    [Senate Hearing 114-436]
    [From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]

                                                            S. Hrg. 114-436

    2020 CENSUS: CHALLENGES FACING THE BUREAU FOR A MODERN, COST	EFFECTIVE
                                     SURVEY

    =======================================================================

                                    HEARING

                                   before the

                                  COMMITTEE ON
                   HOMELAND SECURITY AND GOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS
                              UNITED STATES SENATE

                        ONE HUNDRED FOURTEENTH CONGRESS

                                 FIRST SESSION

                                   __________

                                 APRIL 20, 2015

                                   __________

            Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.fdsys.gov/

                           Printed for the use of the
            Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs

        [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

                             U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE

    94-905 PDF                     WASHINGTON : 2016
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------
      For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Publishing
      Office Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512-1800;
             DC area (202) 512-1800 Fax: (202) 512-2104 Mail: Stop IDCC,
                              Washington, DC 20402-0001

            COMMITTEE ON HOMELAND SECURITY AND GOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS

                        RON JOHNSON, Wisconsin Chairman
    JOHN McCAIN, Arizona                 THOMAS R. CARPER, Delaware
    ROB PORTMAN, Ohio                    CLAIRE McCASKILL, Missouri
    RAND PAUL, Kentucky                  JON TESTER, Montana
    JAMES LANKFORD, Oklahoma             TAMMY BALDWIN, Wisconsin
    MICHAEL B. ENZI, Wyoming             HEIDI HEITKAMP, North Dakota
    KELLY AYOTTE, New Hampshire          CORY A. BOOKER, New Jersey
    JONI ERNST, Iowa                     GARY C. PETERS, Michigan
    BEN SASSE, Nebraska

                        Keith B. Ashdown, Staff Director
                           Courtney J. Allen, Counsel
                  Gabrielle A. Batkin. Minority Staff Director
               John P. Kilvington, Minority Deputy Staff Director
         Troy H. Cribb, Minority Chief Counsel for Governmental Affairs
            Deirdre G. Armstrong, Minority Professional Staff Member
                         Laura W. Kilbride, Chief Clerk
                       Lauren M. Corcoran, Hearing Clerk

                                C O N T E N T S

                                     ------
    Opening statements:
                                                                       Page
        Senator Lankford.............................................     1
        Senator Carper...............................................    10
        Senator Ayotte...............................................    12
        Senator Peters...............................................    15
    Prepared statements:
        Senator Johnson..............................................    33
        Senator Carper...............................................    35
        Senator Lankford.............................................    37

                                   WITNESSES
                             Monday, April 20, 2015

    Hon. John H. Thompson, Director, U.S. Census Bureau, U.S.
      Department of Commerce.........................................     3
    Robert Goldenkoff, Director of Strategic Issues, U.S. Government
      Accountability Office..........................................     6
    Carol R. Cha, Director of Information Technology Acquisition
      Management Issues, U.S. Government Accountability Office.......     8

                         Alphabetical List of Witnesses

    Cha, Carol R.:
        Testimony....................................................     8
        Joint prepared statement.....................................    45
    Goldenkoff, Robert:
        Testimony....................................................     6
        Joint prepared statement.....................................    45
    Thompson, Hon. John H.:
        Testimony....................................................     3
        Prepared statement...........................................    38

                                    APPENDIX

    Response to post-hearing questions submitted by Mr. Thompson.....    65

                       2020 CENSUS: CHALLENGES FACING THE
                   BUREAU FOR A MODERN, COST-EFFECTIVE SURVEY

                                  ----------

                             MONDAY, APRIL 20, 2015

                                         U.S. Senate,
                               Committee on Homeland Security
                                      and Governmental Affairs,
                                                        Washington, DC.
        The Committee met, pursuant to notice, at 3:01 p.m., in
    room SD-342, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. James
    Lankford, presiding.
        Present: Senators Johnson, Lankford, Ayotte, Carper,
    McCaskill, and Peters.

                 OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR LANKFORD

        Senator Lankford. This hearing will come to order. I wanted
    to do an opening statement, and then Senator Carper is on his
    way. Senator Johnson is also on his way, and so as they slip
    in, we will recognize them at the appropriate time as well. I
    want to have this Committee come to order so we can begin this
    process on time today.
        I would like to welcome everyone to this afternoon's
    hearing on the ``2020 Census: Challenges Facing the Bureau for
    a Modern, Cost-Effective Survey.'' I will begin by recognizing
    myself for this opening statement.
        Director Thompson, let me first say to you on behalf of the
    Committee, we would like to express all of our condolences on
    the loss of Lawrence Buckner. We lost him in the line of duty
    on April 9 in Census Bureau headquarters in Suitland, Maryland.
    Know that our thoughts and prayers are with you and the agency
    as you all walk through this time together. It was a senseless
    act of violence, and we will all walk through it together with
    his family.
        The United States Constitution mandates that an actual
    enumeration be made within 3 years after the first meeting of
    the Congress of the United States and every subsequent 10
    years.
        As the 2020 decennial census approaches, I appreciate the
    fact that the Census Bureau is actually taking steps to prepare
    since, as we have seen in the past, a failure to do so can
    drastically increase costs for the Federal Government and
    ultimately the taxpayers. It is laudable that the Bureau is
    working toward implementation of an innovation strategy with
    the goal of saving the taxpayers' money.
        However, as the Government Accountability Office (GAO), has
    noted, although progress has been made since 2010, more work is
    needed to ensure that technology systems are fully operational
    and information remains secure and confidential.
        While it is important that we have information regarding
    the makeup of this Nation, it is also important that we
    safeguard the privacy of the American people. Questions asked
    of citizens of this Nation must be cost-effective and should
    not be overly intrusive. When the questions go too far and
    exceed what we should ask from the U.S. Government, it is
    invasive and fuels an environment of distrust.
        It is important that we examine not just the preparation
    for the 2020 Census itself, but also the manner in which the
    Census and other surveys, like the American Community Survey
    (ACS), are being conducted, as well the substantive nature of
    the questions asked. I look forward to the testimony, and I
    will acknowledge the Ranking Member Senator Carper for his
    opening statement when he arrives as well.
        Let me introduce the witnesses. Then I am going to swear
    the witnesses in as we go from here.
        John Thompson is the Director of the Census Bureau. Before
    his appointment as Director, Mr. Thompson was the President and
    Chief Executive Officer (CEO) of the National Opinion Research
    Center (NORC). Thanks again for being here.
        Robert Goldenkoff is the Director of Strategic Issues at
    the GAO. Mr. Goldenkoff leads reviews of the governmentwide
    civil service reforms and ways of improving the cost-
    effectiveness of the Federal statistical system.
        Carol Cha is the Director of Information Technology
    Acquisition Management Issues at the Government Accountability
    Office. Before joining GAO, Ms. Cha led numerous reviews of
    information technology (IT) systems at Federal agencies,
    including the Departments of Commerce, Defense (DOD), and
    Homeland Security (DHS).
        Thank you, all three of you, for being here, and thanks for
    your testimony, both your written testimony and the oral
    testimony that you are about to begin as well.
        I would like to ask unanimous consent that Senator
    Johnson's statement be included in the record.\1\ Without
    objection, so ordered.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \1\ The prepared statement of Senator Johnson appears in the
    Appendix on page 33.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        It is the tradition of this Committee that we swear in all
    witnesses, so would you please rise and raise your right hand?
    Do you swear that the testimony you will give before this
    Committee will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but
    the truth, so help you, God?
        Mr. Thompson. I do.
        Mr. Goldenkoff. I do.
        Ms. Cha. I do.
        Senator Lankford. Thank you. You may be seated.
        Let the record reflect that the witnesses have answered in
    the affirmative.
        I will ask that each of you will give your testimony. You
    have plenty of time to be able to do that. We are glad that you
    came and you came well prepared on that. When Senator Carper
    comes, I will recognize him for an opening statement. That may
    be in between one of you, but I will not interrupt you in the
    middle of your statement if he comes in during that time.
        Mr. Thompson, you are first. Thank you. We would be glad to
    receive your testimony now.

     TESTIMONY OF HON. JOHN H. THOMPSON,\1\ DIRECTOR, U.S. CENSUS
                  BUREAU, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

