The decennial census is the nation’s most comprehensive and expensive statistical data-gathering program. An accurate population count is critical because, as required by the Constitution, census results are used for allocating seats in the House of Representatives. Census data are also used for redistricting within states, distributing billions of dollars in federal funding, guiding investment decisions of the public and private sectors for the ensuing decade, and providing a baseline for countless other statistical measurement programs. Unfortunately, as we noted in a previous report, the nation runs the risk of a very expensive and seriously flawed census in 2000. To assess the Bureau of the Census’ progress in minimizing risks, we reviewed the status of key activities that the Bureau plans to test as part of its dress rehearsal for the next decennial census: address list development, local outreach and promotion, staffing, and statistical sampling. To the extent that the dress rehearsal accurately mirrors the actual census, the results of the dress rehearsal could indicate what might occur in 2000. According to the Census Bureau, the dress rehearsal for the 2000 Census is designed to test the various operations, procedures, and questions that are planned for the decennial under as near census-like conditions as possible. In July 1996, the Bureau announced that Sacramento, CA; 11 counties in the Columbia, SC, area; and Menominee County, WI, including the Menominee American Indian Reservation, had been selected as sites for the 2000 Census dress rehearsal. According to the Bureau, Sacramento was selected because its diverse population will allow the Bureau to test estimation methods designed to reduce differential undercounts. Sacramento is also a primary media market, thus enabling the Bureau to test its paid-advertising campaign. The Columbia site was selected, among other reasons, for its mixed rural and urban features and because its relatively high proportion of African-Americans will give the Bureau an opportunity to test methods of reducing the differential undercount for this population group. The Menominee site was included to allow the Bureau to test measures aimed at reducing the undercount of American Indians. Administratively, the Bureau’s Seattle Regional Office is responsible for conducting the Sacramento dress rehearsal, while its Charlotte, NC, and Chicago, IL, Regional Offices, respectively, are responsible for the South Carolina and Menominee dress rehearsals. An important aspect of the dress rehearsal activities is Dress Rehearsal Census Day, which is scheduled for April 18, 1998. However, as is the case with the actual census, the Bureau’s dress rehearsal activities span a much wider period of time than 1 day. Following the selection of the dress rehearsal sites in July 1996, the Bureau developed preliminary mailing lists and materials for these locations, contacted local governments at the three sites, and conducted staffing activities to hire temporary census employees in those locations. Similarly, after April 18, the Bureau is to develop its census count by conducting the necessary follow-up activities at nonresponding households and completing other fieldwork. A well-planned and -executed dress rehearsal should provide the Bureau with an opportunity to demonstrate the feasibility of its design for the 2000 Census. This demonstration is particularly important considering the problems the Bureau has experienced to date and the controversy that surrounds its design. Since 1970, when measured in constant dollars, census costs have increased faster than inflation, even after allowing for population growth. In 1990 constant dollars, total census cycle costs were $0.7 billion in 1970, $1.8 billion in 1980, and $2.6 billion in 1990. The Bureau expects that the escalating cost of conducting the census will continue; in March 1997, the Bureau estimated that the 2000 Census will cost at least $4.0 billion in 2000 dollars. Unfortunately, the nation’s growing investment in the census has not generated more accurate results. Although the 1990 Census was the most expensive in history, the results were less accurate than those of the 1980 Census. The Bureau estimated that about 6 million persons were counted twice in the 1990 Census, while 10 million persons were missed. These errors were particularly worrisome because the Bureau’s evaluation showed a persistent differential undercount of minority groups and renters, particularly those living in rural areas. The cost of a census is largely influenced by the relative need for the Bureau to follow up on nonresponding housing units. Since the 1970 Census, the Bureau has used a “mail-out/mail-back” approach for counting the vast majority of the population whereby the Bureau develops an address list of the nation’s housing units and mails a questionnaire to each one. Although households are to mail back completed forms, many millions do not. This nonresponse requires the Bureau to hire hundreds of thousands of temporary employees, called enumerators, to follow up on each nonresponding housing unit by visiting each unit and gathering census information. The mail response rate to the census questionnaire has dropped from 78 percent in 1970 to 65 percent in 1990, thus increasing the Bureau’s costly nonresponse follow-up