2000 Census: Review of Partnership Program Highlights Best	 
Practices for Future Operations (20-AUG-01, GAO-01-579).	 
								 
To ensure a more complete and accurate count of the nation's	 
population in the 2000 Census, the Bureau of the Census partnered
with other federal agencies, as well as with state, local, and	 
tribal governments, religious, community, and social service	 
organizations; and private businesses. According to the Bureau,  
about 140,000 organizations participated in the partnership	 
program, assisting in such critical activities as reviewing and  
updating the Bureau's address list; encouraging 		 
people--especially hard-to-count populations--to participate in  
the census; and recruiting temporary census employees. GAO found 
that the Bureau spent about $142.9 million on its partnership	 
program, or about two percent of the estimated $6.5 billion the  
Bureau allocated for the census, and an average of about $1.19	 
for each of the 120 million households that the Bureau estimates 
compose the nation. The Bureau staffed the partnership program	 
with 594 full-time positions, of which 560 were allocated to the 
field, with the remainder in the Bureau's headquarters. Decisions
on which organizations to partner with, and what events to	 
attend, were governed by unwritten guidelines and criteria and	 
driven by the Bureau's desire to collaborate with virtually any  
organization that would support the census. The Bureau made the  
census logo available on its Internet site, and encouraged	 
partners to use the logo to help promote the census. However, the
Bureau did not have any written guidance on how partners could	 
characterize their association with the Bureau or what		 
constituted appropriate use of the Bureau's Census 2000 logo. The
Bureau has since prepared written guidelines for partnership	 
engagements . However, the guidelines fall short in that they	 
still do not address how partners may (1) characterize their	 
associations with the Bureau and (2) use the Bureau's logo.	 
Although the Bureau developed a monitoring system for tracking,  
planning, and analyzing partnership efforts throughout the	 
nation, it was not fully tested before it went operational	 
because of time constraints. As a result, a number of		 
shortcomings went undetected until the system was implemented.	 
-------------------------Indexing Terms------------------------- 
REPORTNUM:   GAO-01-579 					        
    ACCNO:   A01626						        
  TITLE:     2000 Census: Review of Partnership Program Highlights    
             Best Practices for Future Operations                             
     DATE:   08/20/2001 
  SUBJECT:   Census						 
	     Data bases 					 
	     Interagency relations				 
	     Management information systems			 
	     Private sector practices				 
	     Program evaluation 				 
	     2000 Decennial Census				 
	     Census Bureau Contact Profile Usage		 
	     Management System					 
								 

******************************************************************
** This file contains an ASCII representation of the text of a  **
** GAO Testimony.                                               **
**                                                              **
** No attempt has been made to display graphic images, although **
** figure captions are reproduced.  Tables are included, but    **
** may not resemble those in the printed version.               **
**                                                              **
** Please see the PDF (Portable Document Format) file, when     **
** available, for a complete electronic file of the printed     **
** document's contents.                                         **
**                                                              **
******************************************************************
GAO-01-579
     
A

Report to Congressional Requesters

August 2001 2000 CENSUS Review of Partnership Program Highlights Best
Practices for Future Operations

GAO- 01- 579

GAO United States General Accounting Office

Page i GAO- 01- 579 2000 Census Partnerships Letter 1

Results in Brief 2 Scope and Methodology 5 Background 6 Financial and Human
Capital Dedicated to the Partnership

Program 8 Partnering Decisions and Logo Use Were Governed by Unwritten

Guidelines and Criteria 14 The Bureau?s Database for Tracking the
Partnership Program Had

Shortcomings 17 The Bureau Plans to Evaluate and Continue the Partnership

Program 18 Best Practices for Forging Productive Partnerships 19 Conclusions
29 Recommendations for Executive Action 30 Agency Comments and Our
Evaluation 31

Appendix I Comments From the Secretary of Commerce 34

Appendix II GAO Contacts and Staff Acknowledgments 40

Tables

Table 1: Number of Full- time Equivalents for the Partnership Program 11

Figures

Figure 1: Stickers Purchased by the City of Alhambra for Census 2000
Promotion Purchased With Bureau In- Kind Funds 9 Figure 2: The Bureau?s Logo
as Downloaded From Its Web Site 15 Figure 3: Census Partnerships Best
Practices Checklist 20 Figure 4: Detroit Billboard Showing Political
Figures? Support of

the Census 21 Figure 5: Logo Developed by the Wyoming Census Task Force for

Census 2000 Promotion 22 Figure 6: Korean Senior Center Banner With Tailored
Census 2000

Questionnaire Assistance Center Logo 25 Contents

Page ii GAO- 01- 579 2000 Census Partnerships

Page 1 GAO- 01- 579 2000 Census Partnerships

August 20, 2001 The Honorable Henry A. Waxman Ranking Minority Member
Committee on Government Reform House of Representatives

The Honorable Dan Miller Chairman The Honorable William Lacy Clay, Jr.
Ranking Minority Member Subcommittee on the Census Committee on Government
Reform House of Representatives

The Honorable Carolyn B. Maloney House of Representatives

To take a more complete and accurate count of the nation?s population in the
2000 Census, the Bureau of the Census partnered with other federal agencies,
as well as with state, local, and tribal governments; religious, community,
and social service organizations; and private businesses. According to the
Bureau, about 140,000 organizations participated in the partnership program,
assisting in such critical activities as reviewing and updating the Bureau?s
address list; encouraging people- especially hardto- count populations- to
participate in the census; and recruiting temporary census employees. The
program stemmed from the Bureau?s recognition that a successful head count
required the local knowledge, experience, and expertise that these
organizations provide. The Bureau expects the program will play a key role
in the 2010 Census, as well as a number of the Bureau?s nondecennial surveys
in the years to come.

Although a more complete picture of the results of the partnership program
will not be available until the Bureau completes several ongoing evaluations
of the effort, thus far, the program has generally received broad support.
The Bureau and members of Congress have cited the role that partners have
played in boosting public awareness of the census, while in our prior work,
we noted that the Bureau aggressively pursued partnerships with local
governments, community groups, and other organizations to help ensure a
complete and accurate population count.

United States General Accounting Office Washington, DC 20548

Page 2 GAO- 01- 579 2000 Census Partnerships

As discussed with your offices, we reviewed the 2000 Census partnership
program, paying particular attention to (1) the financial and human capital
the Bureau dedicated to the 2000 Census partnership effort, (2) the Bureau?s
guidelines governing partnering decisions and use of the Bureau?s Census
2000 logo, and (3) the Bureau?s tracking system used to monitor partnership
engagements and measure performance. Moreover, given the Bureau?s efforts to
institutionalize the partnership program, you asked us to describe the
Bureau?s plans and to identify best practices and lessons learned from the
2000 Census for forging constructive partnership engagements that the Bureau
can use to inform those plans. This report is one of several we will be
issuing in the coming months on lessons learned from the 2000 Census that
can help inform the planning effort for 2010.