        Mr. Thompson. Thank you, Senator Lankford. I would also
    like to thank Chairman Johnson and Ranking Member Carper and
    the Committee for allowing me this opportunity to testify on
    our preparations for the 2020 Census.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \1\ The prepared statement of Mr. Thompson appears in the Appendix
    on page 38.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Before I testify, however, I would like to take a moment to
    honor a true hero, Officer Lawrence Buckner, who lost his life
    protecting all of us at the U.S. Census Bureau. We are
    profoundly saddened by the loss of Officer Buckner. No one can
    ever measure the loss to his family. But our hearts are full,
    and the Census Bureau extends its deepest sympathy to his wife,
    Linda, his son, Lawrence, and his family. Thank you, and we
    mourn this tragic loss.
        I will now proceed with my testimony. The Census Bureau is
    fundamentally changing the way we will conduct the decennial
    census, which is the largest civilian mobilization in the
    United States. These efforts began earlier this decade by
    establishing a goal to design and conduct the 2020 Census to
    cost less per housing unit than the 2010 Census, while
    maintaining the highest levels of quality.
        The Census Bureau then identified the major cost drivers,
    and with the Congress' support, we began researching and
    testing major innovations oriented around technology and the
    strategic use of information to rein in these cost drivers.
        Today I will describe our work in four key innovation areas
    that will lead to the reengineered 2020 Census. We believe that
    investing now in these four key innovation areas can yield up
    to $5 billion in savings relative to repeating the 2010 Census
    in 2020. The tests we conducted in 2013 and 2014 and the four
    tests we are conducting this year are informing the 2020 Census
    design decisions, which we will deliver later this year. I will
    discuss how these tests informed our planning and how the next
    2 years position us for the critical end-to-end test in 2018.
    The alternative is repeating the 2010 Census, which would
    forfeit the savings of $5 billion.
        There are four key areas of innovation and potential
    savings:
        First, better address validation. By using the U.S. Postal
    Service (USPS) and other information sources, including aerial
    imagery, we plan to avoid walking every street in the Nation to
    validate the address list. We can save $1 billion through these
    efforts.
        Second, better response options. By making responding to
    the Census more convenient through the Internet, phone, or by
    mail, we can potentially save approximately $550 million.
        Third, better use of existing information. By using
    existing government and commercial information to reduce the
    need to follow-up with non-responding housing units, we can
    potentially save $1.2 billion.
        Fourth, better field operations. By using technology to
    manage and track cases, as well as to route the Census takers
    who will be using smartphones and tablets rather than pencil
    and paper, we can potentially save $2.3 billion.
        As I noted above, the total savings we expect from these
    four areas of innovation is $5 billion. I will now discuss each
    of these innovation areas in more detail.
        The foundation of an accurate Census is an accurate address
    list, which includes both the address and the geospatial
    location. Over the past few years, there have been tremendous
    technological advances in the geospatial field. More and more
    data become available, meaning that we no longer have to
    validate every address by a personal visit. We are now
    examining how to refine our procedures to integrate private
    sector data and services to update our geospatial assets.
    Specifically, we want to purchase address, road, and satellite
    imagery instead of physically walking the entire United States.
        This year's Address Validation Test encompasses two
    components that will also bring insights into how we can build
    a better address frame. The first component is to assess the
    ability of statistical models to predict change, such as new
    roads, new housing units, or other changes. The second
    component will provide measures of the current accuracy of our
    address list and our geospatial database.
        The second area of innovation is developing better response
    options. We are moving away from relying solely on the mailed
    questionnaire and enumerator to count every household. We are
    expanding options for people to self-respond by the Internet,
    at home or on a mobile device remotely, as well as by
    telephone. However, it is important to note that paper will
    continue to be an option.
        We want to make the Census as mobile and convenient as
    possible. This means allowing respondents to answer the Census
    without entering a Census ID. In fact, we anticipate that by
    promoting the Internet option, there will be a dramatic
    increase in the number of these responses in 2020. For this to
    work, we must validate these responses quickly in real time.
        The third area of innovation is better use of existing
    information. The increased use of administrative records from
    other Federal and State government agencies and third-party
    commercial data can reduce costs. The use of administrative
    records is not new to the decennial census, and we want to
    expand our use of these data for the 2020 Census. We are
    exploring several options, and two of the most promising are
    using those data to help manage and even reduce the field
    workload.
        The two most significant areas of innovation and cost
    savings are removing vacant units and using existing
    information on persons to enumerate occupied housing units,
    thereby removing them from the non-response follow-up
    operations.
        For example, during the 2010 Census, the field workload
    included 50 million housing units. Each housing unit received
    at least one in-person visit. Of these, 19 million were either
    vacant or no longer existed. By using administrative data from
    the Postal Service and other agencies, we believe we can
    identify these vacant and non-existent housing units and remove
    them from the in-person follow-up workload, achieving
    substantial cost savings.
        Administrative records may also us to enumerate occupied
    housing units rather than enumerate them directly, and I would
    like to have a conversation with the Congress about this
    potential step.
        Ultimately, we will have to send Census takers into the
    field to enumerate the remaining non-responding households,
    which underscores the importance of the fourth area of
    innovation: better field operations. As part of the research
    and testing, including the 2015 Census test in Maricopa County,
    Arizona, we are examining our field staffing structure and
    testing several technological innovations. The goal of
    reengineering our field operations is to use technology more
    efficiently and effectively to conduct and manage the 2020
    Census field workload.
        In previous Censuses, the entire process, both data
    collection and management, was conducted by paper and pencil.
    To measure progress, we had to rely on daily in-person meetings
    with field staff and had no ability for real-time
    communication. This paper-based data collection process was a
    significant contributor to the overall cost increases of the
    previous Census field operations.
        We are developing a sophisticated operational control
    system that will manage tasks and assignments in real time. We
    intend to send our interviewers out with mobile devices rather
    than paper and pencil. They will use these devices to collect
    responses and report their time and attendance instead of using
    the paper forms as in 2010. And we will have real-time measures
    of progress.
        Our goals are to incorporate operational best practices,
    including the optimization of daily assignments, intelligent
    routing, and real-time issue management. We are working with
    the private sector as we build these systems.
        The four key innovation areas represent significant cost
    savings that can only be achieved if we get the opportunity to
    complete significant testing and development in the next 2
    years. We have very little time left to test and ultimately
    important these innovations before we reach 2018, when the cost
    of the Census will rise. 2018 is also important because we must
    conduct a complete end-to-end test so we can be confident that
    when we go live in 2020, all of our systems will work.
        To realize the most modern decennial census ever, we have
    to stay on track. That is why next year is crucial to the 2020
    Census for the development of the key systems to support the
    infrastructure to handle data collection and processing.
        One of the critical activities in 2016 is the continued
    development of our Census Enterprise system that will support
    not just the 2020 Census but all of our data collection
    activities at the Census Bureau. We will no longer build a
    system that we will throw away after the decennial, as we have
    for each previous Census. Known as the Census Enterprise Data
    Collection and Processing (CEDCaP) program, we are moving to a
    smarter, more cost-efficient, enterprise-level strategy to
    manage core information technology aspects for all of our
    Censuses and surveys.
        At the core of this modern system that we are building is
    our continued commitment to protecting privacy and
    confidentiality of individuals' information. Confidentiality
    and privacy is the very core of the Census Bureau's mission and
    deeply ingrained in our culture. We protect the information the
    public provides with a robust, comprehensive, and layered
    cybersecurity system. We are actively engaged with the National
    Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) and the Department
    of Homeland Security on these efforts.
        From the Census Enterprise system and cybersecurity to each
    test, each activity plays a significant role helping the Census
    Bureau design an accurate and cost-effective 2020 Census.
    Scaling up to the decennial census is complex, ranging over
    many years and many operations, which must be synchronized to
    meet our ultimate mandate. The $5 billion in savings cannot be
    achieved without rigorous testing designed to inform
    development of the systems and operations. We need your support
    to achieve these goals.
        Thank you, and I hope this update has been informative, and
    I look forward to answering your questions.
        Senator Lankford. Mr. Goldenkoff.

       TESTIMONY OF ROBERT GOLDENKOFF,\1\ DIRECTOR OF STRATEGIC
             ISSUES, U.S. GOVERNMENT ACCOUNTABILITY OFFICE

        Mr. Goldenkoff. Thank you, Senator Lankford. I would like
    to thank you and Chairman Johnson and Ranking Member Carper for
    the opportunity to be here this afternoon to discuss the Census
    Bureau's progress in developing a more cost-effective approach
    to counting the Nation's population.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \1\ The joint prepared statement of Mr. Goldenkoff and Ms. Cha
    appears in the Appendix on page 45.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        As you know, this month the Bureau marked the midway point
    in the decade-long countdown to Census Day 2020, giving greater
    urgency and importance to the testing, operational, and
    procurement decisions that it will make in the months ahead.
    For example, this September, the Bureau plans to announce its
    preliminary design for the 2020 Census, and two key field tests
    to inform that decision are currently underway.
        The cost of the decennial census has continually increased
    during the past 40 years, in part because the Nation's
    population has grown steadily larger, more diverse, and
    increasingly difficult to enumerate. At about $13 billion, the
    2010 Census was the costliest U.S. Census in history and was 56
    percent more expensive than the $8.1 billion spent on the 2000
    Census in constant 2010 dollars.
        In my remarks today, I will discuss the Bureau's progress
    in implementing four critical cost-savings initiatives and
    their associated challenges. The four areas include: using data
    previously provided to the government to help enumerate the
    population; new processes for updating the Bureau's address
    list and maps; reengineering field operations; and maximizing
    self-response.
        As the Director said, combined, the Bureau estimates that
    these efforts could generate up to $5 billion in cost savings
    and enable the Bureau to conduct the 2020 Census at a total
    life-cycle cost of around $12.7 billion, or about the same as
    the 2020 head count.
        With respect to using data previously provided to the
    government, the Bureau estimates that this initiative,
    sometimes referred to as ``using administrative records,''
    could save as much as $1.2 billion by reducing the need for
    costly, labor-intensive follow-up work with non-responding
    households.
        The Bureau is testing the extent to which it can use
    Federal data such as Social Security and Medicare records as
    well as records from State, local, and tribal governments and
    commercial sources to reduce the number of in-person visits,
    local Census offices, and operations needed to ensure a
    complete count.
        However, before it will be able to realize cost savings or
    improvements in data reliability from the use of these records,
    the Bureau will first need to address such questions as the
    quality of the records and whether they will meet the Bureau's
    needs. For example, while race and ethnicity data are collected
    in the Census, certain records available to the Bureau do not
    include this information.
        To reduce the cost of its efforts to update its address
    list and maps by as much as $1 billion, the Bureau is testing
    whether it can rely mainly on data from government agencies at
    all levels to share and continuously update their address list
    and street data with the Bureau.
        In prior decennials, thousands of Bureau field staff walked
    almost every street in the Nation as one of several operations
    to update the Bureau's address list. Key questions here include
    which map and address data sources are the most cost-effective
    and whether the Bureau can accurately target its address
    canvassing efforts.
        With respect to improving the management of its field
    operations, the Bureau is examining, among other things, how
    best to automate enumerators' work, which could save an
    estimated $2.3 billion. However, the Bureau must first resolve
    whether it can fully test all the systems and procedures in
    time for 2020.
        A fourth cost-saving area involves maximizing self-response
    through enhanced outreach and an Internet response option. This
    effort could reduce the need for enumerators to visit non-
    responding households and save around $500 million. However,
    among other issues, the Bureau has yet to establish reliable
    estimates of how much it will cost to deliver an Internet
    response option and does not have integrated schedules for
    completing the work.
        The Bureau has identified or acknowledged many of the
    challenges and questions associated with these four initiatives
    and is working to address them. Because of their interrelated
    nature, shortcomings in any one area could impact the success
    of the others and thus put estimated cost savings and the
    accuracy of the count at risk.
        Going forward, it will be important to ensure the research
    and testing for these initiatives continue as planned to inform
    key design decisions later this year.
        This concludes my prepared remarks, and I will be happy to
    answer any questions that you may have.
        Senator Lankford. Thank you.
        Ms. Cha.