workload. The Bureau’s plans for the 2000 Census include the use of sampling and statistical estimation. Initially, the Bureau planned to use these methods at the three dress rehearsal sites just as it plans to do nationwide in 2000. Congressional concern over the validity and legality of the Bureau’s sampling and statistical estimation methods have led to recent changes to the dress rehearsal. According to Department of Commerce officials, as part of a compromise between the administration and Congress over the Bureau’s fiscal year 1998 appropriation, it was agreed that the Bureau would use sampling and statistical estimation methods only in the Sacramento site for nonresponse follow-up and to improve the accuracy of the population count. In the Columbia site, the Bureau is to hire enumerators to follow up on all nonresponding households, just as it did nationally in the 1990 Census. At the Menominee dress rehearsal site, the Bureau is to do a 100 percent nonresponse follow-up but is to use sampling to improve the accuracy of the population count. Although use of the different methods at the dress rehearsal sites invites a comparison of the results, geographic, demographic, and possibly other differences between the dress rehearsal locations preclude such a comparison. The Bureau’s fiscal year 1998 appropriation act also allows for expedited judicial review of sampling and created an eight-member Census Monitoring Board that is to oversee all aspects of the preparation and implementation of the 2000 Census and report its findings to Congress. Concerned about the risk of a failed census, the Chairman and Ranking Minority Member, Senate Committee on Governmental Affairs, asked us to review the status of key census-taking activities that the Bureau is to test during the 1998 dress rehearsal. In response, we examined the Bureau’s efforts to (1) create a complete and accurate address list, (2) increase the mail response rate through local outreach and promotion, (3) staff census-taking operations with an adequate workforce, and (4) implement its sampling and statistical estimation methodology. If designed and implemented as much like the actual census as possible, the dress rehearsal could yield results indicative of what might occur in 2000. To examine the status of address list development, local outreach and promotion, and hiring, we obtained documents that describe the Bureau’s plans, procedures, and progress for each activity and interviewed Bureau headquarters officials and, where applicable, regional office officials. We also reviewed the Bureau’s analysis of missed or duplicated housing units in the 1990 census; the Bureau’s analyses of missed or duplicate housing units in its 1995 Census Test conducted in Paterson, NJ, and Oakland, CA; and its analysis of the completeness of address lists for seven locations around the nation. This was done to review the accuracy and completeness of the Bureau’s address list. To help verify the Bureau’s information and also obtain a local perspective on the dress rehearsal activities, we (1) made site visits to the Sacramento and South Carolina dress rehearsal jurisdictions; (2) conducted in-person and telephone interviews with local officials on their experiences in reviewing address lists, promoting the census, and recruiting and hiring census workers; and (3) where applicable, obtained relevant documents on these activities. Menominee officials were contacted by telephone. To obtain an indication of the task the advertising contractor faces in developing an effective promotional campaign, we observed focus group sessions the contractor scheduled with different population groups as part of its market research at the dress rehearsal sites. To examine the Bureau’s efforts to implement its sampling and statistical estimation methodology, we reviewed Bureau documents related to sampling and estimation, interviewed Bureau officials who are responsible for drawing the sample for the dress rehearsal, and reviewed the Bureau’s methodology for drawing the sample. We conducted our audit work at the South Carolina and Sacramento dress rehearsal sites; the Bureau’s Charlotte and Seattle regional offices; as well as in Washington, D.C., and Dallas, TX, between September 1997 and February 1998 in accordance with generally accepted government auditing standards. We requested comments on a draft of this report from the Secretary of Commerce or his designee. On March 18, 1998, the Acting Director, Bureau of the Census, provided us with comments on the draft report. These comments are presented and evaluated in chapter 6 and reprinted in appendix I. A quality address list—one that is complete and accurate—and precise maps are the fundamental building blocks of a successful census. Accurate addresses are essential for delivering questionnaires, avoiding unnecessary and expensive follow-up efforts at vacant or nonexistent residences, and establishing a universe of households for sampling and statistical estimation. Accurate maps are critical for counting the correct portions of the population in their correct locations—the cornerstone of congressional reapportionment and redistricting. For the 2000 Census, the Bureau estimates that it needs to identify and locate 118 million housing units and to create a database of addresses, known as the Master Address File (MAF).