According to Bureau data, from October 1997, when the Bureau began staffing
partnership positions, through September 2000, the Bureau spent about $142.
9 million on its partnership program. This is about 2 percent of the
estimated $6.5 billion the Bureau allocated for the census, and an average
of about $1.19 for each of the 120 million households that the Bureau
estimates compose the nation. Of the $142.9 million, $65.1 million (46
percent) was spent on salaries and benefits. The remainder included
nonpayroll expenditures such as travel, training, supplies, and postage. The
Bureau also included about $14 million of ?in- kind? funding to back local
partners? efforts to support the census. Partners could apply for awards of
up to $2,499 to purchase such promotional items as stickers, banners, and
flyers. The money was not given directly to partners. Instead, the Bureau?s
regional census centers purchased the items directly from vendors on the
partners? behalf. However, the Bureau did not have data on how many awards
were given, whom the awards were given to, the amount of these awards, and
what the awards were spent on. This information is important for
accountability purposes as well as for managing and assessing the
effectiveness of the effort. Moreover, the lack of information is
inconsistent with federal internal control standards, which require
transactions to be recorded in a timely and accurate manner and be readily
available for examination. 1

The Bureau staffed the partnership program with 594 full- time positions. Of
these, 560 positions were allocated to the field, while the remaining

1 Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government (GAO/ AIMD- 00-
21. 3. 1, November 1999). Results in Brief

Page 3 GAO- 01- 579 2000 Census Partnerships

slots were located in the Bureau?s headquarters. The number of partnership
positions in 2000 was more than triple the 181 positions filled in 1990.
However, partnership staff in 2000 were more thinly spread as they were
responsible for working with many more local groups in 2000 compared to
1990. Local census office managers we surveyed expressed concern that the
partnership staffs? heavy workload may have affected the support they were
able to provide. Partnership specialists we interviewed generally did not
share this view, but they did report the need for more clerical support.
Local census office managers also said the reporting structure for
partnership specialists, in which partnership specialists reported directly
to a regional partnership coordinator, rather than to the local census
office manager, may have led to communication and coordination hurdles
between the partnership staff and the local census office. Headquarters
officials explained that this structure was chosen so that partnership
specialists could coordinate their efforts and maintain a consistent
national census campaign message.

According to Bureau officials, decisions on which organizations to partner
with and what events to attend were governed by unwritten guidelines and
criteria. These decisions were driven by the Bureau?s desire to collaborate
with virtually any organization that would support the census, particularly
groups with unique demographic and other characteristics of the regions. The
Bureau also made the census logo available on its Internet site, and
encouraged partners to use the logo to help promote the census. However, the
Bureau did not have any written guidance on how partners could characterize
their association with the Bureau or what constituted appropriate use of the
Bureau?s Census 2000 logo. This lack of written guidance thus raised the
risk that (1) the Bureau might partner with organizations that could
generate perceptual or other problems because their nature or actions were
inconsistent with those of the census or (2) partners might misrepresent
their association with the Bureau.

The Bureau has since prepared written guidelines for making decisions on
partnership engagements. However, the guidelines fall short in that they
still do not address how partners may (1) characterize their association
with the Bureau and (2) use the Bureau?s logo. The lack of guidelines
governing use of the Bureau?s logo is at odds with federal internal control
standards that require agencies to establish control over assets vulnerable
to unauthorized use. 2

2 GAO/ AIMD- 00- 21. 3. 1.

Page 4 GAO- 01- 579 2000 Census Partnerships

Although the Bureau developed a monitoring system for tracking, planning,
and analyzing partnership efforts throughout the nation, it was not fully
tested before it went operational because of time constraints. As a result,
a number of shortcomings went undetected until the system was implemented.
Bureau headquarters staff said the system was slow, cumbersome, and
difficult to keep current. Because of these difficulties, the Bureau had
limited real- time data on the status of agreements with thousands of
partners and was unable to fully monitor the extent to which partners
fulfilled their commitments. The system?s shortcomings also led to
inefficiencies and duplication of effort in the partnership program. For
example, some partnership specialists kept separate partnership tracking
systems. The Bureau has developed a new tracking system called Prisms to
address the problems it encountered with its initial system.

With respect to its future plans for the partnership program, for fiscal
year 2001, the Bureau has budgeted $5.4 million to support a series of
workshops for partners and other interested parties on how to access and use
census data. For the longer term, the Bureau plans to continue working with
partners to help conduct its ongoing demographic and economic surveys and
begin initial preparations for the 2010 Census. In addition, the Bureau
expects to release the results of its evaluation of the partnership program,
which should shed light on the program?s overall impact and assess how the
partnership efforts affected different populations and census operations as
well as the adequacy of its partnership staffing levels. This information
should help the Bureau as it moves ahead with plans to institutionalize the
partnership program and prepares for the next national head count in 2010.

Our observations during the 2000 Census highlighted some best practices that
appeared to be key to successful partnership engagements. It will be
important for the Bureau to explore these and other best practices to help
refine the partnership program and enhance its effectiveness. As shown in
figure 3, best practices for partners include (1) identifying ?census

champions? that is, people who will actively support the census and
encourage others to do so, (2) integrating census- related efforts into
partners? existing activities and events, and (3) leveraging resources by
working with other partners and customizing census promotional materials to
better resonate with local populations. For the Bureau, best practices
include (1) providing adequate and timely information, guidance, and other
resources to local partners on how they can support the census, (2)
maintaining open communication with partners, and (3) encouraging the early
involvement of partners in census activities.

Page 5 GAO- 01- 579 2000 Census Partnerships

Overall, it appears as though key census- taking activities, such as
encouraging people to return their questionnaires, would have been less
successful had it not been for the Bureau?s partnership efforts. Thus, given
the important role that partners are expected to play in future Bureau
activities, we recommend that the Secretary of Commerce ensure that the
Bureau takes steps to make the partnership program more accountable and
performance- oriented. These steps include (1) completing its evaluation of
the partnership program as planned and using the information to help
determine its cost- effectiveness and how best to allocate program
resources, (2) documenting in- kind funding expenditures and maintaining
proper accounting in accordance with federal internal control standards, (3)
exploring ways to increase communication and coordination between
partnership staff and local census managers, (4) reviewing partnership
staffing levels to make sure that the levels are sufficient to ensure the
adequate provision of Bureau support to partners, (5) developing regulations
specifying how organizations may characterize their association with the
Bureau and use the Bureau?s logo, while providing for needed flexibility,
and (6) ensuring that the Bureau?s new partnership tracking system functions
as an effective management tool.

To review the financial and human capital that the Bureau dedicated to the
partnership program and the Bureau?s guidelines governing partnering
decisions and use of its Census 2000 logo, we interviewed relevant Bureau
managers in both headquarters and the field and examined Bureau documents
that described the partnership program?s goals, budget, and decision- making
processes.

To identify partnership best practices, we interviewed local government and
community partners, as well as other stakeholders, in four locations across
the country that either we or the Bureau identified as examples of
constructive partnership programs because they had specific characteristics.
These characteristics included (1) an active local or regional partnership
effort, (2) an initial census mail response rate that was favorable when
compared to the nation as a whole or to the location?s 1990 response rate,
and (3) populations the Bureau considered hard to enumerate. In addition,
the sites we selected were geographically and demographically diverse, and
included a large urban area (Los Angeles County), a mostly rural state
(Wyoming), a medium- size city (Detroit), and three Native American tribes
(the Lumbee and Tuscarora tribes in Robeson County, North Carolina, and the
Catawba tribe in South Carolina). To obtain the Bureau?s perspective on
these engagements, as part of these visits, we met with partnership staff
from 16 local census Scope and

Methodology

Page 6 GAO- 01- 579 2000 Census Partnerships

offices and with officials at the Bureau?s Regional Census Centers in
Charlotte, N. C.; Denver; Detroit; and Los Angeles. Our findings cannot be
projected to the partnership program as a whole.

We also included the initial results of our survey of a stratified random
sample of 250 local census office managers in which we obtained responses
from 236 managers (about a 94 percent overall response rate). The survey-
which asked local census office managers about the implementation of a
number of key field operations- can be generalized to the 511 local census
offices located in the 50 states. All reported percentages are estimates
based on the sample and are subject to some sampling error as well as
nonsampling error. In general, percentage estimates in this report for the
entire sample have confidence intervals ranging from about ï¿½ 4 to ï¿½ 5
percentage points at the 95- percent confidence interval. In other words, if
all local census office managers in our population had been surveyed, the
chances are 95 out of 100 that the result obtained would not differ from our
sample estimate in the more extreme cases by more than ï¿½ 5 percent.

