservative estimate of the paper-based costs in Decennial operations. Items that are in bold in 

the table indicate that they add a significant paper-based cost to the operation. 

Category Key Activity Lifecycle 

Cost 

($ M) 

Estimated 

Percentage 

Cost from 

Paper (%) 

Estimated 

Paper 

Lifecycle 

Cost ($ M) 

Rationale 

Major 

Contracts 

Decennial Response 

Integration System 

(DRIS) 

$981 100% $981M DRIS processed paper-based 

responses for the 2010 Decennial. 

Scanning was required to process 

paper. 

Field Data Collection 

Automation (FDCA) 

$801 0 0* 

Communications $308 0 0* 

Data Access and 

Dissemination System 

(DADS) 

$176 0 0* 

Printing $179 100% $179M A large contract was required for 

printing millions of paper 

questionnaires. 

Mail Out/Mail Back 

Postage 

$257 100% $257M The cost of Mail Out/Mail Back 

postage was due to the paper 

operations. 

Office 

Space & 

Staff 

Regional Census Centers 

(RCC)

$828 0 0*

Local Census Offices 

(LCO) 

$1,301 0 0*

Address Canvassing $386 0 0*

Group Quarters Advance 

Visit 

$17 0 0*

Group Quarters 

Enumeration 

$80 0 0*

Group Quarters Validation $71 0 0*

Coverage Measurement $83 0 0*

Puerto Rico $62 0 0*

Island Areas MOAs $37 0 0*

Field Verification $39 0 0*

Non Response Follow-Up $2,744 0 0*

Vacant/Delete $341 0 0*

Military $5 0 0*

Remote Alaska $4 0 0*

Page 19 
Service-Based 

Enumeration 

$41 0 0*

Transient Night $11 0 0*

Update Enumerate $108 0 0*

Update Leave $116 0 0*

Urban Update Leave $2 0 0*

Fingerprinting $148 0 0* 

Other National Processing 

Center Census 

Operations 

$364 15% ~ $55M NPC supports various other 

operations and functions in 

addition to paper. Approximately 

15% of its costs stem from paper 

(i.e. Mail Out/Mail Back, NRFU, 

etc). 

HQ Staff and All Other 

(2002-2013 lifecycle) 

$2,986 10% ~ $300M HQ staff and others are 

responsible for a wide variety of 

activities that span IT, survey 

methodology, contract 

management, communications, 

etc. Approximately 10% of 

Census staff must support paper, 

in one form or another, from 

printing, and scanning. 

Total Cost 

($B)

$12.5B $1.8B 

Cost of 

paper per 

household 

 $12 - $14 138 million households were 

counted and paper forms were 

used to support data collection 

Source: Envisioning the 2020 Census, National Academy of Sciences, http://www.nap.edu/catalog/12865.html (p.36) 

*We do not have sufficient data to identify the cost of paper for these operations. The focus of this analysis is on the primary 

cost contributors. 

 

Page 20 
The pie chart below provides a high level illustration of the cost of paper across the five major 

contributing areas: DRIS, the printing contract, Mail Out/Mail Back Postage, National Processing Center 

Census Operations and HQ Staff and all other. The chart illustrates that DRIS is the single highest cost 

contributor over the lifecycle comprising approximately 55% of the total paper-based cost. 

$981 M

$179 M [55%]

[10%]

$257 M

[15%]

$55 M

[3%] $300 M

[17%]

Total Estimated Lifecycle Cost of Paper

Decennial Response 

Integration System (DRIS)

Printing Contract

Mailout/Mailback Postage

National Processing Center 

Census Operations 

HQ Staff and All Other 

Operations

Figure 6: Total Estimated Lifecycle Cost of Paper 

Page 21 
Works Cited

Brown, Lawrence D., Michael L. Cohen, Daniel L. Cork, and Constance F. Citro. “Envisioning the 2020 Census.” Washington: 

National Academies, 2010. 

Castro, Daniel. “E-Census Unplugged: Why Americans Should Be Able to Complete the Census Online.” Rep. Washington: 

Information Technology and Innovation Foundation, 2008. 

 De Leeuw, Edith D. "To Mix or Not to Mix Data Collection Modes in Surveys." Journal of Official Statistics, 2005. 

“Digital Nation: Expanding Internet Usage.” National Telecommunications and Information Administration, 2011. 

Dillman, D. A. and Christian, L. M. “Survey Mode as a Source of Instability in Responses across Surveys. Revised version of a 

paper presented at the Workshop on Stability of Methods for Collecting, Analyzing and Managing Panel Data.” Cambridge: 

American Academy of Arts and Sciences, 2003. 

Fox, Jean, William Mockovak, Sylvia Fisher, and Christine Rho. “Usability Issues Associated with Converting Establishment 

Surveys to Web-Based Data Collection.” Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2003. 

Griffin, Deborah H., Donald P. Fischer, and Michael T. Morgan. “Testing an Internet Response Option for the American 

Community Survey.” U.S. Bureau of the Census, 2001. 

Weinberg, Daniel H. "Plan for the Research and Testing Phase of the 2020 Census." International Census Forum, 2010. 

Presentation. 

Wilson, Stephen A and Andrei Perumal. “Waging War on Complexity Costs.” New York: McGraw Hill, 2010. 

Page 22