A successful census is critical because, as required by the Constitution, census data are used to reapportion seats in the House of Representatives. In addition, every year, the government awards around $180 billion in federal funds to localities on the basis of census numbers, and states use census data, among other purposes, to redraw the boundaries of congressional districts. Businesses and private citizens also depend on census data for such purposes as marketing and planning. Census Day is April 1, 2000, with peak efforts to follow up on nonresponding households scheduled to run from April 27 to July 7, 2000. Population counts to be used to reapportion seats in the House of Representatives are to be delivered to the President by January 1, 2001. In 1998, the Bureau conducted a dress rehearsal for the 2000 Census during which it tested most of the procedures and operations planned for the decennial census under as near census-like conditions as possible. The dress rehearsal was the Bureau’s last opportunity for an operational test of its overall design of the 2000 Census and to demonstrate to Congress and other key stakeholders the feasibility of its plans. (Dress Rehearsal Census Day was April 18, 1998). The dress rehearsal sites included Sacramento, CA; 11 county governments and the City of Columbia, SC; and Menominee County, WI, including the Menominee American Indian Reservation. To review the Bureau’s efforts to increase public participation in the census and to collect timely and accurate field data from nonrespondents, we examined documents that described the Bureau’s budget, plans, procedures, progress, and evaluations relating to these operations. Further, we examined current laws, regulations, and legislation pertaining to staffing the Bureau’s field operations. We also interviewed Bureau officials at headquarters and, where applicable, regional and local census officials responsible for planning and implementing the 1998 dress rehearsal and the 2000 Census. To obtain a local perspective on the Bureau’s outreach and promotion and field follow-up efforts during the dress rehearsal, we made several site visits to the dress rehearsal jurisdictions and interviewed local officials who were responsible for organizing and implementing community outreach and promotion efforts. We also inspected each site for the scope and prominence of promotional material and activities, and observed nonresponse follow-up operations. To determine the dollar effect of a 1 percentage point decrease in the mail response rate, we reduced the assumed mail response rates used in the Bureau’s cost model supporting its fiscal year 2000 amended budget request. We did our audit work at the Bureau’s Census 2000 dress rehearsal sites; Regional Census Offices in Charlotte, NC, and Seattle, WA; Bureau headquarters in Suitland, MD; as well as in Washington, D.C., between April 1998 and October 1999, in accordance with generally accepted government auditing standards. We requested comments on a draft of this report from the Secretary of Commerce. On December 3, 1999, the Secretary forwarded the Bureau’s written comments on the draft (see app. I), which we address at the end of this report. Achieving the Bureau’s Mail Response Rate Objective Will Be Difficult Outreach and Promotion Program May Have Only a Modest Impact on the Public participation is critical to a successful census because it helps improve the accuracy and completeness of census information, while reducing the Bureau’s costly and time-consuming nonresponse follow-up workload. The mail response rate to the census questionnaire is the most commonly used indicator of the level of public participation.Unfortunately, as shown in figure 1, the mail response rate has declined with each decennial census since the Bureau first initiated a national mailout/mailback approach in 1970. According to the Bureau, this declining trend is due, in part, to various demographic, attitudinal, and other factors, such as concerns over privacy and mistrust of government. These and related issues led us to note, in our 1992 summary assessment of the 1990 Census, the formidable challenges the Bureau faces in increasing public cooperation. We identified several opportunities for improvements in this regard. One of these opportunities was to simplify the census questionnaire—which the Bureau has successfully done. However, even with a simplified questionnaire and other changes in census design, we noted the Bureau needed to prepare for a lower mail response rate in 2000. For the 2000 Census, the Bureau is expecting a 61-percent mail response rate, which is 4 percentage points lower than what it achieved in 1990. However, the dress rehearsal results suggest that even this goal may be optimistic. First, while the Bureau generally achieved its mail response rate goals during the dress rehearsal, it did so only by mailing out a second, “replacement” questionnaire, which is an approach the Bureau has since dropped for 2000. Second, the Bureau’s outreach and promotion program does not appear to have bridged the gap that typically exists between raising awareness of the census on the one hand and motivating people to respond on the other. The significant difficulty in both raising public awareness and motivating