We did our audit work at the case study locations in June and July 2000, and
at the Bureau?s headquarters in Suitland, Md., from February 2000 through
May 2001. Our work was done in accordance with generally accepted government
auditing standards.

We requested comments on a draft of this report from the Secretary of
Commerce. On July 17, 2001, the Secretary forwarded the Bureau?s written
comments on the draft (see app. I), which we address at the end of this
report. The Bureau generally agreed with, or recognized the value of, our
seven recommendations.

To improve participation in the 2000 Census and to mobilize support for
other census operations, the Bureau partnered with state, local, and tribal
governments as well as religious, media, educational, and other community
organizations. The partnership program stemmed from the Bureau?s recognition
that local people know the characteristics of their communities better than
the Census Bureau and therefore know the best ways to communicate with their
constituents to ensure they are counted.

To coordinate local partners? efforts, the Bureau encouraged government
entities to form Complete Count Committees, which were to be made up of
representatives of these local groups. The Bureau also established
partnerships with national organizations such as the Mexican American
Background

Page 7 GAO- 01- 579 2000 Census Partnerships

Legal Defense and Education Fund, the National Association for the
Advancement of Colored People, the National Congress of American Indians,
and the American Association of Retired Persons. In addition, the Bureau
partnered with private companies such as Wal- Mart Stores Inc. and the
United Parcel Service.

The Bureau depended on partners to help conduct a number of census
operations. Among other contributions, partners helped recruit over 3.7
million temporary census workers from March 1997 through September 2000,
reviewed and updated census maps and address lists, provided space and
volunteers for Questionnaire Assistance Centers and for testing census job
applicants, organized promotional events, and motivated individuals to
complete their census forms.

In addition, for the first time ever, the Bureau instituted a paid-
advertising campaign led by Young and Rubicam, a private sector advertising
firm. The campaign included both national and local census advertising, and
was intended to increase mail returns from the general public, targeted
audiences, and historically undercounted populations.

As part of its larger study of the outreach and promotion program, the
Bureau is examining the impact that the partnership program had on public
awareness and participation. The Bureau achieved an initial mail response
rate of about 64 percent, 3 percentage points higher than it had anticipated
when planning for nonresponse follow- up. This was a noteworthy
accomplishment in light of the challenges the Bureau faced in publicizing
the census and, as a result, the Bureau had over 3 million fewer housing
units to follow up with than it had initially planned. However, initial
Bureau data on the postcensus mail return rate- which is a more precise
indicator of public cooperation- was 72 percent, a decline of 2 percentage
points from the 74 percent mail return rate the Bureau achieved in 1990 (the
Bureau?s figures are preliminary and subject to verification upon receipt of
final data).

The initial mail response rate is calculated as a percentage of all forms in
the mailback universe from which the Bureau received a questionnaire. It
factors in housing units that are discovered to be nonexistent or unoccupied
during nonresponse follow- up. The Bureau uses this percentage as an
indicator of its nonresponse follow- up workload. This differs from the mail
return rate, which refers to the percentage of forms the Bureau receives
from occupied housing units in the mailback universe and is calculated after
the Bureau completes the enumeration process. We discuss the mail response
rate and mail return rate more fully in our

Page 8 GAO- 01- 579 2000 Census Partnerships

forthcoming report on the Bureau?s nonresponse follow- up efforts, which we
expect to issue in the near future.

The cost of the partnership program from October 1997 through September 2000
totaled about $142.9 million, or about 2 percent of the estimated $6.5
billion total cost for the 2000 Census. This is an average of about $1.19
for each of the 120 million households the Bureau estimates make up the
nation.

The partnership program was labor- intensive. In fact, Bureau spending data
show that salaries and benefits accounted for the largest component of the
partnership spending, totaling $65.1 million (46 percent) for fiscal years
1998 through 2000. The remainder of the spending, $77.8 million (54
percent), covered travel, shipping, postage, printing, telecommunication
services, contracts, training, supplies, and equipment.

The $142.9 million also included $14 million in ?in- kind? funding to
support local partners? efforts to promote the census. The money was not
given directly to local partners; rather Bureau regional census centers
purchased the items on partners? behalf directly from vendors. The funds
were used to purchase educational and promotional materials such as flyers,
banners, balloons, and stickers tailored to meet the specific needs of local
partners. For example, officials from the city of Alhambra, Calif., reported
that the city received $2, 300 of in- kind funds for the purchase of outdoor
street banners in English and Chinese, and, as shown in figure 1, stickers
for outgoing city mail in March and April 2000 encouraging city residents to
support the census. Financial and Human

Capital Dedicated to the Partnership Program

Page 9 GAO- 01- 579 2000 Census Partnerships

Figure 1: Stickers Purchased by the City of Alhambra for Census 2000
Promotion Purchased With Bureau In- Kind Funds

Source: City of Alhambra, Calif.

To receive in- kind funding awards of up to $2,499, partners were to
complete applications describing how the project would encourage targeted
audiences to complete their questionnaires, reduce the undercount of certain
populations, or increase awareness of census activities. In purchasing goods
and services from vendors, the Bureau expected regional census centers to
primarily use government purchase cards. Bureau rules prohibited the funds
from being used for a number of types of goods and services such as cash
prizes, food, or salaries, although Bureau regional officials granted
occasional exceptions.

The Bureau did not have data on how it distributed the $14 million of inkind
funding. Data were unavailable on which partners received in- kind support,
how much support each partner received, and how the partners spent the
money. Such information is important for accountability purposes, as well as
for managing and assessing the effectiveness of the effort. Moreover, the
lack of information is inconsistent with federal

Page 10 GAO- 01- 579 2000 Census Partnerships

internal control standards, which require transactions to be recorded in a
timely and accurate manner, and be readily available for examination. 3

Federal standards for internal control require agencies to record
transactions promptly and accurately to maintain their relevance and value
to management in controlling operations and making decisions. In addition,
the documentation should be readily available for examination. 4 Because
records were not available to census managers on a timely basis, the Bureau
is inconsistent with internal control standards.

Consistent with our findings that the Bureau did not meet federal
requirements for financial management and reporting of in- kind funding
spending, an independent audit of the Bureau?s financial management
procedures found that the Bureau had ?significant difficulties and delays in
producing complete and accurate financial statements? for all of its
expenditures. 5 The auditor?s report recommended that the Bureau produce
timely reports that meet the Bureau?s internal, regulatory, and audit
requirements. 6

At its peak in fiscal year 2000, the Bureau staffed the partnership program
with 594 full- time equivalent positions 7 of which 560 positions were
located in the field and 34 were in the Bureau?s headquarters (see table 1).
The Bureau hired 665 field partnership staff, some of whom worked parttime.

3 GAO/ AIMD- 00- 21. 3. 1. 4 GAO/ AIMD- 00- 21. 3. 1. 5 U. S. Census Bureau,
2000 Financial Report, February 2001, p. 51. 6 U. S. Census Bureau, 2000
Financial Report, February 2001, p. 52. 7 One full- time equivalent is one
full- time person working 40 hours per week over a 12month period, or the
equivalent of that level of work. Partnership Program

Staffing Levels

Page 11 GAO- 01- 579 2000 Census Partnerships

Table 1: Number of Full- time Equivalents for the Partnership Program Fiscal
year Field Headquarters Total

1998 88 22 110 1999 362 30 392 2000 560 34 594

Source: U. S. Bureau of the Census.

