Challenges Blog - Census 20/20

Understanding “Differential Privacy”

Jason Jurjevich — Tue, 09 Jul 2019 19:50:42 +0000

The U.S. Census Bureau collects sensitive data from individuals and households, publishing demographic data that is essential for telling the story of Americans and their communities. Under Section 9 of the Census Act, U.S. Code Title 13, as a “trusted curator” the Bureau is required uphold respondent privacy in data that are released publicly. To meet this requirement, the Census Bureau typically releases aggregate-level data (i.e. census block, block-group, or tract) and implements various disclosure avoidance techniques (e.g. collapsing data, variable suppression). More recently however, modern computational methods, combined with more publicly available data, has increased the risk of exposing individual privacy. In response, the Bureau has explored approaches for modernizing disclosure avoidance.

What is Differential Privacy?

Differential privacy includes various techniques aimed at limiting available aggregate information to protect individual privacy. More specifically, differential privacy attempts to balance privacy loss and accuracy through mathematical formulas. Once the limit for acceptable privacy loss is established (this is part of the current debate), measures including adding synthetic data (or introducing “synthetic noise”), data-swapping, and data imputation can be used to ensure that the database is sufficiently safeguarded from reconstruction and individual identification.

Differential Privacy And the Census

The U.S. Census Bureau has expressed interest in implementing differential privacy in the 2020 Census. In practice, the Census Bureau would need to set a limit for the amount of disclosure avoidance that balances privacy with data utility and accuracy. Given the importance of decennial census and ACS data, it is critical to understand the impact that differential privacy will have on data availability, particularly for cross-tabulated data (e.g. poverty by race/ethnicity), microdata (e.g. Public Use Microdata Sample or PUMS), and for small-area geographies (e.g. census blocks). To date, the Bureau has not applied differential privacy to their ACS or decennial datasets nor have they released information about how differential privacy would be approached on the upcoming census.

Concerns ABOUT differential privacy

A white paper written by Census Bureau staff acknowledges that differential privacy “lacks a well-developed theory for measuring the relative impact of added noise on the utility of different data products, tuning equity trade-offs, and presenting the impact of such decisions.” By adjusting the perceived demographic composition of communities, differential privacy has the capacity to disproportionately impact racial/ethnic minorities and underrepresented individuals. Communities where individuals of color make up a small percentage of the population, for example, may require data swapping to a different tract or block group to meet the privacy limits set under differential privacy protocol.

Dr. Steven Ruggles, Director of the Institute for Social Research and Data Innovation at the University of Minnesota, notes in a recent tweet that, “the Census Bureau announced new confidentiality standards that mark a ‘sea change for the way that official statistics are produced and published.”

The Minnesota Population Center (MPC) outlines a number of concerns regarding differential privacy. The MPC recommends the following points be addressed before differential privacy policies are implemented:

More testing is needed before final decisions are made on how differential privacy will be applied to census data.
Differential privacy is not appropriate or feasible for ACS microdata (e.g. PUMS).
For all data products, the Census Bureau should proceed cautiously in close consultation with the data user community.

For more information

This topic is ever-evolving and as such, this post will be updated to make the most current information available.

“Innovating Data Privacy for the American Community Survey.” -Rolando Rodriguez and Amy Lauger (2019).
“Challenges and New Approaches for Protecting Privacy in Federal Statistical Programs.” National Academies, Committee on National Statistics (2019).

Navigating the Undercount Risk in Census 2020

Jason Jurjevich — Fri, 07 Jun 2019 19:50:33 +0000

When it comes to the upcoming 2020 Census, the risk of an undercount is rooted in two (overlapping) factors: 1) general undercount risks (e.g. underfunding, change in leadership, distrust of government) and, 2) the proposed citizenship question. Below is a summary of recent research that highlights the risk of failing to count all individuals in the upcoming census.