         TESTIMONY OF CAROL R. CHA,\1\ DIRECTOR OF INFORMATION
       TECHNOLOGY ACQUISITION MANAGEMENT ISSUES, U.S. GOVERNMENT
                         ACCOUNTABILITY OFFICE

        Ms. Cha. I would like to express my thanks to you, Senator
    Lankford, to Chairman Johnson, Ranking Member Carper, and
    Members of the Committee for inviting me to testify today.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \1\ The joint prepared statement of Ms. Cha and Mr. Goldenkoff
    appears in the Appendix on page 45.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        IT implementation will be a key factor in whether the
    Bureau will be able to adequately contain the costs for 2020.
    The Bureau's past efforts have not always gone well. Our work
    on the 2010 Census highlighted the mismanagement and major
    cost, schedule, and performance issues associated with several
    critical IT investments, one of which was intended as a cost-
    savings measure but instead increased the costs of the Census
    by up to $3 billion.
        For 2020, the Bureau will rely on an enterprisewide IT
    initiative called ``CEDCaP'' to deliver the systems and IT
    infrastructure needed to carry out its cost-savings
    initiatives.
        For example, CEDCaP is planning to deliver the online
    survey instrument and a cloud computing solution to support an
    Internet response option. For field reengineering, the program
    is planning to implement a new system to track and manage field
    work. It will also test the use of mobile devices, either
    government-issued or employee-owned, for field data collection.
        Recent estimates put the program's cost at about $548
    million through 2020. Given the Bureau's prior and existing
    challenges, we highlighted CEDCaP as part of a new entry onto
    this year's GAO high-risk list as one of a handful of major IT
    investments in need of the most attention, and we plan to
    initiate an in-depth review for this Committee later this year
    on CEDCaP.
        Based on our work to date, I would like to highlight two
    key challenges this afternoon regarding the Bureau's IT plans
    for 2020.
        First, the time constraints. September's decision is
    expected to drive the business requirements for CEDCaP's
    systems and infrastructure. This milestone, which has already
    been delayed by a year, cannot afford to slip further. However,
    as we reported earlier this year, the Bureau had not yet
    addressed how two critical inputs into this decision would be
    addressed. These inputs relate to the Internet self-response
    rate and the IT infrastructure security and scalability needs.
    And if they are not adequately addressed by September, it could
    lead to system rework downstream, eating into an already narrow
    schedule margin.
        By October 2018, the Bureau intends to begin end-to-end
    testing to validate that CEDCaP's systems are ready to go live
    on Census Day. This gives the Bureau roughly 3\1/2\ years to
    develop and integrate planned systems, which may seem like a
    lot of time but is not based on past performance, and a lack of
    experience implementing technologies at the scale of the 2020.
        The October 2018 milestone date is a prudent one for
    planning purposes. If this date slips to the right and system
    testing is compressed, then we very well could have another
    HealthCare.gov on our hands.
        In order to decrease the risk of system rework downstream
    and protect the October testing date, the Bureau should fully
    implement the recommendations we made to ensure that this
    September's decision will be adequately informed.
        The second key challenge is the Bureau's current IT
    posture. The Bureau has made important progress to strengthen
    and institutionalize IT governance and requirements management,
    and as a result, the Bureau is better positioned to manage and
    oversee its IT investments than in prior decennials. However,
    more work is needed to address critical IT workforce gaps and
    information security deficiencies.
        In particular, the Bureau does not have the requisite
    competencies in enough numbers to meet IT workforce needs.
    These skills gaps include systems engineering, IT security,
    cloud computing, and Internet data collection, to name a few.
        To the Bureau's credit, it is aggressively working to close
    these gaps. However, if they do remain open, the Bureau's
    ability to deliver CEDCaP effectively will be hampered.
        In addition, the Bureau does not yet have a comprehensive
    information security program, something we first reported on in
    January 2013. Among other things, the Bureau had not
    effectively implemented appropriate access controls to protect
    its systems from intrusion. For example, the Bureau did not
    adequately encrypt Title 13 data in transmission and at rest,
    nor did it use secure protocols to manage its IT
    infrastructure, which placed sensitive data such as
    administrative user accounts and passwords at risk of
    compromise. As a result, we made 115 recommendations to address
    these control deficiencies. As of today, the Bureau has fully
    addressed 19 of them.
        Given that the Bureau is considering using IT systems to
    collect the public's personal information in ways that have not
    been used in the prior decennial, implementing our security
    recommendations must be a high priority.
        In summary, while the Bureau is in a stronger position to
    manage its IT investments than in the 2010 Census, it is also
    starting development work much later in the decade. The margin
    for error is slim. And the current workforce and information
    security gaps add significant risk to the 2020 Census. Moving
    forward, swift actions to fully implement our open
    recommendations must be taken. Doing so will improve the
    Bureau's ability to deliver on its IT plans and realize cost
    savings.
        That concludes my statement, and I look forward to
    addressing your questions.
        Senator Lankford. Thank you, all of you.
        And as promised, Senator Carper is here and will give an
    opening statement.

                  OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR CARPER

        Senator Carper. Thanks so much, Mr. Chairman. What I would
    really like to do is get right into the questions. It is nice
    of you to yield to me.
        I would say that I would like to ask that my statement be
    made part of the record,\1\ unless one of my colleagues
    objects.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \1\ The prepared statement of Senator Carper appears in the
    Appendix on page 35.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Senator Lankford. Without objection.
        Senator Carper. All right. Good.
        Just very briefly, we have been doing this for 200-and-some
    years--not us here. We have not been in the Senate that long.
    But we have had Senators interested in trying to get a good
    Census and trying to do it in a cost-effective way.
        A lot of people think that we in Washington cannot organize
    and run a good three-car funeral procession. And we have a
    great opportunity here to demonstrate, by careful planning,
    smart funding, good oversight, that we can do some amazing
    things with the technology and the tools and the people that we
    have. It is just really imperative that we deliver. And this
    oversight hearing today is in part designed to make sure that
    you can deliver and that we will be proud of the work that is
    done in the next 5 years.
        Thank you.
        Senator Lankford. Thank you.
        Let me address just a few questions, and then we will
    continue moving through questions here on the dais as people
    arrived.
        Mr. Thompson, you had mentioned that there are some things
    you need to talk to Congress about, about vacant units. Is
    there something you are needing from Congress directly,
    clarification or statutory changes?
        Mr. Thompson. Thank you, Senator. There is, but let me
    clarify my statement first. So in collecting the information
    from our non-responding households to the Census, we are
    testing ways in which we can use administrative records to
    enumerate occupied housing units instead of direct in-person
    enumeration. And we want to make sure that we are on the same
    page as the Congress in terms of taking this step, if we should
    propose to take this step.
        Now, with regard to help from the Congress, there is a data
    set--it is called the National Directory of New Hires (NDNH)--
    and it is maintained at the Department of Health and Human
    Services (HHS), and it would help us greatly in our program,
    and we would need some legislative changes to have access to
    that file.
        Senator Lankford. OK. What other data do you need here?
    Obviously there are multiple different databases between the
    IRS, Social Security, Department of Labor (DOL); HHS has it,
    you have it. There are lots of data sets around there. I guess
    the question for me initially would be: Which particular data
    sets do you want to be able to use? And, second, are any of
    these agencies charging Commerce to be able to have access to
    that data?
        Mr. Thompson. Thank you. So you have named some of the data
    sets that we already have access to. We are also in the process
    of acquiring the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program
    (SNAP) records State by State and the Women, Infants, and
    Children (WIC) program records so we can put these together in
    a very private way, protecting privacy, and using them and
    research them as we proceed with the Census.
        We are not being charged by the other agencies for these
    data sets. In fact, the Secretary of Commerce has great
    authority to ask for these records in conducting the job of
    carrying out the Census.
        Senator Lankford. OK. We had an extensive conversation here
    at this same Committee room just a couple of weeks ago about
    the Death Master File (DMF), and that we have about 6.5 million
    people that are listed in our systems right now that are over
    114 years old, I believe--112? Excuse me. A lot younger than
    that, 112 years old, when we actually think there are less than
    two dozen in the United States. So we have some problems in
    those data sets that are out there. How are you going to try to
    address that to make sure we do not get individuals into the
    system that are not really alive anymore?
        Mr. Thompson. Part of our research program, is to look at
    which records can be effective and in which combinations of
    records that link together. So we do need to do an extensive
    research program to feel comfortable before we use
    administrative records. And we are looking at those very things
    right now.
        Senator Lankford. OK. That is one of the aspects that we
    will need to resolve, both how that is resolved within Census
    and then obviously we would like to know that information so we
    can get a chance to share that with other entities within the
    Federal Government, because as I mentioned, with the Death
    Master File, that has extensive millions of names on it that
    are no longer with us anymore. We have to be able to resolve
    that.
        Mr. Goldenkoff, you have a very interesting statement,
    which I have read and seen multiple times before. If we can put
    all of these different aspects into place, all these different
    innovations, we could save $5 billion. And so by saving $5
    billion, we would spend the same as we did last time.
        Now, if I sold you a pizza for $10 and said I am going to
    sell you the next one for--I am going to save $5 for you, and
    it is going to be the same cost, I am not sure you would think
    that was a savings. So I am working through the math here
    between how we save $5 billion, yet we do it for the same cost
    as we did last time.
        Mr. Goldenkoff. Well, part of it is a unit cost, roughly
    $100 per housing unit. So you would expect to see some cost
    increase because the population----
        Senator Lankford. Right, because of the number of people.
        Mr. Goldenkoff. Exactly. The workload is more. So that is
    why we look at the unit cost, and it works out roughly the
    same, about $100 per housing unit.
        Senator Lankford. Is there a way to be able to save unit
    cost, that the unit cost goes down? Or are we tapped out? I
    think it is $97, the last stat that I saw, per person to be
    able to do this. Is there a way to be able to save money per
    unit cost rather than saying we had a growing population, we
    assume it still costs $97 per person to do this.
        Mr. Goldenkoff. Well, there is always a cost-quality
    tradeoff. You can always conduct a count for less. The question
    is: How accurate is it going to be? And that is always--that
    has to be weighed. I mean, the Constitution requires that
    everybody be counted, and so that is the gold standard. And so
    because of the increasing complexities of counting everybody,
    the cost goes up from Census to Census. The Census Bureau needs
    to work harder each decade just to stay in place.
        Senator Lankford. So going back to something Ms. Cha
    mentioned before, in 2010 we had a $3 billion process of
    innovation that came through. I think that was dealing with the
    handhelds--is that correct?--is what it circled around.
        Ms. Cha. That is correct.
        Senator Lankford. So a $3 billion cost. A $13 billion
    program really cost $10 billion because we had a $3 billion
    program that ended up not being fully implemented and we lost
    there. So what I am trying to figure out is we save $5 billion,
    however we are still at basically the same cost as we did last
    time per person, and we had a $3 billion failure last time.
        Mr. Goldenkoff. That is correct. And I also need to say
    that, GAO has not verified these cost estimates, so we are
    relying for now on the Bureau's estimates. We will probably be
    doing work in the future where we will look into the validity
    of those estimates.
        Senator Lankford. Is there a difference in the American
    Community Survey and the cost per person in that piece versus
    the every-10-year-Census piece, cost per person?
        Mr. Goldenkoff. I do not have that information.
        Senator Lankford. Mr. Thompson, do you happen to know that
    number, cost per person, the American Community Survey that we
    do every quarter basically?
        Mr. Thompson. I am sorry. I do not have that figure.
        Senator Lankford. Do you think it is higher or lower? Just
    a ballpark on that.
        Mr. Thompson. I think it is probably higher for the
    American Community Survey, somewhat.
        Senator Lankford. OK. I am going to keep going on
    questions, and I will come around for a second round here in
    just a moment. I will recognize Senator Carper, the Ranking
    Member, for the next set of questions.
        Senator Carper. Why don't I just go last? I would like to
    hear the others.
        Senator Lankford. OK.
        Senator Carper. Then I will just come in at the end. Thank
    you.
        Senator Lankford. Senator Ayotte, you came in next after
    that.