The staffing level was 332 full- time partnership staff positions more than
the Bureau originally planned. The Bureau received additional funding for
its partnership efforts following a 1999 Supreme Court ruling 8 that
prohibited the use of statistical sampling to produce state population
totals for apportioning the House of Representatives.

Most of the field staff were ?partnership specialists? who received special
Bureau training and were responsible for mobilizing local support for the
census by working with Complete Count Committees and other organizations
(the qualifications and backgrounds of partnership specialists are described
in greater detail later in this report). However, according to Bureau
officials, the 560 field positions also included a small number of other
occupations, such as those in support staff.

Table 1 also shows that the full complement of partnership staff did not
come on board until after the start of fiscal year 2000 (October 1, 1999),
when the Bureau filled the remaining 202 (34 percent) of the 594 positions
authorized for the partnership program. Although Bureau headquarters
officials recognized the benefits of hiring partnership staff earlier in the
census cycle to allow them more time to learn about census operations and
build local contacts, they also said the cost of doing so was difficult to
justify.

Compared to the 1990 Census, the Bureau had more partnership positions for
the 2000 Census, but a rough indicator of their workload- the average number
of local jurisdiction Complete Count Committees they supported- suggests
that partnership staff were more thinly spread in 2000. Indeed, the 560
full- time field positions filled for the 2000 Census is over three times
the 181 positions filled for the 1990 Census. However, in 1990, the 181
partnership staff supported the work of 2,201 Complete Count Committees or
about 12 committees per each partnership staff

8 Department of Commerce v. U. S. House of Representatives, 525 U. S. 316
(1999).

Page 12 GAO- 01- 579 2000 Census Partnerships

position. For 2000, 560 partnership specialists were responsible for working
with 11,253 committees, or about 20 committees per specialist.

The partnership specialists? heavy workload may have limited the level of
support they were able to provide to individual local census offices. In our
survey of local census office managers, when asked about the effectiveness
of the outreach and promotion program in reaching hard- toenumerate
populations, 28 percent thought that the program needed no improvement. On
the other hand, 40 percent thought that some improvement was needed, and
another 30 percent thought that significant improvement was needed (2
percent of the managers responded that they had no basis on which to judge
or were unsure of the effectiveness of the program). A number of respondents
who saw room for improvement expressed the view that partnership specialists
were too disparate to offer meaningful assistance. For example, one
California manager told us, ?The

partnership [specialist] was stretched far too thin, and was expected to
cover three counties.? Likewise, a Pennsylvania manager said, ?The

partnership specialist assigned to the Scranton office was responsible for
multiple local census offices. The [Assistant Manager for Field Operations
(AMFO)] felt that the partnership specialists were spread too thin. As a
result, the former local census office manager and AMFO ended up doing most
of the outreach and promotion work.?

For their part, while the partnership specialists we spoke to generally
agreed that the Bureau hired enough specialists to carry out partnership
activities, they also reported that they could have used more clerical
support to help alleviate some of the specialists? administrative work,
which included distributing thousands of posters and other promotional items
to partner organizations and entering data into the Bureau?s partnership
tracking system (each regional census center typically hired four to six
partnership program support staff).

Specialists reported to and were overseen by regional partnership
coordinators and partnership specialist team leaders at their respective
regional census centers. Bureau headquarters officials explained that this
structure was established so that specialists could coordinate their efforts
with other partnership specialists in the same area, share common problems
and solutions, and convey the national census campaign at the local level.
Also, some partnership specialists hired to reach out to specific ethnic
groups were responsible for areas under many local census offices, making it
logistically difficult to report to one local census office. For example,
the tribal partnership specialist for the Charlotte Regional Census Center
was responsible for a four- state area that included 40

Page 13 GAO- 01- 579 2000 Census Partnerships

different Indian tribes. Therefore, she reported that it did not make sense
for her to report to one local census office, as the local office was
concerned with only a small portion of the area the for which the specialist
was responsible.

However, the local census managers we surveyed provided a different
perspective of this management structure. Of the 70 percent of respondents
who said the effectiveness of the outreach program in reaching hard- to-
enumerate populations needed some or significant improvement, a common
perception was that there were coordination challenges between the local
census offices and the partnership specialists. To better integrate the
local census offices with the partnership program, a number of managers
suggested that the partnership specialists should report directly to local
census office managers. Illustrating this viewpoint, a local census manager
from Connecticut reported that there was ?very poor? coordination with the
partnership specialist because the partnership program was under a separate
chain of command. Similarly, a local census manager in Maryland told us,
?There was very little coordination between the partners and the local
census office. The lack of coordination resulted in some unnecessary

? duplication of effort. For example, one partner held a census awareness
session in a community that had already been enumerated by census workers,
negating any real need to hold such a session at that time.?

According to the Bureau, it is more effective to have partnership
specialists report to partnership coordinators because they are more
experienced in outreach, rather than to local census office managers who are
responsible for a variety of operations. Regardless of the management
structure, what is clear is that more positive experiences seemed to result
when local managers and partnership specialists dovetailed their efforts.
For example, a Detroit manager told us that she had a ?very good? experience
with the partnership program in part because the local partnership
specialist attended local office meetings and stayed in close communication
to develop outreach and promotion strategies.

Page 14 GAO- 01- 579 2000 Census Partnerships

As we noted in our October 2000 report, at the time of the census, decisions
on which organizations the Bureau partnered with and what events the Bureau
participated in were governed by unwritten guidelines and criteria. 9 The
Bureau noted that it was very difficult to have guidelines about partnering
decisions because these decisions tend to be subjective, and there are
difficult trade- offs involved in making partnering decisions. According to
Bureau officials, partnering decisions were driven by (1) the Bureau?s
desire to partner with virtually any organization that was willing to
support the census and (2) the specific demographic, cultural, and other
characteristics of each census region.

In practice, Bureau officials said that the Bureau relied on the judgment of
its partnership specialists and other field staff to determine which
organizations to partner with, what events to attend, and how to make the
best use of their time. However, according to the Bureau, partnership
specialists? decisions were subject to supervisory review, and the Bureau
had an unwritten policy not to partner with law enforcement and certain
other federal agencies, such as the Internal Revenue Service, because it
could give the public the impression that the Bureau was sharing information
with them. In addition, according to Bureau officials, employees were
provided guidance concerning the statute that prohibits federal employees
from engaging in partisan political activities.

Similarly, the Bureau had no written guidelines on how organizations could
characterize their relationship with the Bureau, including the appropriate
use of the Bureau?s Census 2000 logo shown in figure 2. The Bureau
encouraged organizations to use the census logo to customize promotional and
other literature, and made it available on its Internet site, but aside from
stylistic guidelines, such as logo color restrictions and logo font
requirements, the Bureau did not provide any guidance on what constituted
proper and improper use.

9 Census Bureau Participation in Los Angeles Symposium, August 2000 (GAO-
01- 124R, October 24, 2000). Partnering Decisions

and Logo Use Were Governed by Unwritten Guidelines and Criteria

Page 15 GAO- 01- 579 2000 Census Partnerships

Figure 2: The Bureau?s Logo as Downloaded From Its Web Site

Source: U. S. Census Bureau.

The lack of written guidelines raised the risk that the Bureau might partner
with organizations that could create perceptual or other difficulties for
the Bureau, or that partners could use the Bureau?s logo or characterize
their relationship with the Bureau in a way that could have a similar
effect.

