1 — U.S. BUREAU OF LABOR STATISTICS • bls.gov

Tailored approaches to data collection 

to reduce field collection costs

Laura Erhard, Graham Jones, Tucker Miller (U.S. Bureau of 

Labor Statistics), 

and Michael Bagley (U.S. Census Bureau)

AAPOR Annual Conference

May 14, 2024
2 — U.S. BUREAU OF LABOR STATISTICS • bls.gov

Outline

◼Background

◼Development of Cost Cutting Measures

◼(Very) Early Results

◼Plans/Next steps
3 — U.S. BUREAU OF LABOR STATISTICS • bls.gov

Consumer Expenditure Survey

◼ Collects spending data on the U.S. Population

◼ Provide expenditure weights for the U.S. 

Consumer Price Index (CPI)

◼ Sponsored by the Bureau of Labor Statistics, 

collected by the Census Bureau

◼ Survey participants report dollar amounts for all 

non-investment purchases. Business expenses 

and reimbursements are excluded.

◼ Two independent surveys: 

Interview Survey: 4 waves, 3-month recall of 

large and regular expenses

Diary Survey: Household characteristic survey 

and two consecutive one-week expenditure 

diaries
4 — U.S. BUREAU OF LABOR STATISTICS • bls.gov

Background

◼2022 – at risk of budget shortfall

 Mileage rates increased from 58.5¢ to 62.5¢ midyear

Before the pandemic, cost-of-living adjustments (COLAs) were relatively low and 

stable. 

COLAs increased by (to?) 5.9% in 2021 and 8.7% in 2022

◼BLS and Census needed to identify an easy to implement method 

for reducing sample to cut costs

 Flat rule: For wave 4 interviews, don’t attempt cases that were prior Type A noninterviews. 

 Emphasis on tightly monitoring interviewer hours and miles used per case
5 — U.S. BUREAU OF LABOR STATISTICS • bls.gov

Interview Survey: distribution of final dispositions for 

eligible sample units (unweighted) Rates

Source: Consumer Expenditure Surveys Data Quality Profile. 
6 — U.S. BUREAU OF LABOR STATISTICS • bls.gov

Background: FY2024 Budget Development

◼Cost estimates for collection much higher than previous years (primarily 

due to increased costs for collection – FR salaries, mileage, etc)

◼No increase to BLS’s Operational Authority (budget)

◼Limited impact from typical cost-cutting measures (e.g., virtual vs. inperson meetings and training)

◼Concerns over cutting sample (normal approach to lack of funding)
7 — U.S. BUREAU OF LABOR STATISTICS • bls.gov
8 — U.S. BUREAU OF LABOR STATISTICS • bls.gov

Approach to cutting costs

◼Reduce the total number of cases worked with...

Minimal impact on response rate and effective sample size

An easy to implement solution

–Constrained by available apriori data

– Limited time to implement on a monthly collection cycle

–Managed by Census Headquarters, not managed by the Field Offices
9 — U.S. BUREAU OF LABOR STATISTICS • bls.gov

Approach to cutting costs, cont’d

◼Find identifiers that have:

Minimal impact on total number of complete interviews (numerator)

(i.e., identifiers that are predictive of Refusals and Noncontacts)

Goal (AAPOR RR2):

(Interviews + Partials)

_______________________________________

(Interviews + Partials + Refusals + Noncontacts + Other Nonresponse)
10 — U.S. BUREAU OF LABOR STATISTICS • bls.gov

2.7%

1.2%

0.7%

n=4783 

n=2366 

n=3657 

0.0% 2.0% 4.0% 6.0% 8.0% 10.0% 12.0%

Contact Attempts > 8

Contact Attempts > 10

Prior 3 waves non-response

Percent of Elligbile Cases (n=44,908)

Interview Survey June 2021-June 2022

Complete Interviews Type A Nonresponse

Variables considered – Interview Survey

◼Interview Survey (up to 3 prior 

waves)

Variables Considered: 

- Number of contact attempts

- Prior wave outcomes (refusals, 

noncontacts, other)

- Prior wave doorstep concerns 

(anti-government, health, too 

busy, etc)

Overall Response Rate 

(Jun21-Jun22): 45%
11 — U.S. BUREAU OF LABOR STATISTICS • bls.gov

0.0%

10.0%

20.0%

30.0%

40.0%

50.0%

60.0%

70.0%

80.0%

90.0%

100.0%

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20

and

up

Cumulative Percentage of Interview Outcomes

Contact Attempts to Place a Diary

Contacts to Final Diary Survey Outcome in 2022

Complete Diary Type A Nonresponse

Variables considered – Diary Survey

◼Diary Survey (one shot)

Variables Considered: 

- Number of contact attempts

Overall Response Rate 

(2022): 45%

RR = 36.0%

RR = 42.4%
12 — U.S. BUREAU OF LABOR STATISTICS • bls.gov

Final Cost Reduction Measures

◼Tailored approach to reducing costs:

Diary and Interview Surveys: 

1) Caps on mileage and hours (*based on previous averages...no 

expected impact)

2) Maximum number of contact attempts (>8)

Interview Survey only: 

3) Don’t return to wave 4 cases where wave 1-3 were non-interviews
13 — U.S. BUREAU OF LABOR STATISTICS • bls.gov

42%

41%

45%

40%

41% 41%

39%

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

45%

50%

JUN-2 3 JUL-2 3 AUG-2 3 SEP-2 3 O C T -2 3 NOV-2 3 D E C-2 3

Final Disposition Rate

Interview Refusal Noncontact Other Noninterview Stop Work Wave 4 not fielded

Interview data collection outcomes Jun-Dec 2023
14 — U.S. BUREAU OF LABOR STATISTICS • bls.gov

Impact So Far?

Cost within budget (so far)

Lower than expected impact on 

Response Rates

Positive Feedback from Field Staff
15 — U.S. BUREAU OF LABOR STATISTICS • bls.gov

Future research/plans

◼Further evaluation of impact based on historic data

If we had implemented this earlier and reweighted accordingly, would the 

estimates have differed? 

How did the sample composition of cut cases compare?

◼Evaluate new data collected 

Regular evaluation of nonresponse bias existence

Impact on estimates/sample composition

Evaluation of Fielding strategies (time of contact attempts, etc)

◼Consider more sophisticated models in the future for targeting cases to 

cut?
Contact Information

16 — U.S. BUREAU OF LABOR STATISTICS • bls.gov

Laura Erhard

Chief, Research and Program Development

Division of Consumer Expenditure Surveys

202-5119

Erhard.Laura@bls.gov