[Federal Register Volume 69, Number 210 (Monday, November 1, 2004)]
[Notices]
[Pages 63355-63358]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 04-24294]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

Census Bureau


2005 National Census Test

ACTION: Proposed collection; comment request.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce, as part of its continuing effort 
to reduce paperwork and respondent burden, invites the general public 
and other Federal agencies to take this opportunity to comment on 
proposed and/or continuing information collections, as required by the 
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Pub. L. 104-13 (44 U.S.C. 
3506(c)(2)(A)).

DATES: Written comments must be submitted on or before January 3, 2005.

ADDRESSES: Direct all written comments to Diana Hynek, Departmental 
Paperwork Clearance Officer, Department of Commerce, Room 6625, 14th 
and Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20230 (or via the Internet 
at [email protected]).

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Requests for additional information or 
copies of the information collection instrument(s) and instructions 
should be directed to Edison Gore, U.S. Census Bureau, Building 2, Room 
2012, Washington, DC 20233-9200, (301) 763-3998.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

[[Page 63356]]

I. Abstract

    The 2005 National Census Test (NCT) is part of the research and 
development cycle leading up to the re-engineered 2010 Census. The NCT 
will help the U.S. Census Bureau achieve one of its Strategic Goals--
developing a census that is cost-effective, improves coverage, and 
reduces operational risk.
    The Objectives of the 2005 NCT include studying methods for:
     Improving completeness and accuracy of reporting for short 
form items.
     Reducing respondent and data capture errors.
     Making questionnaires more respondent friendly.
     Improving coverage accuracy.
     Improving the operational feasibility of a targeted 
mailing for replacement questionnaires.
     Improving self-response and maintaining data quality by 
mailing bilingual questionnaires.
    In conjunction with the 2005 NCT, the Census Bureau will conduct 
the 2005 Coverage Followup (CFU) operation. This operation is a 
continuation of the research and testing program begun in 2002 that is 
intended to develop and evaluate new procedures to improve coverage and 
reduce duplication. The CFU operation will collect data to evaluate the 
different versions of the coverage questions and different 
presentations of the residence rules instructions (See Definition of 
Terms). A separate Federal Register notice will be submitted for this 
operation.

Components of the Test

A. Control
    The Control questionnaire will include short-form topics from the 
Census 2000 questionnaire. The standard mailing strategy will be used 
for both the initial and replacement Control questionnaires. All 
wording changes in the control questionnaire that are different from 
the Census 2000 questionnaire reflect refinements based on the 2004 
Census Test questionnaire. The short form questions included in the 
Control questionnaire are currently considered to be the ``best'' 
version of each question. Our objective is to determine whether the 
experimental panels' question wording can improve the item response and 
data completeness over the control panel questions.
    The control questionnaire will use the Residence Rules Instructions 
(See Definition of Terms) tested in the Alternative Questionnaire 
Experiment (AQE) 2000 (See Definition of Terms). This design will serve 
as the control for some of the experimental treatments because the 
results of tests conducted during Census 2000 indicated that the 
residence rules instructions used in the AQE questionnaire yielded 
better quality data than did the Census 2000 questionnaire residence 
rules instructions. The changes in format, presentation, and wording of 
the residence rules instructions used in the AQE resulted in a 
significantly higher response to the household count question (an 
important indicator of missing data and a flag for large household 
followup). In addition, the AQE questionnaire also produced better data 
for Hispanics who were likely to be left off census forms.
    The Control Component includes four Self Response Option (SRO) 
treatments, each using the same form, content and initial questionnaire 
mailing strategy. Previous tests have shown that sending non-
respondents a replacement questionnaire significantly increases 
response rates. We will employ four variations of the traditional 
replacement mailing strategy.
     Two treatments are planned to test the operational 
feasibility of two different replacement questionnaire-packaging 
strategies. Since the questionnaires designed to be included in these 
treatments may also ``look'' different, we also need to evaluate the 
response to them.
     A third treatment is planned to test the effect of 
providing a letter encouraging respondents to send in their original 
questionnaire or respond via the Internet. Households in this panel 
will not receive a replacement questionnaire.
     The fourth treatment is planned to test whether using 
messaging on the replacement questionnaire (that distinguishes it from 
the initial questionnaire) will increase response rates as well as 
reduce response duplication. This treatment is intended to create a 
clear differentiation between the replacement questionnaire and the 
original in order to make it easier for respondents to understand the 
intent of the replacement questionnaire.
    The questionnaires for the Control component and the four (SRO) 
treatments share the same design and mailing strategy for the initial 
questionnaire. Consequently, we will be able to compare the results 
from the Control questionnaire with the results from the initial 
questionnaires in the SOR treatments. Doing so will give us a much 
larger sample for comparisons.
B. Hispanic Origin/Race
    For the 2005 NCT, we plan to test modifications of the questions on 
race and Hispanic origin that are consistent with the 1997 Office of 
Management and Budget (OMB) Directive 15 (i.e., test a question on race 
that includes only the five minimum OMB race categories--See Definition 
of Terms). The version of the question chosen for future testing must 
produce data that is comparable in quality or better than the data 
produced by the Census 2000 questions.
    The Hispanic origin and race component of the 2005 NCT is intended 
to evaluate the following elements: question design, the use of 
examples, revised wording of the questions and instructions, and a 
tribal enrollment question.