Better guidance could help avoid situations that might raise congressional
concern such as that which occurred when the Bureau, at the invitation of
one of its partners, participated in a public symposium that focused on
challenges facing the African American community, including census
undercounts. The event was held in Los Angeles on August 12, 2000. As we
noted in our October 2000 report, the Bureau considered the request routine
because it provided an opportunity to reach an audience of 1,500 to 2,000
African Americans, a hard- to- count population targeted by the Bureau.
Nevertheless, because promotional material used the Bureau?s Census 2000
logo, identified the Bureau as a sponsor of the symposium, and made it
appear that the event was connected to the Democratic National Convention
(which began in Los Angeles on August 14), members of Congress raised
concerns about the Bureau?s attendance.

In response to our October report, the Chairman of the House Subcommittee on
the Census called on the Bureau to develop a written policy governing its
partnership decisions and the use of its logo. In its December 7, 2000,
letter, the Bureau outlined the guidelines under which the partnership
program had operated and under which the Bureau believes the program has
functioned effectively. The guidelines state that

Page 16 GAO- 01- 579 2000 Census Partnerships

when partnering with government agencies, community groups, or local
individuals, Bureau officials will (1) exercise good judgment, (2) avoid the
reality or appearance of impropriety or preferential treatment, (3) follow
rules limiting federal employees? involvement in political activity, and (4)
not partner with law enforcement and certain other federal agencies.

Although the written guidelines are a step in the right direction, they
still do not address how partners may characterize their association with
the Bureau, nor do they discuss how partners may use the Bureau?s logo.
Thus, the Bureau still faces the risk that an organization could use the
partnership program in a manner that could create operational or perceptual
problems for the Bureau.

Moreover, the lack of guidelines governing use of the Bureau?s logo is at
odds with federal internal control requirements that call on agencies to
develop processes and procedures that support performance- based management
and minimize operational problems. As required in the November 1999 federal
internal control standards, 10 agencies must establish control over assets
vulnerable to unauthorized use. Much like trademarks used by private
companies, the census logo is a valuable asset in that it represents the
Bureau, its mission, and its reputation. Therefore, it is important for the
Bureau to safeguard its use while maintaining its flexibility and
accessibility to partners.

Bureau officials believe that a set of rigid guidelines would narrow the
scope of its outreach efforts and limit their effectiveness. However, the
practices of other federal agencies that partner with nongovernmental
entities or allow limited public use of their logos provide some useful
guidance for the Bureau. For example, the National Park Service partners
with authorized nonprofit organizations and other authorized individuals or
entities. They in turn may raise funds from private companies for the
benefit of the national park system. Although the Park Service allows
businesses to publicize their support, Park Service rules prevent them from
characterizing their association in such a way that suggests the Park
Service uses or endorses the companies? products or services. 11

Other federal agencies have issued regulations that control public use of
their logos and symbols and specify what constitutes appropriate use. For

10 GAO/ AIMD- 00- 21. 3. 1. 11 National Park Service, Director?s Order #21:
Donations and Fundraising.

Page 17 GAO- 01- 579 2000 Census Partnerships

example, under regulations governing property management, the Chief of the
U. S. Forest Service can authorize the use of the Forest Service insignia
for noncommercial educational purposes without charge when its use is a
public service that will contribute to public knowledge and understanding of
the Forest Service, its mission, and its objectives. The regulations also
allow the Chief to revoke the use of the insignia if it is being used in a
way that is ?offensive to decency and good taste or injurious to the image
of the Forest Service.? 12 Similar regulations control the use of the Forest
Service?s ?Smokey Bear? and ?Woodsy Owl? symbols. 13

In our ongoing work on performance management, we have consistently stressed
that credible performance information is essential for accurately assessing
an agency?s progress in achieving its program goals. In cases where
sufficient progress is not being made, this information can be used to
identify opportunities for improvement. To monitor the performance of the
partnership program and evaluate its overall success, the Bureau developed a
centralized database called the Contact Profile Usage Management System
(CPUMS). Specifically, CPUMS was designed to track, plan, and analyze the
Bureau?s partnership efforts by monitoring such information as the kinds of
organizations the Bureau partnered with, the commitments the organizations
made, and whether they fulfilled their commitments. Bureau headquarters
officials told us that they checked CPUMS three or four times a week to get
a sense of what was going on in the Bureau?s regions and to determine
whether targeted groups were being reached. However, several shortcomings
appear to have reduced the reliability of CPUMS data and limited its use as
an effective management tool.

According to Bureau headquarters officials, CPUMS was slow and not user
friendly, and keeping the data current was a challenge because of data entry
backlogs. These problems in turn led to inefficiencies and duplication of
effort, prompting partnership specialists and regional census centers to
keep duplicate tracking systems. For example, the separate partnership
tracking systems confused local census managers and partnership specialists
about which partners had been contacted. The Bureau did not detect many of
these problems prior to the census in part

12 36 C. F. R. part 264. 13 36 C. F. R. parts 271 and 272. The Bureau?s

Database for Tracking the Partnership Program Had Shortcomings

Page 18 GAO- 01- 579 2000 Census Partnerships

because CPUMS was developed after the 1998 dress rehearsal for the 2000
Census and was not fully tested before it went operational. 14

In response to the problems it encountered with CPUMS, the Bureau developed
a new partnership tracking system called Prisms, which went online in mid
April 2001. According to Bureau officials, unlike CPUMS, Prisms is Web-
based and thus more easily accessible to partnership program staff. In
addition, Prisms is to provide managers with more advanced reporting and
querying capabilities.

As part of its efforts to evaluate the effectiveness of the 2000 Census and
to begin planning for the 2010 Census, the Bureau is conducting two separate
evaluations of the partnership program. To get partner feedback on the
implementation of the program, the Bureau mailed out a survey to 15,000
partners asking them about their experiences in obtaining promotional items,
the types and value of in- kind services rendered, the specific partnership
activities they conducted, and their view of the effectiveness of the
overall program in reaching hard- to- count populations. According to the
Bureau, this evaluation is scheduled for completion by August 2001. The
Bureau is also doing an internal operational assessment of the partnership
program. As part of this assessment, partnership program staff were asked
about the effectiveness of the program in reaching its goals and how the
program could be improved for 2010.

For the longer term, according to Bureau officials, the Bureau intends to
institutionalize its partnership efforts so it can maintain the
organizational relationships it developed for the 2000 Census and not have
to start over when preparing for the next head count in 2010. For fiscal
year 2001, the Bureau budgeted $5.4 million to support a series of ?data
transition workshops? for partners and other interested parties on how to
access and use census data. According to Bureau officials, the Bureau wants
to make census data more easily available to data users, particularly
organizations that have not traditionally used census data but were very
active in the Bureau?s partnership program during this census. The Bureau
also hopes to build on these relationships to enhance community awareness of
and participation in its annual, nondecennial demographic and economic

14 The dress rehearsal for the 2000 Census was held in Sacramento, Calif.;
11 South Carolina counties and the City of Columbia; and Menominee County,
Wisc., including the Menominee American Indian Reservation. The purpose of
the dress rehearsal was to demonstrate the overall design of the 2000
Census. The Bureau Plans to

Evaluate and Continue the Partnership Program

Page 19 GAO- 01- 579 2000 Census Partnerships

surveys. In addition, the Bureau hopes to engage partners to support the
American Community Survey, an ongoing survey that the Census Bureau plans to
use to replace the long form in the 2010 Census. Full implementation of the
survey is to begin in 2003.

Based on our meetings with representatives of partner organizations and the
Bureau, we identified a number of best practices that appear to be key to
successful partnership engagements. As the Bureau assesses the 2000 effort,
these and other best practices should prove valuable as the Bureau moves
ahead with plans to make the partnership program permanent and gears up for
the next national head count in 2010.