                  OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR AYOTTE

        Senator Ayotte. Thank you. Thank you all for being here.
        Here is what I wanted to understand. I know that you have
    taken steps to use commercial mapping information in putting
    together the proposal for the upcoming Census. And as I
    understand it, you are using portions of that commercial data
    to fill in gaps, but you still would be creating essentially
    your own product of the map that you need for this. What I
    wanted to understand is why we do not further use the
    commercial products that may be available. Why is the Request
    for Proposal (RFP) limited to filling in gaps rather than
    relying more heavily on commercial, already existing products
    where they already have? I know that their products may not be
    able to fully do this, but could do a significant amount of it.
    So what is the thinking there?
        Mr. Thompson. Well, thank you, Senator. We have been
    talking with a number of the companies in that field. We have
    an RFP, as you noticed.
        Senator Ayotte. Right.
        Mr. Thompson. We want to evaluate the quality of the
    materials that are available in the private sector and where
    they will work and save us from walking the ground where we
    intend to use them.
        We also will be having another RFP coming out soon which is
    going to be asking the private sector for services such as
    automated change detection and the like.
        So we are looking forward to seeing the responses to the
    RFP, and we are looking forward to using commercial data where
    it is available.
        Senator Ayotte. So couldn't commercial data be used in a
    much broader capacity than what your current RFP suggests?
        Mr. Thompson. I did not think that we were trying to limit
    the commercial data through the RFP process.
        Senator Ayotte. So are you open to--for example, if
    commercial data for mapping would get you--I am just using a
    number--90 percent there and you had to fill in the rest to
    complete your product, are you open to doing that?
        Mr. Thompson. Yes.
        Senator Ayotte. OK.
        Mr. Thompson. Yes.
        Senator Ayotte. It seems to me, I mean, so many of us use
    this data in so many capacities, and so always re-creating the
    wheel, this is a place where I know you are already taking
    important steps to do this, but we could save a lot of money
    for the public.
        Mr. Thompson. Yes.
        Senator Ayotte. I wanted to follow-up on some of the GAO
    findings. What are the issues that you are going to be able
    to--one of the big things, I think, that overlies all of this
    is transparency in costs and measuring and achieving savings.
    How do you think that you will meet the transparency goals so
    that we can actually understand how much we are paying for
    things in a much more open way so that when we have our
    oversight function we do not end up in a position where we are
    not having the right type of oversight?
        Mr. Thompson. Well, thank you. We are committed for this
    Census and the 2020 cycle to being very open and transparent
    with our methods. I think we have a good relationship with the
    GAO. We certainly hope that they will--and we know they will--
    look carefully at what we are doing.
        I should also note that once a quarter we have a project
    management review in a public way for the 2020 program, and we
    webcast it. We make it available and we want everyone to see
    how we are planning and what we are doing, and we are trying to
    be very transparent with that.
        Senator Ayotte. So, Ms. Cha, thank you for your testimony,
    and I think it is an eye opener for all of us when we hear
    potential analogies to HealthCare.gov, because obviously we all
    got an earful from our constituents and others over that
    rollout.
        What are the most significant steps that we could take in
    this Committee to make sure that, in fact, this IT procurement
    goes properly? One of the issues that we have I think overall
    in the government--it is not just unique to this. We are
    particularly bad at this. Throughout the government we have had
    numerous occasions where we have invested a lot in a particular
    system, and we have not ended up with the system that we hoped
    for or the costs went way over. So I just wanted to hear from
    your perspective. If you were sitting in our shoes, what would
    you think that we should do most to make sure that the warnings
    that you have given us do not occur?
        Ms. Cha. Well, Senator, your continued and sustained
    oversight of the 2020 Census and particularly the CEDCaP
    program will be vital. These large and complex IT modernization
    programs are challenging, and it is one of the reasons why we
    cited CEDCaP as part of a new GAO high-risk entry this year in
    terms of improving IT management governmentwide. These programs
    rarely meet cost schedule and performance goals, and we have an
    opportunity here. The train has not left the station. And so,
    when we look at CEDCaP and we look at the complexity and the
    risks associated with this program and you layer on top of that
    the key challenges that I identified in terms of the time
    constraints as well as the risks associated with the IT
    workforce gap and the information security control
    deficiencies, there is quite a bit of risk here. I think there
    is an imbalance.
        And so to the extent that that the Bureau can focus on
    implementing a simpler solution, that would, I think, set the
    Bureau up for success relative to IT.
        Senator Ayotte. So as I see it, I hear you saying that the
    solution they are proposing may be too complex to achieve
    during this period with the workforce that they have.
        Ms. Cha. That is correct.
        Senator Ayotte. And is there anything more we should be
    doing also on the workforce gap issue? Which, frankly, is
    something that we face across government agencies, because this
    is a highly competitive field.
        Ms. Cha. Well, again, it is that continued monitoring on
    your end. I do want to say that the Bureau is aggressively
    looking to close these gaps that they do have. However, if
    these gaps are not effectively closed, then I think the Bureau
    needs to, again, continue to identify ways to decrease the
    complexity of the CEDCaP initiative.
        Senator Ayotte. So my timing is up, but I would like to
    hear what your response would be to that about making this a
    simpler process so it could be easier to achieve.
        Mr. Thompson. Certainly, Senator. So I think I would coin a
    phrase from our Chief Information Officer (CIO), and it is
    something that worked very successfully in the 2000 Census when
    we did deliver our systems on time and on schedule, and that
    is, we are innovating but we are not inventing. So our plan is
    to use existing technology and existing expertise and innovate
    by using that intelligently.
        So, for example, we are going to be using a smartphone, but
    the smartphone already exists. We are not going to invent one
    like we tried to invent a handheld the last time.
        We are using optimized systems for our routing, but we are
    not building--those systems already exist, and a number of
    people have very good ones, including the United Parcel Service
    (UPS). So we are trying to take advantage of what is existing
    and not trying to invent new things.
        Senator Ayotte. Thank you.
        Senator Lankford. Senator Peters.