Question Design

    We plan to test two fundamentally different designs--the 
traditional Hispanic origin and race design and a new design that 
includes shortened questions on Hispanic origin and race combined with 
a third question on ancestry. The shortened design includes only the 
five minimum OMB race categories and eliminates all write-ins. The 
Hispanic origin question component will consist of a yes/no option with 
no write-in option. The ancestry question component will include write-
in lines that are intended to permit respondents to provide detailed 
information on their ancestry or country of origin.

Examples

    We need to determine how useful it is to include examples of the 
OMB race categories to help respondents understand the intent of the 
design that includes the shortened questions. Consequently we plan to 
test this design with and without examples. We are currently conducting 
cognitive tests in order to select the most promising sets of examples 
for the 2005 NCT. We will choose the examples that yield the highest 
quality data for use in the 2008 Dress Rehearsal.
    Secondly, based on the results of past censuses, we know that the 
specific examples used in the ancestry question can affect reporting. 
Since the detailed Hispanic origin (e.g., Mexican) and race information 
(e.g., Japanese) only will be collected in the ancestry question, we 
intend to evaluate the effect of using two different sets of examples 
on the reporting of detailed ancestry groups in that question.

Wording and Instructions

    We plan to test the effect of changing the word order of the 
Hispanic origin

[[Page 63357]]

item so that it reads, ``Is this person of Hispanic, Latino, or of 
Spanish origin?'' (Census 2000 order: ``Spanish, Hispanic, Latino''). 
The instruction for the Hispanic origin item will reflect the OMB 
definition of Hispanic origin (See Definition of Terms) rather than 
relying on examples to communicate the intent of the question.
    In addition, we plan to test revisions to the ``MARK ONE OR MORE'' 
instruction in order to make it more user-friendly, and we plan to test 
the effectiveness of the revised note that is intended to encourage 
respondents to answer both of the traditionally formulated race and 
Hispanic origin questions. The note is intended to reduce the number of 
Hispanics who report ``Some other race''. The final wording of the 
question will be determined by cognitive testing that is currently 
underway.

Tribal Enrollment

    The 2005 NCT plans to test a tribal enrollment question to attempt 
to determine what proportion of those who report a tribe are enrolled. 
We are currently conducting cognitive testing to determine the final 
wording of the question. We plan to evaluate the quality of tribal 
enrollment data.
C. Tenure and Other Population Questions

Tenure

    We plan to test the following elements in the Tenure (own or rent) 
and other population questions: dropping the reference to ``cash'' 
rent, adding an instruction to improve the reporting of home equity 
loans, and a version that combines both treatments.
    We intend to test the effect of eliminating the term ``cash'' from 
the tenure question, since the traditional formulation of the question 
has been criticized as not accurately depicting how rent is actually 
paid (e.g., by check). We plan to compare missing item data rates for 
the test questions to those for the Census 2000 question in order to 
determine the effect of eliminating the term.
    Since we are not sure whether respondents understand that home 
equity loans are liens against the home, we also plan to test an 
instruction asking respondents who own their own homes whether they 
have a mortgage or loan, including home equity loans. We plan to 
evaluate the resulting owner distribution (owned free and clear vs. 
owned with a mortgage or loan). We plan to evaluate both variables in 
order to choose the version of the question that yields the highest 
quality data for use in future tests.

Age

    In Census 2000, many respondents incorrectly reported the age of 
babies under one year of age. The 2005 NCT will test an instruction in 
the Age question to help respondents correctly determine the age of 
babies who are less than one year old. We also plan to reverse the 
order of the Age and Date of Birth questions to make them consistent 
with electronic modes such as the Internet.