As shown in figure 3, we found that successful partnership engagements are
the joint responsibility of both partners and the Bureau. For partners, best
practices include (1) identifying ?census champions?- people who will
actively support the census and encourage others to do so, (2) linking
census promotional and other efforts to the partner?s existing activities,
and (3) leveraging resources by working with other partners and customizing
existing census informational material. For the Bureau, best practices
include (1) providing adequate and timely guidance, promotional materials,
and other resources, (2) maintaining open channels of communication with
partners, and (3) encouraging the early involvement of partners in census
activities. Best Practices for

Forging Productive Partnerships

Page 20 GAO- 01- 579 2000 Census Partnerships

Figure 3: Census Partnerships Best Practices Checklist

Source: GAO.

A critical building block of constructive partnership engagements appeared
to be the presence of ?census champions? within local organizations. These
individuals recognized the community benefits that could accrue from a
complete and accurate population count, had the authority to commit their
organizations? resources toward that goal, and were sufficiently persuasive
to mobilize others. Best Practices for Partners

Identify ?Census Champions?

Partner Best Practices 1. Identi fy ?census champions?

2. Link promotional and other support to partner?s existing activities 3.
Leverage resources by working with other partners and customizing
informational materials

Census Partnerships Census Partnerships Best Practices Checklist Best
Practices Checklist

Partner Best Practices

1. Identify ?census champions? 2. Link promotional and other support to
partner?s existing activities 3. Leverage resources by working with other
partners and customizing

informational materials

Bureau Best Practices

1. Provide adequate and timely information on how partners can support the
census

2. Maintain open channels of communication with local partners 3. Encourage
partners to initiate census planning activities early

Page 21 GAO- 01- 579 2000 Census Partnerships

Champions we encountered in the course of our work included elected
officials, heads of city agencies, religious leaders, and school officials.
Although each supported the census in different ways, they generally had
certain elements in common. First, they viewed support of the census as an
investment with a long- term payoff, as opposed to a short- term expense,
and were thus more inclined to allocate time, people, and money towards the
census. For example, a champion for the City of Detroit was the City Clerk.
Her office led the effort in creating a Homeless Task Force to count all the
homeless in the city, cosponsoring Census Town Hall meetings with the
Detroit City Council, and bringing together all the elected officials in
Detroit- including the Mayor, the City Council President, a U. S.
Congressman, and a U. S. Senator- for a televised public service
announcement and a billboard encouraging Detroit residents to participate in
the census. A copy of this billboard is shown in figure 4.

Figure 4: Detroit Billboard Showing Political Figures? Support of the Census

Source: Brogan and Partners Communications.

Second, census champions helped garner the commitment and support of other
community leaders and organizations, which increased the visibility of the
census still further. For example, the Wyoming Governor?s liaison to the
census told us that the Governor, in realizing how much the accuracy of the
census affects the distribution of federal funds to Wyoming, formed a task
force in early 1999 to encourage municipalities to promote the

Page 22 GAO- 01- 579 2000 Census Partnerships

census. The Task Force published statistical and demographic data to show
Wyoming localities how much funding they might lose if all their residents
were not counted. It also issued press releases about census recruiting
needs, participated in American Indian pow- wows, set up questionnaire
assistance centers for the Bureau, and, as shown in figure 5, developed a
separate logo supporting the census.

Figure 5: Logo Developed by the Wyoming Census Task Force for Census 2000
Promotion

Source: The Wyoming Census Task Force.

In addition, census champions used their credibility within their
communities to help dispel misperceptions about the census. For example, to
counter a long- held belief that tribal members had nothing to gain from
taking part in the census, the Chief of the Tuscarora Indian Tribe in
Pembroke, N. C. decided in early 1999 to partner with the Bureau. At monthly
tribal meetings he discussed how census data are used as a basis

Page 23 GAO- 01- 579 2000 Census Partnerships

for funding decisions at all levels of government and stressed that a
complete count of the Tuscarora Indians might help them in their petition to
become a federally recognized tribe.

A second best practice that emerged from our discussions with local partners
was the integration of census- related activities with an organization?s
day- to- day work. This allowed local partners to support the census using
existing staff and other organizational resources. Further, partners said
that supporting the census as part of an organization?s dayto- day
activities helped reduce people?s fear and distrust of the census because
they could see how organizations they were familiar with were already
participating.

For example, as part of its efforts to help the Bureau develop a more
complete address list, Los Angeles tasked employees of the Department of
Water and Power, sanitation workers, as well as many other city employees to
identify dwellings that the Bureau may have missed as part of its address-
list development operations. These employees were selected because their
work necessitated their going door- to- door, and thus they were well suited
to find ?nonstandard? housing units such as converted garages and subdivided
single family homes. The city?s Information Technology Agency developed a
10- minute video describing the importance of this citywide effort, what
nonstandard dwellings look like, and how to report any findings. According
to the city, over 38,000 nonstandard dwellings were confirmed by the Bureau.
Locating nonstandard housing was particularly important to the city since
the city believed the exclusion of these units from the address list played
a significant role in Los Angeles? undercount in 1990. Link Promotional and
Other

Support to the Partner?s Existing Activities

Partner Best Practices

1. Identify ?census champions?

2. Link promotional and other support to partner?s existing activities

3. Leverage resources by working with other partners and customizing
informational materials

Page 24 GAO- 01- 579 2000 Census Partnerships

A third role for partners was enhancing the impact of their support by
sharing ideas and resources with other organizations that had also partnered
with the Bureau. In this way, they coordinated activities to reach more
people while making more efficient use of their resources, and they avoided
duplicating the efforts of others. For example, in Detroit, service
providers to the homeless worked together to determine how they could best
promote the census among those without residences. As a group they organized
special promotional events on different nights around the city and
coordinated their distribution of promotional items. One service provider
organized a gospel choir concert in honor of the census, with a choir made
up of homeless men, women, and children. Homeless service providers
encouraged homeless persons from all over the city to participate.

Partners also leveraged their resources by customizing the Bureau?s census
informational materials to better resonate with local groups. Indeed, they
said that incorporating symbols, images, languages, and people familiar to a
particular community helped community members to identify with and be more
receptive to the census. For example, a Los Angeles Korean organization
developed its own census logo, as shown in the banner held by two staff
members in figure 6. The organization developed brochures in Korean and
tailored its census message to undocumented immigrants by emphasizing that
census information was confidential by law. Leverage Resources by

Working With Other Partners and Customizing Informational Materials

Partner Best Practices

1. Identify ?census champions? 2. Link promotional and other support to
partner?s exi sti ng act ivi ti es

3. Leverage resources by working with other partners and customizing
informati onal materi al s

Page 25 GAO- 01- 579 2000 Census Partnerships

Figure 6: Korean Senior Center Banner With Tailored Census 2000
Questionnaire Assistance Center Logo

Source: GAO.

Page 26 GAO- 01- 579 2000 Census Partnerships

A number of the partners we spoke to stressed the importance of the Bureau?s
providing partners with information on the census and guidance on how the
partners could best lend their support. They said that this was important so
that they could adequately plan for and participate in census activities.
For example, to help educate the Eastern Shoshone Tribe (located on the
Wyoming Wind River Indian Reservation) about census operations and the
partnership program, the Bureau provided information through the Tribal
Leaders? Council, an organization representing Montana and Wyoming tribal
governments. According to a tribal representative, the Bureau also provided
the tribe a copy of its Tribal Complete Count Committee Handbook. The 46-
page handbook lays out suggested activities, including running public
service announcements with voiceovers by tribal leaders and community
elders, distributing census awareness materials throughout the tribe?s
jurisdiction, and collaborating with the Bureau of Indian Affairs to develop
in- school initiatives that support the census.