                  OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR PETERS

        Senator Peters. Thank you for being here and for your
    testimony. As Senator Carper mentioned, it is important to get
    this right, and certainly it is a monumental undertaking to be
    able to count every individual in this country, and this is not
    an easy task. I appreciate that. But it is a very important
    task that you undertake, particularly from a public policy
    standpoint, so that we can make sure folks are protected, have
    resources, allocations that are done properly, so my hat goes
    off to you.
        I represent an area in Michigan, however, that has a very
    large population of folks from the Middle East and from North
    Africa. Mr. Thompson, I sent a letter to you earlier this year
    with a couple of my colleagues talking about that issue and the
    fact that that classification is not part of the Census. And as
    you know, it can be problematic because if you are not on the
    Census, you do not have access to some voting rights
    protections, including access to ballots in your home language
    to be able to vote and exercise that right. Also, it is
    difficult for researchers if we do not have that type of Census
    information to understand potential health disparities that may
    exist in the Middle Eastern population in Michigan and other
    places around the country, as well as employment discrimination
    and a whole host of things that we need to look into, and this
    would provide accurate data.
        My understanding is that you are going to test that
    category for Middle Eastern descent as well as North African. I
    appreciate your prompt response to our letter a ways back, but
    I want to take this opportunity to get an update from you as to
    where you are. I know when you responded to my letter, you
    mentioned you were going to be reaching out to stakeholders in
    the spring and consulting with community leaders within that
    community to get some assessment as to how you would proceed.
    Could you give me an update, please, on where we stand on that
    and how you look to proceed?
        Mr. Thompson. Certainly. So we have been having ongoing
    discussions with various members of the Middle Eastern and
    North African community, and we are testing including that
    categorization as part of our race and ethnic questions, and
    that test will take place this fall.
        We are looking forward to having an expert meeting of
    various Middle Eastern and North African scholars this spring
    so that we can really come up with a definition, if you will,
    of Middle Eastern and North African that everyone agrees to so
    we can use that as part of how we explain it when we conduct
    the Census. So we are on track.
        Senator Peters. Well, that is good to hear. I appreciate
    that.
        Have you heard from any other Americans or other
    organizations about a lack of representation in the Census? Is
    this unique to Middle Eastern community, or are there others
    that you are working on?
        Mr. Thompson. In terms of the----
        Senator Peters. Classification.
        Mr. Thompson. Classification of Middle Eastern and North
    African. We have heard from other constituents on other aspects
    of the question, but for inclusion, it has been basically the
    Middle Eastern and North African.
        Senator Peters. So that is where your focus is, it is going
    to be on this going forward?
        Mr. Thompson. Yes.
        Senator Peters. Great. I have many constituents, as you can
    imagine, given the large size of our community in Michigan,
    that are very passionate about this, and I understand that you
    have received thousands of inquiries from the community. Have
    you been responding directly? Or how can I respond to my
    constituents as to how you are listening to them and the
    response that they will receive?
        Mr. Thompson. I think what you are referring to is a
    Federal Register notice we put out that announced our plans for
    this fall test, and we received well over a thousand
    recommendations that we include in that test the Middle Eastern
    and North African category. And we are responding by a comment
    to the Federal Register notice to those recommendations that we
    got.
        Senator Peters. OK.
        Mr. Thompson. Now, we will group them together because many
    recommendations said the same thing.
        Senator Peters. Right. So you will be summarizing that in
    the Register.
        Mr. Thompson. Yes.
        Senator Peters. And the folks we could refer them to that
    as well as get back----
        Mr. Thompson. Yes.
        Senator Peters. Well, I appreciate that. The other issue
    that I am concerned about deals with the homeless population. I
    know you are reaching out to folks who are not going to be at
    an address to count to make sure that they are represented. In
    fact, in Michigan, Washtenaw County is one of 71 communities
    that participates in Zero: 2016, which is a campaign to end
    veteran and chronic homelessness. And as a result of a recent
    survey that they did, they did show a 24-percent decline in the
    number of people living on the streets and in shelters, which
    is a good thing. But I am particularly concerned, as they are,
    with homeless veterans who may be out there, who have the
    ability and certainly the right to access benefits, but may not
    be aware of it.
        It seems to me having Census workers out finding people who
    are living on the street--and you have the staffing to do
    that--presents an opportunity, first, to identify those
    individuals, but also, two, present them with information that
    may be helpful to get them to a place where they can get the
    services that they have earned and they deserve.
        Could you talk a little bit about how you reach out to
    folks who are homeless living on the streets and if you would
    be in a position to help in our efforts to bring these folks
    out of the shadows and into the help that they deserve and
    need?
        Mr. Thompson. Senator, getting an accurate count of all
    Americans is our primary goal for 2020. We are right now at
    this point in the process of starting to look at how we will
    blend in operations on top of our automation and reengineering
    to count these populations. So, for example,
        I have a National Advisory Committee on Racial, Ethnic, and
    Other Populations, and we are starting a working group on that
    committee right now to start addressing these issues.
        We want to address these issues over the years ahead, but
    right now I do not have a proposal for how we are going to
    count the homeless and the veterans in 2020. But we do intend
    to have a plan for that, and we will share it widely.
        Senator Peters. When do you expect to have that plan?
        Mr. Thompson. I would have to get back to you. I would say
    by the end of next year we should have some significant
    progress on that.
        Senator Peters. Well, I would appreciate that, and if you
    could inform our office about that, I would appreciate that.
    And then the second step is that when we identify these
    individuals, it also is an opportunity to make sure that these
    individuals, particularly homeless veterans, that there are
    benefits that are available to them and places of refuge for
    them to go. Although it is a different mission than you have
    for your Census workers now because of certainly the concern
    about those who have served our country who may be homeless,
    this may be an opportunity for us to kind of take a whole-
    government approach to helping those individuals. I would hope
    you would be open to that as well.
        Mr. Thompson. Of course.
        Senator Peters. Thank you.
        Senator Lankford. Mr. Thompson, before I recognize Senator
    Carper, can I get a clarification? By the end of 2015 or by the
    end of 2016 you will have the plan for the homeless?
        Mr. Thompson. I was referring to the end of 2016.
        Senator Lankford. OK. So by the end of 2016, you will be
    able to have articulated a plan for that, for identifying the
    homeless and then doing a count there?
        Mr. Thompson. Yes.
        Senator Lankford. Great. Thank you. Senator Carper.
        Senator Carper. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Mr. Thompson, it is very nice to see you, and Mr.
    Goldenkoff, Ms. Cha. I love saying your name.
        This is not your first opportunity to be involved at a
    senior level for the Census. Is that correct, Mr. Thompson?
        Mr. Thompson. That is correct, Senator. I was the career
    person in charge of the 2000 Census.
        Senator Carper. OK. Just thinking back on your tenure with
    the Census Bureau, share with us some of the insights or things
    you have learned in this tour as our Director that are new and
    that you did not know before and how might they direct us as we
    try to get a better result for less money?
        Mr. Thompson. Well, Senator, you are hitting on the reason
    that I came back into public service. When I left the
    government in 2002 and went to the private sector, I had no
    intention of coming back into government. But I could not
    foresee just the way that technology had developed and offered
    a lot of opportunities to do the Census fundamentally
    differently than we had done it before. And that got me excited
    to come back into government and help the Census Bureau move
    forward.
        Senator Carper. When you watched back in 2010, or actually
    the run-up to 2010, when they were trying to develop the
    handheld, and rather than get something off the shelf, actually
    develop and build and invent it, as you said, invent it
    ourselves, what did you think as you watched that unfold?
        Mr. Thompson. I was very disappointed that that happened,
    that that event happened. I was fairly close to it. I was on a
    panel that Secretary Carlos Gutierrez called together to give
    him a recommendation on how to proceed in the aftermath of the
    handheld contract issues. I was just disappointed and sorry for
    the Census Bureau. I wish I could have been there, but I was
    not.
        Senator Carper. My recollection was this is when Dr. Coburn
    and I were taking turns leading the Subcommittee on Federal
    Financial Management that had jurisdiction over the Census. And
    it seems to me we went through a period of time where we had a
    fair amount of churning in terms of leadership at the Census.
    Is that correct? I think we had someone who was Acting
    Director, and then within the span of a couple years, we had
    maybe a couple of other people who were Acting Directors. We do
    not have that challenge anymore, do we?
        Mr. Thompson. Not right now.
        Senator Carper. That is right.
        Mr. Thompson. I am delighted to be the Director.
        Senator Carper. Because we have a law that actually says
    that the folks who are appointed in the job serve for 5 years,
    and the idea is that hopefully we will end up in a situation
    where we are not going to be in the throes or we are in the
    face of the Census and all of a sudden have turnover in
    leadership. My hope is that is going to serve us well.
        I am a guy who likes to think about incentives, how do we
    incentivize behavior to get better results, and I am real
    interested in root causes. We have a lot of people that are not
    interested in cooperating and being counted and providing
    information to the Census because of their right to privacy or
    they do not see any value for taking the time to either respond
    online or in person if somebody knocks on their door. They do
    not have an appreciation for the value of the information that
    we gain from the Census. They do not care how their
    Congressional districts are apportioned and all that.
        How do we incentivize people to be better citizens in this
    process? What are we doing, we collectively, to incentivize
    people to be better citizens in this regard? It is all great
    that we have the technology, we provide the money, the
    oversight, the funding. But how do we incentivize people?
    Collectively, how do we do that?
        Mr. Thompson. That is a very good question, Senator. We
    have started research on that issue already for the 2020
    Census. We have a test in the Savannah, Georgia, area, the
    Savannah, Georgia, media market, and we have already started to
    test different ways to reach out to the American public to
    encourage them to respond. And this is just the first in a
    series of tests, but we are starting this process much earlier
    than we did in the 2010 Census process.
        Senator Carper. OK.
        Mr. Thompson. But it is something that we have to conduct
    some research on because the population has changed. It is not
    the same population that we had in 2010.
        Senator Carper. All right. I agree with you. I thought that
    was a pretty good question, and I am going to ask you to think
    about your answer and respond to me on the record, because I
    think this is a big issue, and most people have not a clue of