Modified Categories in the Relationship Question

    We plan to test the effect on response distributions of replacing 
``Foster Child'' with ``Foster child or foster adult''. Cognitive tests 
indicate that respondents understand the phrase ``foster adult'' and do 
not consider it to be offensive.
    We plan to test the effect on data quality of replacing ``Natural-
born son/daughter'' with ``Biological son/daughter'' [used in the 
Survey of Income and Program Participation]. Adoptive parents have 
received the term ``Natural-born'' unfavorably.
D. Residence Rules Instructions and Coverage Questions
    Improving the accuracy of census coverage is one of the major goals 
of reengineering the 2010 Decennial Census Program. As a result of the 
Census 2000 Testing, Evaluation, and Experimentation Program and the 
Coverage Measurement Program, we implemented a research and development 
program to investigate ways of improving our coverage of persons and 
housing units in preparation for the 2010 Census. The 2005 NCT is part 
of this effort. Specific areas that we intend to evaluate in the 2005 
NCT include improving within-household coverage and revising residence 
rules instructions so that they are clear and unambiguous to the 
respondent.
    The panels in this section of the 2005 NCT are planned to evaluate 
the main effects and anticipated interactions of the residence rules 
instructions (See Definition of Terms) and two versions of the 2004 
Census Test coverage questions.
    The Control for this section of the 2005 NCT is the experimental 
roster tested in the AQE in the 2000 Census. This design was chosen as 
the control because it out-performed the Census 2000 residence rules 
instructions in two ways: It had significantly lower item nonresponse, 
and, in low coverage areas, the rate at which Hispanics were not 
included on the AQE questionnaire was significantly lower than for the 
Census 2000 questionnaire.
    The following are the features of the residence rules instructions 
that will be evaluated:
     Content, order, and wording of cues and bullets in the 
include/exclude lists (See Definition of Terms).
     List order.
     Presentation of the basic ``usual residence'' concept.
     Approach to structuring the residence rules instructions 
(for example, using an alternative approach that eliminates the 
include/exclude lists and relies instead on explaining the basic 
concept behind the lists).
    The Coverage Followup (CFU) operation will evaluate the effects of 
the alternative residence rules instructions on gross coverage errors.
    The Census Bureau is currently conducting cognitive tests using 
four versions of the 2004 Census Test undercount question (Question 2) 
and overcount question (Question 10). The versions of the questions 
that produce the best results will be chosen for use in the 2005 NCT. 
The experimental treatments are intended to isolate some of the 
individual effects of each version of the coverage questions by 
crossing them with the different residence rules instructions. We plan 
to evaluate the coverage questions' efficacy in flagging potential 
omissions or erroneous enumerations by implementing the CFU operation.
E. Respondent-Friendly Design
    The questionnaire for this panel will have design changes intended 
to make it easier to use. The changes that this questionnaire will test 
include:
     Color as a navigational tool.
     Lightly embedded text that describes what should be 
entered in response boxes.
     Consistent formats between check boxes and write-in answer 
fields (for example, all answer fields will be outlined with a strong 
black line). Using consistent formats for all answer fields is intended 
to help respondents identify all fields where a response is required.
F. Language
    The 2005 NCT will include a bilingual English/Spanish questionnaire 
panel in an effort to improve self-response in the growing number of 
households in which Spanish is a primary language. We plan to implement 
an English/Spanish questionnaire mailout treatment that is intended to 
evaluate the effect of a bilingual questionnaire on response rates, 
public reaction, and data quality.

[[Page 63358]]

G. Internet Option
    All respondents (including those in the Language panel) will have 
the opportunity to respond via the Internet, but while the general 
content of the Internet questionnaire will be the same as other test 
questionnaires, it is not planned to mirror the exact wording of any 
one specific paper questionnaire. Instead, the Internet Questionnaire 
will be designed using questions from several of the 2005 NCT 
questionnaires and rewording the questions to reflect the wording that 
works best for this response mode.
    Respondents who ask to respond via the Internet (including those in 
the language panel) will be randomly assigned to answer either a 
person-based or a topic-based format. In the person-based approach, 
responses for all items (e.g., name, date of birth, gender, race) are 
collected for one household member (person), after which the same 
questions are repeated for each successive household member. In the 
topic-based approach, responses for a given topic/item (e.g., age) are 
collected for all persons in the household, after which responses for 
the next topic/item (e.g., date of birth) are collected. This process 
continues for each successive topic/item. We will evaluate the quality 
of Internet data collected using these two design treatments.