The partners we spoke with also noted the importance of the Bureau?s
deploying census information and other resources in a timely manner. This
was particularly true with in- kind funding, where the partners said they
needed sufficient time to apply for the support and to plan census
promotional and other activities. However, in some cases, the timeliness of
the in- kind funding may have fallen short of partners? needs. For example,
the Bureau announced the availability of in- kind funding in January 2000, 3
months before Census Day. A number of partners we spoke with said that this
left little time for them to apply for the support and organize specific
events. One Wyoming social service organization- Needs Inc.- told us that it
received notice about the availability of in- kind funding awards the day
the applications were due. This gave the Best Practices for the

Bureau Provide Adequate and Timely Information on How Partners Can Support
the Census

Bureau Best Practices 1. Provi de adequate and timel y information on how
partners can

support the census

2. Maintain open channels of communication with local partners 3. Encourage
partners to initiate census planning activities early

Page 27 GAO- 01- 579 2000 Census Partnerships

organization a day to apply for the in- kind support and find a vendor to
supply promotional items. A Needs Inc. representative told us that had the
organization known about the in- kind support earlier, it would have planned
more promotional activities. According to Bureau officials, factors
affecting the timeliness of the in- kind support included budgetcycle delays
and government credit card spending limits.

A second best practice emerging from our conversations with partners
centered on the Bureau?s establishing clear communication links with its
partners, mostly through the Bureau?s partnership specialists. The partners
said that good communication was important for exchanging information on
local enumeration conditions, such as locations of hard- to- count
populations and key community contacts. In addition, clear communication
links helped the Bureau to be more responsive to partners? questions about
census operations. For example, a representative for the Detroit Census Task
Force noted that a partnership specialist or other Bureau official regularly
attended Task Force meetings to keep everyone up- to- date about available
Bureau support and upcoming census operations.

To increase the Bureau?s ability to identify and communicate with local
partners, and to overcome the wariness certain groups had towards the
government, the Bureau tried to hire partnership specialists from and
familiar with the cultures and languages of the communities where they would
work. In addition, the Bureau expected partnership specialists to have an
understanding of the structure and function of local businesses and
community organizations, as well as negotiation and presentation skills. To
help ensure that partnership specialists had the information and skills with
which to speak knowledgeably about Census 2000 operations and to negotiate
effective partnerships, the Bureau required specialists to Maintain Open
Channels of

Communication With Local Partners

Bureau Best Practices

1. Provide adequate and timely information on how partners can support the
census

2. Mai ntain open channels of communicati on with local partners

3. Encourage partners to initiate census planning activities early

Page 28 GAO- 01- 579 2000 Census Partnerships

complete three stages of training totaling about 25 days. Training topics
included the history of the census, the Bureau?s overall plan of operation,
and communication and media skills, such as delivering effective
presentations and developing partnerships in multicultural environments.

Our discussions with partners demonstrated the importance of this hiring and
training strategy. For example, the Charlotte, N. C., regional census office
hired a Native American partnership specialist who was very active in her
tribe and with local Native American organizations. According to the
partnership specialist, she already had credibility within the community and
understood the importance of working within the tribal hierarchy to gain the
trust of the tribe?s chief and elders necessary to engage the tribe in
promoting the census.

Another method the Bureau used to communicate with its partners was its
Census 2000 Web site. The site had a link to a page devoted to the
partnership program from which partners could download documents such as
brochures, press releases, and newsletter articles, as well as information
about census operations. A number of partners we spoke with said that they
used the Web site to find information for newsletters, 1990 and current
response rates, publicity messages for advertising, and school materials.

A third role for the Bureau appeared to be enlisting the early support of
partners in planning census activities. The partners we met with often told
us that it takes time to develop the infrastructure to support the census at
the local level, as well as to educate the community about the importance of
participating in the census. In addition, several census operations that can
benefit from partner involvement, such as reviewing and updating the
Bureau?s address list, take place several years prior to Census Day. As a
Encourage Partners to Initiate

Census Planning Activities Early

Bureau Best Practices

1. Provide adequate and timely information on how partners can support the
census

2. Maintain open channels of communication with local partners

3. Encourage partners to initiate census planning acti vi ties early

Page 29 GAO- 01- 579 2000 Census Partnerships

result, some partners launched their census efforts as much as 3 years prior
to Census Day while others told us that their efforts could have been more
effective had they started earlier in the census cycle. For example,
officials in Maywood, Calif., said the city started its census efforts 3
years prior to the census, which allowed the city to budget a total of
$30,000 from 1997 through 2000 to promote the census to its many non-
Englishspeaking Hispanic immigrants. In contrast, representatives from a
subcommittee of the Robeson County, N. C., Complete Count Committee told us
they began their census promotion efforts in November 1999, 5 months before
Census Day. The representatives explained that they felt this was too late
to effectively incorporate census promotion efforts into different community
events, such as Pembroke?s December holiday parade.

A little over a year after Census Day 2000, the Bureau?s partnership program
is at a crossroads. The intensive effort to mobilize grassroots support for
the census by engaging as many organizations and people as possible is over,
and the program is focused on the lower- intensity but longer term job of
sustaining those relationships. Overall, the Bureau made an extraordinary
effort to fulfill the goals of the partnership program over a relatively
short period. More significantly, based on our observations, it is quite
likely that key census- taking activities, such as recruiting temporary
census workers and encouraging people to complete their questionnaires,
would have been less successful had it not been for the Bureau?s aggressive
partnership efforts.

Still, the full impact of the partnership program will not be known until
the Bureau completes its evaluations. As it does so, it will be important
for the Bureau to assess how its partnership efforts affected different
populations and census operations, as well as the adequacy of its
partnership staffing levels. Such information will be important for
determining the costeffectiveness of the program and for allocating
resources in the years to come. Moreover, our review highlights Bureau and
partner best practices and lessons learned that appear to be key to
effective partnership engagements. As part of its evaluation, it will be
important for the Bureau to explore these further to best apply its limited
resources. In addition, the Bureau should examine ways to increase the
coordination and communication between the partnership specialists and the
local census office managers. By having a close relationship with the local
census managers and local census offices, the partnership program could
benefit from the ground- level perspective that managers have about the
enumeration challenges of their particular areas. Conclusions

Page 30 GAO- 01- 579 2000 Census Partnerships

Our review also suggests that as the program moves forward, the partnership
program could benefit from tighter internal controls and a greater
performance orientation in several key areas. Those areas include better
documentation of how the Bureau spends its in- kind support, clear guidance
on how partners can characterize their association with the Bureau and use
the Bureau?s logo, and a more effective information system to monitor the
partnership program. Together, such improvements could help (1) increase
financial accountability, (2) reduce the risk of engaging partners that
might raise perceptual or other problems that could undermine the Bureau?s
efforts, and (3) provide program managers with better information on the
status of the partnership program for more informed decisions on program
performance.

To foster a more accountable and performance- oriented partnership program,
we recommend that the Secretary of Commerce ensure that the Bureau take the
following actions.

 In completing the evaluations of the partnership program as planned,
ensure that the Bureau managers receive the information they need to refine
and develop the program and allocate resources appropriately. As part of
this effort, the Bureau should identify best practices and ensure that they
are incorporated into future partnership efforts.

 Document in- kind funding expenditures and maintain proper accounting in
accordance with federal government standards for internal control.

 Explore ways to increase the coordination and communication between the
partnership specialists and the local census office managers.

 Review partnership specialist staffing levels to make sure that the levels
are sufficient to ensure the adequate provision of Bureau support to
partners.