    the value to our country, to their communities, of a Census
    done well.
        Let me also ask, one of my many favorite sayings is, ``Pay
    me now or pay me later.'' And I think that also applies with
    the President's budget request for 2016, and he is asking in
    his budget for the Census a bump-up in funding. Explain to us
    why that relates to pay me now or pay me later.
        Mr. Thompson. Certainly. So the biggest part of the bump-up
    is to start developing the systems and processes that we will
    use to take this reengineered Census, and it is a challenge
    because we have never done a Census this way before. We have
    never used handheld devices. We have never used the Internet as
    a self-response option for the Census. We have never used
    optimized routing. So there are a lot of gains through that.
    But we really have to do the work in 2016 and 2017 to have in
    place the system so that we can run a complete end-to-end test
    in 2018, and that would give us the assurance that we could
    avoid a bad situation, similar to what happened before.
        Senator Carper. OK. I have some more questions, and I will
    look forward to another round. It will give me a chance to pick
    on our other two witnesses. Do not go away.
        Senator Lankford. Thank you. We will open it up for
    questions here, and we will get a chance to go through as much
    as we can.
        Mr. Thompson, you had made a comment about identifiers and
    the Internet, as far as being able to follow-up. Can you
    complete that thought as well? If individuals go on to the
    Internet and they actually do their information, will they have
    an identifier there that is consistent so we will know who that
    was and have the consistency of that, as we would with a paper
    form?
        Mr. Thompson. Thank you, Senator. So let me be clear. What
    we are testing is in every Census to date, most of the
    enumeration required that an individual have either a Census
    questionnaire or an ID number that linked them to an address.
    What we are testing now is letting people respond with their
    address alone, and that has two issues that we have to feel
    comfortable with before we do it. One issue is we have to be
    able to validate their response as accurate. And the other
    issue is we know that in the past even we have had more than
    one response for the same address. And so we are going to have
    to be able to unduplicate the responses that we get. These are
    some challenging problems. We are working with experts in the
    field, including the National Institute of Standards and
    Technology, the MITRE Corporation, and some others.
        So we are taking this very seriously, and we need to be
    convinced that it will work. But if we can make it work, it
    does give us the opportunity to allow people to be counted when
    we reach them with a message if they do not have their
    questionnaire. So we think that the opportunity there is worth
    trying to do that. But as I said, we are testing it. We are
    going to have the results of our testing, and we are only going
    to implement it if we feel comfortable.
        Senator Lankford. So the assumption is that we would have a
    master list of every address in the United States, and if they
    pull up that particular address, they could fill out the
    information for that address, not that they are creating an
    address in the system. So there is some sort of verification
    even at the beginning if they are typing in an identifying
    address that we do not recognize as a real address.
        Mr. Thompson. Yes.
        Senator Lankford. OK. Ms. Cha, questions and thoughts about
    that? What are the risks involved?
        Ms. Cha. Well, in addition to the address verification,
    there is also the identity verification as well. So I just
    wanted to kind of round out that piece, these two key elements.
        On the former, it seems to be much more simple from a
    technology perspective to match the address that a respondent
    enters into the form and match that against the Master Address
    File (MAF). However, the concern that we have here is that it
    is unclear as to whether the Bureau knows exactly what it needs
    to know in time for its September 2015 decision. Again, that
    milestone decision is going to--it is intended to deliver the
    complete set of business requirements for the systems
    development piece.
        So if there is information regarding non-ID processing that
    is not contained in that decision, then ultimately it could
    lead to system rework downstream. So that is the primary
    concern that we have with regard to non-ID processing, just
    that the Bureau is--we are in year 5 at this time, and if
    continued testing in this area proceeds beyond September 2015,
    it will impact the systems that they are expecting to deliver
    and to deploy.
        Senator Lankford. Right. And you made extensive comments
    about cybersecurity issues and vulnerabilities. Your statement,
    if I remember correctly, access controls, you have 115
    recommendations of which 19 have actually been responded to at
    this point.
        Ms. Cha. That is correct.
        Senator Lankford. So what does that mean as far as your
    perception? At this point you would expect 115, 19 have been
    responded to. When would you anticipate the other 90-some-odd
    are going to be responded to?
        Ms. Cha. Well, we would like to see this be one of the top
    priorities for the Census Bureau. My understanding from my team
    is that the Bureau provided additional evidence late Friday
    afternoon, so my team will be looking at the progress that they
    have made in the remaining recommendations. And we are
    committed to working with the Bureau to ensure that they
    effectively close those out, because ensuring that the
    information that they are collecting is secured is of vital
    importance.
        Senator Lankford. Sure. Mr. Thompson, do you want to
    comment on any of that at this point?
        Mr. Thompson. Yes, Senator. My team is of the perspective
    that we have responded to all of the concerns. However, we have
    obviously not communicated that to our colleagues at the GAO,
    and I certainly intend to make sure we communicate that and we
    reach agreement as to which ones have been responded to, which
    ones have not, and what we have to do. And then I would be
    pleased to send a report back to you.
        Senator Lankford. Good. There has been great conversation
    in the last several years about the questions that are included
    or not included. There was a little bit of conversation in 2010
    over the issue of citizenship, as I am sure you will remember
    distinctly. Where do we stand on that conversation for 2020 as
    far as whether citizenship will be asked or are we going to get
    every single house, and then other questions that may change or
    that are being currently considered and when that list will get
    to us and we are evaluating these questions to be different
    than the previous 10 that were there, and when will we get a
    chance to take a look at those as well?
        Mr. Thompson. Senator, right now the citizenship question
    is on the American Community Survey. We have not received a
    request, because that is what determines the content of the
    Census, from those entities that have asked us to put that on
    there. So we have not received a request to put citizenship on
    the Census itself.
        Let me be clear about a couple things. In 2017, we will be
    submitting the topics that we plan to ask on both the Census
    and the American Community Survey to the Congress, and in 2018,
    we will be submitting the actual questions.
        Senator Lankford. OK. And let me ask about the American
    Community Survey. There has been a lot of consternation in
    Oklahoma, and I would assume in other States as well, about the
    nature of how it is collected if you do not respond to it. My
    office consistently gets calls from individuals saying someone
    is at their door, someone is parked outside. We have a single
    mom that is very uncomfortable that there is some guy outside
    in a car; they are knocking on the door consistently. All of
    those things to get the American Community Survey. How are we
    going to put this into a process that they understand this is a
    Federal Government that is working for them rather than a
    Federal Government that is stalking them? If they do not want
    to complete this, shifting that to a voluntary status, and so
    we can have some way that they do not feel like it is
    oppressive coming after them to be able to fill out the
    American Community Survey?
        Mr. Thompson. Thank you, Senator. I have heard the concerns
    about the American Community Survey. While it provides a wealth
    of very important information that is used by the Federal
    Government to allocate funds by State and local governments and
    by businesses to create jobs, we understand that there are
    concerns with the length of the American Community Survey and
    with the perception that the language on the envelope which
    says your response is required by law is offsetting. So we have
    embarked on a program to look at how we can address these
    concerns, and we are doing a number of things. We are looking
    to see if we can make the questionnaire shorter by asking some
    questions every other year if the data is not needed on an
    annual basis.
        Senator Lankford. There is some publicly available data as
    well that we seem to replicate.
        Mr. Thompson. Right. And we are also looking to see if we
    can use administrative data records to answer some of the
    questions on the form. We are looking at how we can increase
    our messaging, change our messaging to be more of a
    communicator, why it is so important that you fill it out, what
    it means to your community. And we are also beginning a program
    to test the language that we put on the envelope. So this May,
    we are running the test. That is next month. We are doing a
    test to measure the effect of not putting that language on the
    envelope so we can see what the effect is. So we are taking
    these concerns very seriously. The Secretary of Commerce is
    very attuned to this. I am providing a report to her at the end
    of this fiscal year, and she expects to see some significant
    progress in this area.
        Senator Lankford. Well, surely you can understand someone
    that shows up on your doorstep repetitively with a badge
    saying, ``I would like to ask you: What time do you leave for
    work? How many people are in your house? How many toilets do
    you have in your house?'' those questions immediately raise red
    flags for a lot of Americans. They do not want to answer it.
    But they also cannot make this person go away, which is why our
    office gets calls to say, ``Why is this person here? Why won't
    they go away? I have told them no, but yet they just keep
    coming at me.''
        So it is not just the nature of the questions, the length
    of the questions, the type of questions. It is the treatment of
    the individual that is at their door and the repetitive push
    for them. So there is a whole series of issues there. I
    understand the information is valuable, but there are a lot of
    issues that are still there in the American Community Survey
    that we have to resolve, and I am glad to hear that--you said
    this testing is in May. When will we get results from this?
        Mr. Thompson. I do not know exactly, but we do not intend
    to take that long to get it out.
        Senator Lankford. OK. So give me an example: By December?
        Mr. Thompson. Oh, definitely by December.
        Senator Lankford. OK. So this year, this summer? Into the
    summer?
        Mr. Thompson. I would hope so. But I do not want to commit
    to it, but we will definitely have it by December, probably
    much sooner than that.
        Senator Lankford. OK. Thank you. Senator Carper.
        Senator Carper. Before I move away from the American
    Community Survey, let us say if my household were one of those
    chosen in Delaware for the completion of the survey, is the
    first notification that we have been selected somebody knocking
    on my door? What would precede that?
        Mr. Thompson. The first thing you would see would be a
    postcard notifying you that you have been selected for the
    survey in the mail.
        Senator Carper. And then what?
        Mr. Thompson. And then you would get a letter asking you to
    respond by the Internet, and then you would get a questionnaire
    asking you to fill out the questionnaire and mail it back.
        At that point the next step would be if we had a telephone
    number for you, we would call the telephone number. The next
    step would be then we would send a person to visit you in
    person.
        Senator Carper. OK. Is there any time during that process
    we somehow convey to people why this is important for them to
    do it, to respond?
        Mr. Thompson. Senator, we do do that, but I think that
    there is room for us to improve on that. For example, we have