people to mail back their questionnaires was demonstrated during the 1990 Census, when Bureau research showed that although 93 percent of the public reported being aware of the census, the mail response rate was just 65 percent. The dress rehearsal results raise concerns as to whether the Bureau can achieve its 61-percent mail response rate goal in 2000. As shown in table 1, the Bureau generally met its dress rehearsal mail response rate objectives, exceeding its goal by three percentage points in Sacramento and falling slightly short in South Carolina and Menominee. However, a key ingredient of these response rates was the Bureau’s use of a second, “replacement” questionnaire that was sent to all housing units located in mailout/mailback areas in South Carolina and Sacramento. The Bureau has since rejected this procedure because it concluded that the number of duplicate responses suggested that the second mailing confused the public. Bureau officials told us that a similar situation in 2000 could cause overwhelming processing problems. Recognizing the potential impact of not using a second mailing, the Bureau reduced its initial goal of a 67-percent mail response rate by 6 percentage points to 61 percent. However, the results of a subsequent Bureau study suggest that the second mailing during the dress rehearsal had an even greater impact on the mail response rate, and, as a result, the Bureau’s current 61-percent response rate objective could be optimistic. Although the impact of the second questionnaire is difficult to measure precisely, as shown in table 2, the Bureau estimates that the second questionnaire added between 8.2 and 15.8 percentage points to the South Carolina response rate, and between 7.5 and 14.4 percentage points to the Sacramento response rate. Thus, without the second mailing, it is likely that the Bureau would have fallen far short of its response rate goals—by at least 8.2 percentage points in South Carolina and 4.5 percentage points in Sacramento. Dress rehearsal mail response rates are not necessarily predictive of decennial response rates, which are higher because of the greater public and media attention that the actual census receives. Nevertheless, the dress rehearsal mail response rates provide a useful indication of what might occur during the actual census and, for 2000, raise concerns that the Bureau is at risk of an even lower response rate than it had estimated. To help combat the downward trend in response rates, the Bureau has instituted both a national and locally based outreach and promotion program. Two key components of the Bureau’s outreach and promotion program include a paid advertising campaign and partnerships with local governments. In October 1997, the Bureau hired a consortium of private-sector advertising agencies, led by Young & Rubicam, to develop an extensive paid advertising program for the 2000 Census. Marketing the census represents a particular challenge in that advertisers typically target their best prospects and specific segments of the population. In contrast, census advertising is aimed at the most resistant “customers” and every U.S. household. The Bureau estimates it will spend about $167 million on the paid advertising campaign in fiscal years 1998 through 2000, of which $102.8 million (62 percent) has been allocated in fiscal years 1999 and 2000 for media (television, radio, print, and other types of advertising). A substantial portion of the advertising is to be directed at minority groups. Through the end of fiscal year 1999, for example, of the $16.4 million allocated for media purchases, about $7.3 million (45 percent) was to be used to target specific race and ethnic groups (see fig. 2). The Bureau has not yet purchased advertising for 2000, although a similar spending pattern is likely. According to Bureau officials, the paid advertising campaign is intended to motivate people to return their census forms by using a variety of media to stress the message that participating in the census benefits one’s community. We observed this during our visits to the dress rehearsal sites where we often saw billboards containing such taglines as “This is Your Future. Don’t Leave It Blank,” “The Future Takes Just a Few Minutes to Complete,” and “Pave a Road With These Tools” (see fig. 3). The census was also publicized through broadcast and print media and promotional items, such as cups and T-shirts. Nevertheless, the effectiveness of the paid advertising campaign appears to have been limited during the dress rehearsal. An independent research firm, which the Bureau hired to evaluate the effectiveness of the advertising campaign, reported that the campaign generally had no more than a “modest” impact on the public’s attitudes and knowledge of the census. Although the Bureau had expected a 30 percentage point increase in awareness at the South Carolina and Sacramento dress rehearsal sites, the evaluation results indicated that there already was a high level of census awareness among all demographic groups before the start of the advertising campaign. In a telephone survey of residents that was conducted before the advertising campaign, 86 percent of those responding in Sacramento and 93 percent of South Carolina respondents said that they had heard of the census.