II. Method of Collection

    In late August, we will mail an advance letter to a national sample 
of about 420,000 households. This letter will explain why we are 
conducting the mandatory 2005 NCT. The letter also will assure 
respondents that their answers are confidential. We will inform them of 
the measures we take to keep their personal information secure. The 
2005 NCT questionnaires will be mailed approximately a week later. 
Respondents will be asked to mail back their completed questionnaires 
or respond via the Internet by Census Day (September 15, 2005). Early 
in September, we will send reminder/thank you postcards thanking those 
who have already responded and asking non-respondents to send in their 
questionnaires or reply via the Internet. As part of the Census 
Bureau's efforts to improve response rates and contain costs, most 
nonrespondents will receive replacement questionnaires a few days after 
Census Day. Households assigned to the panel for which the experimental 
treatment consists of a letter in lieu of a replacement questionnaire 
will not receive the second questionnaire.
    The Coverage Followup (CFU) operation is scheduled to begin in 
December. The CFU operation will obtain additional information by 
telephone from a sample of respondents in order to evaluate the 
residence rules instructions and coverage questions. Approximately six 
months after Census Day, we will begin formal evaluations of population 
and housing content, coverage, language, race and ethnicity, and self-
response options.

Definition of Terms

    Alternative Questionnaire Experiment--The 2000 AQE incorporated 
three separate experiments, one involving census long forms and the 
other two involving short forms, with different objectives. This 
experiment was conducted during Census 2000 under census conditions. 
Consequently, we were able to compare the effectiveness of the AQE 
questionnaire designs with the Census 2000 questionnaires.
    All three experiments tested combinations or ``packages'' of design 
features, rather than testing each design change separately in a 
controlled fashion that would permit inferences about their individual 
effects. Thus, firm conclusions only were drawn about the combined 
effect of multiple design features. This is an important limitation of 
all three experiments. The three experiments were:
     1.1 Experiment A: Effects of Altering the Design of 
Branching Instructions on Navigational Performance.
     1.2 Experiment B: An Experiment to Improve Coverage 
Through Revised Roster Instructions.
     1.3 Experiment C: Questionnaire Effects on Reporting of 
Race and Hispanic Origin: Results of a Replication of the 1990 Mail 
Short Form in Census 2000.
    The report describing the experiment is located at the following 
address: http://www.census.gov/pred/www/rpts/TR17.pdf.
    Include/exclude List--The list of the people the respondent should 
include in the household count and those who should be left out because 
they should not be counted or will be counted elsewhere.
    Office of Management and Budget (OMB) definition of Hispanic 
origin--A person of Mexican, Puerto Rican, Cuban, Central or South 
American or other Spanish culture or origin, regardless of race.
    Office of Management and Budget (OMB) race categories--American 
Indian or Alaska Native, Asian, Black or African American, Native 
Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander, and White.
    Residence Rules Instructions--Instructions that respondents use to 
determine who should be counted in that household. They are meant to 
insure that everyone is counted once and in the right place for the 
primary purposes of apportionment and redistricting.

III. Data

    OMB Number: None.
    Form Number: DC-1A through DC-1X (2005 Census Test questionnaires).
    Type of Review: Regular.
    Affected Public: Individuals or households.
    Estimated Number of Respondents: Approximately 420,000 households.
    Estimated Time Per Response: 10 minutes.
    Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours: 70,000.
    Estimated Total Annual Cost: There is no cost to respondents except 
for their time to respond.
    Respondent's Obligation: Mandatory.
    Legal Authority: Title 13 of the United States Code, sections 141 
and 193.

IV. Request for Comments

    Comments are invited on: (a) Whether the proposed collection of 
information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of 
the agency, including whether the information shall have practical 
utility; (b) the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden 
(including hours and cost) of the proposed collection of information; 
(c) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the 
information to be collected; and (d) ways to minimize the burden of the 
collection of information on respondents, including through the use of 
automated collection techniques or other forms of information 
technology.
    Comments submitted in response to this notice will be summarized 
and/or included in the request for OMB approval of this information 
collection; they also will become a matter of public record.

    Dated: October 26, 2004.
Madeleine Clayton,
Management Analyst, Office of the Chief Information Officer.
[FR Doc. 04-24294 Filed 10-29-04; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-07-P