    already had one training of our entire field staff on how to
    approach households, and we are going to be doing additional
    trainings in this area. We need to do a better job of
    communicating to the American public why this survey is so
    valuable to them and why----
        Senator Carper. Just to keep in mind maybe what I hope we
    already do this, but whether it is in the postcard or whether
    it is in something that folks get over the Internet or
    something that people get in writing saying, ``You are going to
    get a survey,'' just to be able to say in a very short few
    words why this is important, without a whole lot of verbiage.
        I want to sort of refocus for a little bit, if we could,
    and talk about cybersecurity. Ms. Cha, we are going to get you
    in the act here. Let me just ask, what do you believe needs to
    be done with respect to cybersecurity, on the cybersecurity
    front, as we prepare for the 2020 Census?
        Ms. Cha. First and foremost, it has to be addressing the
    115 recommendations that we have made relative to those control
    deficiencies. Again, as I mentioned to Senator Lankford, access
    controls in particular are of vital importance in
    strengthening, because those regulate who and what is accessing
    the Bureau's systems. And so, as the Bureau is exploring these
    methods to collect data out in the field, including, using
    personally owned devices or government-issued devices, it is
    going to be critical for the Bureau to secure those back-end
    systems to make sure that the information is properly secure.
        In addition, if they are expanding the use of
    administrative records, they are also going to have to shore up
    the controls there to ensure that that information is
    adequately protected.
        So addressing our 115 recommendations made is the top
    priority.
        Senator Carper. 115? That sounds like a lot.
        Ms. Cha. Well, actually, it is a little lower since the
    Bureau at this time has addressed 19 of them, so roughly 20
    percent.
        Senator Carper. OK. You have already talked a little bit
    about this today, I think, Mr. Thompson. Would you just kind of
    think out loud again for us on the cyber front? As we sit here,
    folks from all over the world are hacking into government
    systems trying to steal our intellectual property, identifiable
    information, and it is a huge challenge for us. What can you
    tell us that would make us think that we are up to this
    challenge?
        Mr. Thompson. Yes. So we have a multi-layered system to
    protect information. We limit the access to our systems. Within
    our program we have ways to control who can access the data. We
    encrypt all of our individual data when it is at rest, so, for
    example, our philosophy is that if we have data on a machine,
    we assume the machine can be compromised and, therefore, we
    have to protect and encrypt the data.
        We have some very sophisticated ways that we look at the
    Internet traffic that moves in and out of the Census Bureau. We
    work with the Department of Homeland Security on that
    detection. We also scan all of our outgoing traffic to make
    sure there is no personal information in it.
        But having said that, and we do want to get straight with
    the GAO on the 119 recommendations because we take that very
    seriously, and we want to be in compliance with those because
    that is the kind of practices that we need, and we will get to
    the bottom of that.
        Senator Carper. Let me just ask a question. Of the 115
    minus 19--what is that, 96--outstanding, are some more
    important than others? I presume they are.
        Ms. Cha. Yes, and the access controls-related
    recommendations are of the utmost priority.
        Senator Carper. What Ms. Cha just said, is that something
    that rings a bell, access controls?
        Mr. Thompson. I believe we have addressed that. But, again,
    I need to get with our people and her people and make sure that
    what we think is addressed is what the GAO thinks is addressed,
    because I would rely on them and their final say on that.
        Senator Carper. OK. Let me ask you about hard-to-count
    populations. We talked about this already, but it is certainly
    one of the most challenging jobs in the Census and also one of
    the most expensive, a real cost driver. Maybe what we learned
    from the last couple of times out, 2000, 2010, about counting
    hard-to-count populations, one of the ideas I floated, I guess
    in the run-up to 2010, was maybe we could have--in terms of
    incentivizing people, to find ways to really say, ``I would
    love to''--``I cannot wait to respond to the Census because
    this is what I will get out of it.'' We threw out ideas for
    lotteries where people could have their name--if they were
    early responders, they could be in a lottery, just all kinds of
    ideas. But hard-to-count populations, people who do not want to
    be counted, people who do not want you to know they are there,
    folks who maybe because they are undocumented, or maybe because
    they are parole violators, how do we get some of those people
    to come out of the shadows?
        Mr. Thompson. So one of the most important ways that we
    have found to help count those populations is through a program
    that we call ``local partnership,'' and that is where during
    the decennial census we have a number of individuals that we
    identified that have local ties to communities, they are
    trusted voices in the community, and by working with these
    people, giving them materials about why the Census is important
    to their community in particular, not just in general but to
    particular communities, we have seen gains in the 2000 Census
    and the 2010 Census in reducing the differential undercount
    between minority and non-minority populations. So we are seeing
    those gains. It is not perfect, but it does show that the more
    we can reach out on the local level with trusted voices to
    convince people to be counted, that works and pays big
    dividends. And that is something else we are starting to work
    on at this point in the decade.
        Senator Carper. Good. All right. Thanks. Thanks so much.
        Mr. Chairman, if we have another round, I have a few more
    questions.
        Senator Lankford. Go ahead.
        [Pause.]
        Senator Carper. Mr. Goldenkoff and Ms. Cha, what is next
    for GAO's oversight for the 2020 Census? Give us a look ahead.
        Mr. Goldenkoff. Our focus is on the operational aspects and
    the cost-savings estimates, so we are going to be looking at
    these other four cost-savings initiatives that Director
    Thompson mentioned. We have ongoing work that is looking at the
    Census Bureau's use of administrative records. That report will
    be out in a couple of months. After that, we will be looking at
    the Census Bureau's use of targeted address canvassing, and we
    also expect to look at the Census Bureau's cost estimates, and
    we will try and validate them. Right now they are estimates,
    but we do not know what is behind them.
        Senator Carper. Ms. Cha.
        Ms. Cha. In addition to that, Senator Carper, we will be
    starting a review for this Committee with regards to the CEDCaP
    initiative, and we will be starting that later this year,
    roughly in the October timeframe. So that is going to be very
    critical because we will know early on whether or not the
    quality of the September 2015 decision is good or not in terms
    of the completeness of the business requirements, again,
    because having a full, comprehensive set of business
    requirements is critical to informing the system development
    work downstream.
        Senator Carper. Why don't each of you give us--we have
    already heard you in response to other questions talk a little
    bit about this. But if you were sitting up here with us and you
    wanted to make darn sure that we got a good Census at a
    reasonable price, what are the one or two things that you would
    do if you were in our shoes to make sure that that happened so
    that it would not be on us and we would have better met our
    responsibilities? Ms. Cha, why don't you go first? You look
    like a potential Senator.
        Ms. Cha. Well, I think going back to my response to Senator
    Ayotte, with regards to the complexity of the CEDCaP initiative
    itself, I think based on the risk that the Bureau currently has
    relative to IT acquisition, it would behoove them to look at
    whether there are simpler ways to go about acquiring the CEDCaP
    initiative. It is quite ambitious, and, again----
        Senator Carper. There are people who might be watching this
    on television or listening, and they would say, ``What is
    CEDCaP? '' Could you just explain it in terms that people might
    understand?
        Ms. Cha. Yes. It is the enterprisewide IT initiative that
    will deliver the systems and the infrastructure to support the
    2020 Census. So it is a collection of roughly 14 projects and
    multiple systems beneath those projects. So it is a large and
    complex IT modernization program, and it is critical that the
    risks that we have identified with regards to the time
    constraints as well as their IT posture in general, that those
    risks inform the decisions about IT that they will be making in
    September in terms of what is actually realistic and viable for
    2020.
        Senator Carper. All right. Same question. Mr. Goldenkoff,
    please.
        Mr. Goldenkoff. I would hold the Bureau accountable for
    meeting costs and scheduled milestones. If you look at where
    the 2000 Census went off the track and the 2010 Census went off
    the track, past experience has shown that the Census Bureau
    either runs out of time or runs out of money. So the best way
    to make sure that the Census Bureau is on track is regularly
    checking in with them and monitoring whether they are meeting
    their cost milestones and their schedule milestones. And that
    is the early indication that things are going off the rails.
        Senator Carper. All right. Director Thompson, if you were
    Senator Thompson and this was Director Lankford, what would you
    make sure we get done?
        Mr. Thompson. I would rather comment in a different way.
        Senator Carper. OK.
        Mr. Thompson. We are putting some things in place to try to
    minimize the risk, because you can never be sure. So, for
    example, the document we are producing this fall, the 2020
    Census Operational Plan, and it will be 3 years earlier than we
    issued an operational plan for the 2010 Census. So we are
    getting an early start on it.
        We have in place an active risk management framework (RMF)
    and risk management process where we constantly identify major
    risks, and we constantly look at how we can find contingencies
    for those risks. We would be happy to share that with the
    Committee so you can feel comfortable that we are looking at
    the right risks.
        In terms of the enterprise IT systems, we do not argue with
    the GAO that it is a high-risk system because we are developing
    new processes. But I can assure you that this is getting full
    attention from the Department of Commerce. The Department of
    Commerce CIO is fully engaged with this program and with our
    CIO on the program. In fact, he is running an independent
    verification and validation (IV&V) process on the program. So
    he is taking it very seriously, too. The whole Department of
    Commerce has this as one of their priorities, and success is
    one of the priorities of the Department of Commerce.
        Senator Carper. Good. Mr. Chairman, I have one more. Do we
    have----
        Senator Lankford. Sure.
        Senator Carper. In my old job as Governor, when we were
    wrestling with a problem in Delaware, trying to figure out how
    to deal with a challenge, sometimes in a Cabinet meeting I
    would say to my Cabinet, ``Some other Governor in some other
    State has dealt with this issue. They figured out how to deal
    with it in an appropriate way successfully. What we have to do
    is find that State, that Governor, whoever worked on this issue
    in another State, and find out: Did it really work? Is their
    solution transferable to us in Delaware?''
        We are not the only nation grappling with doing a Census,
    and we are not the only nation grappling with doing it in a
    more cost-effective way. Who are some other countries that we
    are learning from? What are we learning from them?
        Mr. Thompson. We regularly work with other countries like
    the United Kingdom, Canada, Australia, and share our progress;
    we share our problems. We have an ongoing dialogue about what
    works, what does not work.
        So, for example, Canada has been using the Internet as a
    response option before we have, so we have been working with
    the Statistics Canada people to understand what they have
    learned that is both good and not good in terms of how to
    implement an Internet self-response option. But we do have
    active discussions going on with our fellow countries.
        Senator Carper. Could you give us just maybe one example, a
