[Federal Register Volume 67, Number 110 (Friday, June 7, 2002)]
[Notices]
[Pages 39339-39341]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 02-14242]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
Census Bureau
Census 2003 Test; Proposed Collection; Comment Request
ACTION: Proposed collection; comment request.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce, as part of its continuing effort
to reduce paperwork and respondent burden, invites the general public
and other Federal agencies to take this opportunity to comment on
proposed and/or continuing information collections, as required by the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Public Law 104-13
(44.U.S.C.3506(C)(2)(A)).
DATES: Written comments must be submitted on or before August 6, 2002.
ADDRESSES: Direct all written comments to Madeleine Clayton,
Departmental Paperwork Clearance Officer, Room 6608, 14th and
Constitution Avenue, NW. Washington, DC 20230 (or via the Internet at
[email protected]).
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Requests for additional information or
copies of the information collection instruments and instructions
should be directed to Suzanne Fratino, U.S. Census Bureau, Building 2,
Room 2021, Washington, DC 20233-9200, 301-457-4134.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION
I. Abstract
In Census 2000, the Census Bureau conducted four separate tests
examining innovative ideas. One of these ``experiments'' was the
Response Mode and Incentive Experiment (RMIE). RMIE attempted to
measure the extent to which respondents choose to use electronic
response options including Computer Assisted Telephone Interviewing
(CATI), Interactive Voice Response (IVR), and Internet. Preliminary
findings from the RMIE initial mailout component and Operator
Assistance indicate that Computer Assisted Telephone Interviewing does
not offer clear advantages relative to the Internet in terms of
increasing the overall response rate. The IVR mode showed promise but
requires additional design work while the Internet mode yielded
relatively high data quality. One major recommendation resulting from
the RMIE was to investigate the best ways to present the availability
of response options, and how to word messages included with the mailed
questionnaire. To take advantage of evolving technology, the Census
Bureau needs to research various self-response options toward
developing a strategy that encourages the public to respond to the
census using either paper or electronic options before Nonresponse
Follow-up (NRFU) occurs. The method and optimum timing to contact,
inform and, remind the public should be included.
The Census Bureau is planning a two-part test in 2003. The first
part will examine the impact of offering various self-response options
and the interactions among various options on overall response rates
and data quality. These options include mail, Internet, Interactive
Voice Recognition (IVR), and a combination of Internet and IVR. This
test is also designed to address questions about the relative timing
and content of various contacts. We hope to answer the following
questions: (1) What is the effect of offering alternative data
collection modes on response (i.e. increase, decrease, shift)? and (2)
what is the effect of new or additional contact strategies on overall
response?
The goal of this portion of the test is to identify, for further
testing in 2004, the best strategy for increasing self-enumerated
response to the census thus reducing the NRFU workload. Successful
accomplishment of this goal will greatly improve the data quality of
Census 2010 while reducing the cost of data collection.
The second part of the Census 2003 Test will assess the effects of
dropping the ``Some other race'' response option. This test is designed
to answer whether item nonresponse to the race question will increase
if the ``Some other race'' response option with a write-in line is
deleted, and what effect this will have on the overall quality of race
reporting. In past decennial censuses, the Census Bureau has received
an exception from the Office of Management and Budget which allowed it
to include a ``Some other race'' category. This category is a source of
noncomparability between the census and surveys and race data produced
by other agencies. The purpose of this test is to develop and evaluate
a mailout version of the race question that conforms to OMB standards
by excluding the ``Some other race'' category. It will also measure the
effectiveness of revised instructions for the Hispanic origin and race
questions to convey to respondents the intent of the questions; more
specifically that different responses are being requested in each of
these questions. In addition, revisions to the Hispanic origin
question, including the addition of examples of Hispanic groups to
obtain more complete reporting of detailed Hispanic subgroups are to be
tested. Examples for the Other Asian and the Other Pacific Islander
response categories to the question on race also will be included. It
is desirable to assess the feasibility of these changes to the
questions on race and Hispanic origin so that alternatives can be
developed and tested in a timely way before final question versions are
adopted. The Census Bureau plans to conduct multiple rounds of
cognitive testing to identify problems and revise question wordings and
instructions before finalizing them for this test.
The goal of the race and Hispanic origin portion of the test is to
develop question wording and content that will lead to improved self-
reporting of both race and Hispanic origin in the census.
[[Page 39340]]
II. Method of Collection
The methodology for the Census 2003 Test consists of a data
collection strategy involving fourteen different experimental panels.
The control panel is a mailing strategy comprised of four pieces--an
advance letter, an initial questionnaire, a reminder postcard, and a
replacement questionnaire targeted to non-responding housing units.
Essentially, this control panel is similar to the Census 2000 mailout
strategy with the addition of a replacement questionnaire. In addition,
the timing of each mail piece is different from Census 2000. The
questionnaire used in nine of the panels will be a Census 2000 short
form. The remaining six panels will use a Census 2000 short form with
changes to both the Hispanic origin and race questions, their response
categories, and instructions to answer both questions. ``Census Day,''
the reference date for enumerating respondents, will be February 6,
2003. The advance letter will be delivered to housing units in the
sample by the United States Postal Service between January 22 and 24,
2003. The initial questionnaire will be delivered on January 28 and 30,
followed by the reminder postcard during February 3-5. On February 10,
we will determine the universe of non-respondents who will be mailed a
replacement questionnaire on February 15-18, 2003.