 Develop regulations specifying how organizations may characterize their
association with the Bureau and how they may use the Bureau?s logo. The
guidance should provide for needed flexibility while informing partners that
they should not characterize their association with the Bureau or use the
census logo in a manner that is inconsistent with the Bureau?s mission, nor
should they imply that the Bureau is sponsoring or endorsing a particular
activity or organization.

 Ensure that Prisms, the Bureau?s new partnership tracking system, is fully
tested under the operational loads expected for future operations and the
2010 Census. This should help ensure that Prisms increases the accuracy,
ease of use, and utility of the Bureau?s partnership program database and
provides the Bureau with credible performance information necessary for
monitoring, planning, and evaluating the partnership program.
Recommendations for

Executive Action

Page 31 GAO- 01- 579 2000 Census Partnerships

 Ensure that partnership specialists, as part of their training, are made
aware of the best practices of productive partnerships, and that they
incorporate those practices when engaging partners in the future.

The Secretary of Commerce forwarded written comments from the Bureau of the
Census on a draft of this report. The Bureau generally provided additional
perspective and clarification on several of our key points and
recommendations. Further, the Bureau said it would implement three of our
seven recommendations, and acknowledged the importance of three of the four
remaining recommendations. The Bureau provided clarifying information for a
seventh recommendation concerning the need to increase coordination and
communication between partnership specialists and local census office
managers, but did not directly agree or disagree with it.

The recommendations the Bureau agreed to implement included our
recommendations to (1) document in- kind funding expenditures, (2) review
partnership specialist staffing levels to ensure they provide needed
support, and (3) develop regulations specifying how organizations may
characterize their association with the Bureau.

With respect to our finding that the Bureau had no data on how it
distributed $14 million of in- kind funding to local partners, the Bureau
reported that its staff reviewed each expenditure and the funds ?were

dispersed in accordance with standards for internal control in the federal
government.? As we noted in our report, federal internal control standards
require transactions to be recorded in a timely and accurate manner.
Moreover, this information is important for accountability purposes, as well
as for managing and assessing the effectiveness of the local funding of
partnership efforts. In the absence of data on in- kind funding
expenditures, we could not independently review the transactions.

The Bureau noted that partners assisted with the recruitment of over 3.7
million individuals to work on the census as opposed to the 2.5 million that
we reported in our draft. According to the Bureau, the 2.5 million
represents enumerators for nonresponse follow- up and certain other data
collection operations. The 3.7 million represents field and office staff
working on all operations from March 1997 through September 2000. We revised
the draft accordingly. Agency Comments

and Our Evaluation

Page 32 GAO- 01- 579 2000 Census Partnerships

The Bureau disagreed with our use of the ratio of partnership specialists to
complete count committees as an indicator of the specialists? workload. The
Bureau noted that regardless of the number of specialists or committees,
partnership specialists are to offer assistance if and when needed.

We recognized the limitation of the measure and thus referred to it as a

?rough? indicator in the draft. Nevertheless, the ratio of partnership
specialists to complete count committees is a useful way of comparing
partnership specialists? workloads from one census to another. The Bureau
expected partnership specialists to provide guidance and staff support for
committee activities, engaging in such tasks as providing general
information and keeping committees abreast of census operations and
schedules. Thus, it is likely that, overall, the greater the number of
committees, the greater the demands on specialists? time.

The Bureau provided clarifying information for our findings and
recommendation concerning the partnership program?s management structure and
level of coordination between the local offices and partnership specialists.
In response, we revised the draft to better reflect the Bureau?s view that
it is better to have partnership specialists report to partnership
coordinators rather than to local census managers, as some managers
suggested in our survey. However, as we also note in the report, regardless
of the management structure, more positive experiences seemed to result when
local managers and partnership specialists dovetailed their efforts, hence
our recommendation for the Bureau to explore ways to increase the
coordination and communication between partnership specialists and local
census office managers.

In commenting on our recommendation to identify partnership program best
practices and incorporate them into future partnership efforts, the Bureau
said it recognized the value of sharing information. The Bureau noted that
throughout the 2000 Census, the Bureau?s plans and activities included
numerous opportunities for staff to share best practices with each other and
their partners. The Bureau?s efforts to share information during the 2000
Census are commendable, and it will be important for the Bureau to properly
collect and summarize these data so that they can be used to inform future
activities.

With respect to our recommendation concerning Prisms- the Bureau?s new
partnership tracking system- the Bureau responded that the system is now
fully functional. We revised the draft to reflect this fact.

Page 33 GAO- 01- 579 2000 Census Partnerships

We are sending copies of this letter to the Chairman of the House Committee
on Government Reform, the Secretary of Commerce, and the Acting Director of
the Bureau of the Census. Copies will be made available to others on
request.

Please contact me on (202) 512- 6806 if you have any questions. Other key
contributors to this report are included in appendix II.

J. Christopher Mihm Director Strategic Issues

Appendix I: Comments From the Secretary of Commerce Page 34 GAO- 01- 579
2000 Census Partnerships

Appendix I: Comments From the Secretary of Commerce

Appendix I: Comments From the Secretary of Commerce Page 35 GAO- 01- 579
2000 Census Partnerships

Appendix I: Comments From the Secretary of Commerce Page 36 GAO- 01- 579
2000 Census Partnerships

Appendix I: Comments From the Secretary of Commerce Page 37 GAO- 01- 579
2000 Census Partnerships

Appendix I: Comments From the Secretary of Commerce Page 38 GAO- 01- 579
2000 Census Partnerships

Appendix I: Comments From the Secretary of Commerce Page 39 GAO- 01- 579
2000 Census Partnerships

Appendix II: GAO Contacts and Staff Acknowledgments

Page 40 GAO- 01- 579 2000 Census Partnerships

J. Christopher Mihm, (202) 512- 6806 Robert Goldenkoff, (202) 512- 2757

In addition to those named above, Deborah Eichhorn, Lily Kim, Anne Rhodes-
Kline, Roger Stoltz, Tom Schultz, Michael Volpe, and staff from our Los
Angeles, Chicago, and Denver field offices made key contributions to this
report. Appendix II: GAO Contacts and Staff

Acknowledgments GAO Contacts Acknowledgments

(410536)

The first copy of each GAO report is free. Additional copies of reports are
$2 each. A check or money order should be made out to the Superintendent of
Documents. VISA and MasterCard credit cards are also accepted.

Orders for 100 or more copies to be mailed to a single address are
discounted 25 percent.

Orders by mail:

U. S. General Accounting Office P. O. Box 37050 Washington, DC 20013

Orders by visiting:

Room 1100 700 4 th St., NW (corner of 4 th and G Sts. NW) Washington, DC
20013

Orders by phone:

(202) 512- 6000 fax: (202) 512- 6061 TDD (202) 512- 2537

Each day, GAO issues a list of newly available reports and testimony. To
receive facsimile copies of the daily list or any list from the past 30
days, please call (202) 512- 6000 using a touchtone phone. A recorded menu
will provide information on how to obtain these lists.

Orders by Internet

For information on how to access GAO reports on the Internet, send an email
message with ?info? in the body to:

Info@ www. gao. gov or visit GAO?s World Wide Web home page at: http:// www.
gao. gov

Contact one:

 Web site: http:// www. gao. gov/ fraudnet/ fraudnet. htm

 E- mail: fraudnet@ gao. gov

 1- 800- 424- 5454 (automated answering system) Ordering Information

To Report Fraud, Waste, and Abuse in Federal Programs

United States General Accounting Office Washington, D. C. 20548- 0001

Official Business Penalty for Private Use $300

Address Correction Requested Presorted Standard

Postage & Fees Paid GAO Permit No. GI00
*** End of document. ***