    clear, easy-to-understand example of something that we have
    learned in this back-and-forth with other nations, maybe the
    ones you mentioned, maybe others, say this is what we learned
    from Canada, this is what we learned from Britain that we are
    going to be doing differently this cycle?
        Mr. Thompson. Well, I think there were two things with
    Canada. One thing was that the Internet can be a very
    successful way to get responses in on a very timely basis, and
    Canada has had great success in using the Internet as a primary
    response option.
        The other thing we have learned from Canada is that if you
    are not cautious about how you word the equivalent of the
    American Community Survey and the messaging on that, you can
    lose a lot of data quality. At the last minute Canada had to
    make their survey voluntary in 2011, and they did not have much
    time to work on it, and they lost a lot of data quality and
    were not able to publish a lot of the data from their
    equivalent to the American Community Survey. So those are two
    examples of some things that we have learned.
        Senator Carper. Good. Thanks.
        Thanks, Mr. Chairman.
        Senator Lankford. One other thing I would just ask you to
    submit for the record is the controls and how you are going to
    handle staff for 2020, background checks, citizenship status,
    and such for actual Census takers and Census staff, so when
    that is settled and resolved. Do you have a good idea of when
    you are going to set those parameters?
        Mr. Thompson. Right now, our intention is to use similar
    processes in terms of fingerprinting and validation as we did
    before. However, there is still an active class action suit on
    that issue, and so we are awaiting the outcome of that, and I
    do not have an estimate of when that suit may be resolved.
        Senator Lankford. OK. So the assumption is to use basically
    the same standards as the last time, pending this class action
    suit.
        Mr. Thompson. Yes.
        Senator Lankford. OK. Then we will follow-up from there.
        Going back to the American Community Survey again, is there
    anything on the American Community Survey that is not publicly
    available from other places or from other survey teams? I
    understand our every-10-year Census, that one is
    constitutionally mandated. The American Community Survey is
    not. And so what I am looking for are some of the efficiencies
    that are there of cost. What data can we buy at less
    expensive--you are saying if it is $97 a person for a main
    Census but you think it is more for the American Community
    Survey, is there a company we can buy this same information
    from for $50 apiece and save us half the money? That is what I
    want to try to figure out and to see do we need to gather this
    data this way from Census, or is there a more efficient way to
    do that? And I would be interested to know if GAO has examined
    that in the past.
        So, Mr. Thompson, if you want to just be able to address
    just some of the other resources that are out there that are
    publicly available that may already be there. I am sure you are
    talking about that with your questions, and then other places
    and efficiencies.
        Mr. Thompson. So, Senator, we are looking right now as we
    speak at what resources are available to supplement or remove
    some of the questions on the American Community Survey and
    getting them from other places. I must say, though, having run
    a business myself, my efforts in running the business were,
    trying to keep the business in business and to grow the
    business. And so I was not motivated to form a comprehensive
    data series for the entire United States. I was looking at
    where my data was most important to my business.
        Senator Lankford. Right.
        Mr. Thompson. And so that is why it would be very difficult
    to get from the business community a comprehensive data set for
    all parts of the United States.
        That being said, we are certainly looking to use existing
    information in lieu of asking people that information.
        Senator Lankford. Right. So my question is: There are
    businesses that do this kind of investigation all the time,
    this kind of research. You are right, they are not trying to
    comprehensively touch on every single area, but if we are able
    to say to them, ``We want to buy your data. It has to include
    this,'' they already have half the data, they could gather the
    other half and probably half the cost for us as well. I am
    trying to figure out how do we get below $100 apiece to be able
    to ask a set of questions when everyone who does surveys--and
    maybe I am missing it, but I do not know of another survey that
    costs as much as that one does to be able to do it. I
    understand the unique parameters that we have with every
    household, every street. That is different. It is like U.S.
    Mail has a different set of cost parameters than FedEx does
    because it is every house, every day, every street. I get that.
    But I am trying to find are there other ways. Has GAO examined
    something like that in the past?
        Mr. Goldenkoff. Not a very detailed analysis. We have not
    gone question by question. What we have looked at is the
    availability of some of the data in other Federal surveys and
    other Federal data, and it really varies. In some cases there
    really is no substitute for the ACS data because it really gets
    data down to a very low level of geography, and sometimes that
    is needed for some of the requirements. Some of it goes back to
    statute. Some statutes require that the data come from the
    Census. In other cases, it is just the best data available for
    that need, and so it is more for administrative purposes.
        So this is something that the Census Bureau has to look at,
    go item by item and see what are the alternatives and what is
    the cost-benefit, again, balancing that cost-accuracy tradeoff.
        Senator Lankford. Right. But has GAO taken a look before
    about private entities doing this if we paid them--again, if we
    are at $100 a survey, are there entities that would gather the
    same amount of data----
        Mr. Goldenkoff. No, we have not----
        Senator Lankford [continuing]. For less cost? Again, we
    have a difference between the American Community Survey, the
    Census between the Census, and the actual Census. We have a
    constitutional mandate for the actual Census every 10 years.
    This one is supplementary data that helps us, but it is not the
    same constitutional mandate, does not have to be done by a
    government entity, but is useful to us.
        Mr. Goldenkoff. We have not looked into that, no.
        Senator Lankford. OK. Well, that may be one that we try to
    follow-up on in the days ahead and try to find the most
    efficient way to be able to gather this so that we have good
    data and information, but we do not lose in cost.
        Senator Carper, any additional questions?
        Senator Carper. Just one. I do not recall whether you are
    married or not, Director Thompson, but every now and then our
    spouses have a way of saying to us, ``Well, whatever plans we
    had for the rest of our career, you can forget about that.''
    Every now and then, my wife--I do not know if it is tongue in
    cheek or not, but she will say, ``Somewhere down the line here,
    why don't we just put everything we have in storage and just go
    and travel around the world.'' And I say, ``OK. When do we have
    to do that?'' And so far she keeps letting me off the hook.
        But let us say you were married--maybe you are--and you get
    into 2016 and your spouse says, ``Everything we have, let us
    just put everything in storage and let us spend the next
    several years just traveling around the world.'' And, you are
    serving this 5-year term. We are grateful that you are doing
    it. But in order to maintain peace in the valley with your
    spouse, you declined the President's offer for another 5-year
    term. And so then we have to figure out how do we get a smooth
    handoff, how do we get a smooth handoff carrying up to the next
    Census.
        One of the reasons we have this 5-year term in law is to
    try to ensure we have a better transition. But there is nothing
    to ensure that you will want to stay beyond this at this time.
    Hopefully you will. But what else are we doing to ensure a
    smooth handoff of the Census? I think this is premature, but
    what else are we doing and should we be doing to make sure
    that, whether you stay or do not, we have that smooth handoff?
        Mr. Thompson. Well, thank you, Senator. So there are some
    things that are certain, and one is that my term ends December
    31, 2016, the term I am currently in. Then there will be
    another term, which I could be reappointed for or not. But
    there are a lot of things that are going to happen between now
    and then, including a Presidential election, that I have no
    control over.
        So what I am focusing on is putting in place the best plan
    for implementing the 2020 Census that I can by the end of my
    term so that the Census Bureau has good guidance. That is
    something I can control.
        I also need to say that the Department of Commerce is being
    very supportive of me in that effort. So that is what I am
    doing.
        Senator Carper. During an earlier administration, I felt we
    were at a point where we were really struggling with the
    Census. We reached a point where I felt that there was the kind
    of engagement from the Secretary of Commerce that we needed.
    And you mentioned a couple of times the involvement of the
    Secretary and the Secretary's senior staff. Would you just
    characterize that again? Because I think it is really
    important.
        Mr. Thompson. Thank you. The Census Bureau has had
    tremendous support from the Office of the Under Secretary for
    Economic Affairs, they oversee the Census Bureau and the Bureau
    of Economic Analysis. We have had tremendous support from the
    Office of the Secretary and from the Secretary herself. I met
    with the Secretary periodically, and she wants to make sure
    that we are on track to do a good Census and how she can help
    me.
        And we have had tremendous support from the Office of
    Management and Budget, which has understood our needs and has
    been very helpful in defining those.
        So the Administration is behind conducting an accurate
    Census for 2020 and supporting the Bureau in moving forward.
        Senator Carper. Good.
        Mr. Chairman, it has been an encouraging hearing and an
    important one, and I am sorry all of our colleagues could not
    be here. On the question of the budget issue that we have
    raised and talked a little bit about for 2016, our Chairman is
    on the Budget Committee, and he has been out there
    participating, as you probably know, in a conference on the
    budget. So he is probably in there wrestling and trying to make
    sure we get this bump-up so that we will get a good Census in
    2020.
        Senator Lankford. While we are in here trying to make sure
    that we are protected from a $3 billion error.
        Senator Carper. There you go.
        Senator Lankford. Back and forth again. So thank you all
    for being here and what you bring to this. There is a
    tremendous gain for the entire Nation. It is a constitutionally
    mandated operation, and we are grateful for the service, and
    hopefully we can continue to work on efficiencies and bring
    down the cost per person and try to examine some efficiencies
    out of the box in the days ahead. So thanks. Good hunting on a
    lot of the testing and evaluation and things that are happening
    to us in the days ahead.
        The hearing record will remain open for 15 days until May
    the 5 at 5 p.m. for the submission of statements and questions
    for the record. Thank you all for being here.
        Senator Carper. Mr. Chairman.
        Senator Lankford. Yes, sir.
        Senator Carper. I want to again mention the name of
    Lawrence Buckner who was killed in the line of duty, I think
    about 11 days ago.
        Senator Lankford. Right.
        Senator Carper. I know his name was mentioned earlier.
        Senator Lankford. Yes, in the opening.
        Senator Carper. You and others extended your condolences to
    his family, but sometimes we talk about nameless, faceless
    bureaucrats in the Federal Government, and these are people, a
    lot of them, who work hard, work long hours, in some cases at
    great risk to themselves, and we remember him and thank him and
    other of his colleagues who do this dangerous work. Thank you.
        Senator Lankford. Entirely appropriate. Thank you again for
    the way you are taking care of them and their families.
        Thank you. This hearing is adjourned.
        [Whereupon, at 4:33 p.m., the Committee was adjourned.]

                                A P P E N D I X

                                  ----------

      [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

                                     [all]