A national sample of 220,000 addresses will be selected from
housing units in Census 2000. The sample is restricted to addresses in
Mailout/Mailback areas that are not in the American Community Survey
sample during the test period. Based on Census 2000 return rates,
census blocks will be stratified into high response and low response
strata. A random sample of 5,000 housing units will be drawn from each
stratum for each of the eight response strategy test panels, yielding a
total of 10,000 housing units per panel. For the control panel and each
of the six race and ethnicity panels, a sample of 10,000 housing units
from each stratum will be selected, yielding a total of 20,000 housing
units per panel.
The eight response strategy test panels consist of various
treatments providing alternatives and additions to the control panel's
mailing strategy. The sample households in one panel will have the
option of responding via the Internet in addition to the option of
completing a paper questionnaire and returning it by mail. Two other
panels test a telephone interactive voice recognition (IVR) system as
an alternative to mailing back the paper questionnaire. The distinction
among these two panels is the extent to which residents are encouraged
to choose the IVR option instead of mail. One panel will encourage
residents to respond by telephone without including a paper
questionnaire and the second will give them the option of responding by
telephone or with a questionnaire. Two panels, one without an initial
questionnaire in the envelope, will give residents both the Internet
and IVR as response options. Other response strategy treatment panels
include using a telephone call reminder in lieu of a reminder postcard,
putting a due date on the questionnaire envelope, and a mailing
strategy without a replacement questionnaire.
Responses from paper mail returns, the Internet, and IVR will be
data captured in order to analyze the demographic characteristics of
respondents and patterns of item nonresponse. Results of the test will
help shape the data collection strategy for the next census.
The six additional test panels are designed to test the effects on
the overall and item nonresponse of changes to the questions on
Hispanic origin and race. The purpose of this test is to examine the
effects of dropping the ``Some other race'' response category from the
race question, and whether additional instructions can ameliorate the
resulting increase in race item nonresponse expected, as well as convey
to respondents the intent of this question. Previously, the
overwhelming majority of responses in the ``Some other race'' category
were Hispanic ethnicities. It is vital that respondents understand that
the intent of the question on race is for them to self-report their
race using one or more of the race categories shown on the form. In
addition, revisions to the Hispanic Origin question, including adding
examples of Hispanic groups to obtain more complete reporting of
detailed Hispanic subgroups, are being tested.
Because of the listing of Asian and Pacific Islander ethnicities,
along with other design effects of the question, some respondents think
we are asking them to report their ethnicity and not their race. Others
do not see a difference between race and ethnicity. We also are
including Other Asian and Other Pacific Islander examples to obtain
more complete reporting of detailed Other Asian and Other Pacific
Islander subgroups. The six panels test the effects of the following
changes compared to the control panel.
1. A modified Hispanic origin question, including the addition of
the word ``origin,'' slight revisions to the instruction for the
question, and removing the slashes (/). (The same modified Hispanic
question is used in all six panels.)
2. The inclusion of examples of Hispanic groups and Other Asian and
Other Pacific Islander groups to obtain more complete reporting of
detailed other Asian and Other Pacific Islander subgroups.
3. The deletion of the ``Some other race'' response option and
write-in area.
4. The deletion of the ``Some other race'' response option and
write in area and the addition of examples of Hispanic groups and Other
Asian and Pacific Islander groups.
5. The deletion of the ``Some other race'' response and addition of
an ``informative instruction'' to increase respondents awareness that
race and Hispanic origin are different.
6. The deletion of the ``Some other race'' response, addition of
``informative instruction'' to increase respondents awareness that race
and Hispanic origin are different and, adding examples of Hispanic
groups and Other Asian and Other Pacific Islander groups.
Responses from these paper mail returns also will be data captured
in order to analyze the demographic characteristics of respondents and
patterns of item nonresponse.
III. Data
OMB Number: Not available.
Form Number(s): DA-1A, 1B, 1C, 1D, 1DD, DA-1(CC-9), 10, 11, 12, 13.
Type of Review: Regular.
Affected Public: Individuals or households.
Estimated Number of Respondents: 220,000.
Estimate Time Per Response: 10 minutes.
Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours: 36,666 hours.
Estimated Total Annual Cost: There is no cost to respondents except
for their time to respond.
Respondent Obligation: Mandatory.
Legal Authority: Title 13 of the United States Code, Sections 141
and 193.
IV. Request for Comments
Comments are invited on: (a) Whether the proposed collection of
information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of
the agency, including whether the information shall have practical
utility; (b) the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden
(including hours and cost) of the proposed collection of information;
(c) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the
information to be collected; and (d) ways to minimize the burden of the
collection of information on respondents, including through the use of
automated collection techniques
[[Page 39341]]
or other forms of information technology.
Comments submitted in response to this notice will be summarized
and/or included in the request for OMB approval of this information
collection; they also will become a matter of public record.
Dated: June 3, 2002.
Madeleine Clayton,
Departmental Paperwork Clearance Officer, Office of the Chief
Information Officer.
[FR Doc. 02-14242 Filed 6-6-02; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-07-P