General Undercount Risks

In their June 2019 report, Assessing Miscounts in the 2020 Census, the Urban Institute provides a comprehensive assessment of the potential undercount in the 2020 Census. The report takes into account several factors, including insufficient funding for the Census over the past decade, the introduction of internet response option, the use of administrative records to reduce Non-Response Follow-up (NRFU) field work, and the proposal to include a citizenship question.

The report presents the cumulative risk to census undercount across these factors, in High, Medium, and Low Risk scenarios. The authors project the census undercount at national and state levels, and by race/ethnicity and age. The report finds:

The total U.S. undercount could range from approximately 900,000 people to over 4 million people on the 2020 Census
Black and Hispanic/Latinx individuals could be undercounted nationally at a rate as high as 3.7 percent and 3.6 percent, respectively

Follow the link above for the full report or check out the Urban Institute’s data page for additional findings.

Citizenship Question Undercount Risk

On April 23, the Supreme Court heard opening arguments in the case that will determine whether a the proposed citizenship question will appear on the 2020 Census. Since this controversy began in early 2017, researchers have been trying to understand how a proposed citizenship question will impact overall response rates.

Recent studies have found that the citizenship question will impede the mandate to ensure that everyone is fairly and accurately counted.

A Harvard study estimates that the citizenship question could lead to an undercount of roughly 6 million (12 percent) of the Latinx population nationally
A study by UCLA researchers concluded that 7 to 10 percent of the U.S. population, including 11 to 18 percent of immigrants, and 14 to 17 percent of Latinx individuals would not respond to a census with a citizenship question

For more on research quantifying the impacts of a citizenship question, read this Washington Post story.

Challenge #1: Implications of Inadequate Census Funding

Jason Jurjevich — Wed, 01 May 2019 20:58:20 +0000

The struggle to adequately fund the 2020 Census has been closely followed by a number of outlets, including a number of posts on this website. According to the Census Project, the Trump Administration’s FY2020 funding request for the Census Bureau falls approximately $2 Billion short of what is needed to carryout the 2020 enumeration.

Below we outline some of the ramifications to date for inadequate funding for the Bureau. There are certain to be other implications moving forward, especially if the Bureau continues to be underfunded in FY2020.

1. Cancelled testing in suburban and rural areas

Prior to each decennial census, the Census Bureau conducts a "dress rehearsal" to test outreach, data collection methods, and technology. Due to reduced funding, the Bureau announced cuts to 2017 field testing in reservation lands in the Dakotas and Washington State, as well as in Puerto Rico. More recently, the Bureau announced additional cuts for 2018 field testing in West Virginia and Washington State.
Field testing is critical, especially for 2020, because unlike previous decennial censuses, Census 2020 will allow respondents to fill out their forms via the internet. This decision, driven to a large degree to reduce costs of administering the census, means there will be roughly half of the field offices as in Census 2010.

2. Reduction in the number of local census offices and field staff

Part of the justification for fewer Area Census Offices (ACOs) and field staff is that Census 2020 will be “smarter” because of its reliance on digital technology. These potential efficiencies, however, might be offset by various unforeseen technological challenges and other issues (e.g. proposed citizenship question).

3. Delay of the Economic Census

Due to low funding levels at the Bureau, funding for the 2017 Economic Census was used to support efforts to keep the 2020 Census on track. Data collection for the 2017 Census was delayed approximately 6 months when compared to the 2012 Economic Census and data releases were delayed 9 months relative to the 2012 survey.

Challenge #1: Update - Analyzing the TRUMP Administration's 2020 Budget Request

Jason Jurjevich — Fri, 12 Apr 2019 22:43:33 +0000

The Council of Professional Associations on Federal Statistics (COPAFS), which focuses on providing government policy decision makers with information that demonstrates the value of federal statistics, recently released their analysis of the Trump administration’s proposed FY 2020 budget. The administration’s FY 2020 request calls for roughly $5.3 billion to support Census 2020. According to COPAFS, this number, even when paired with the additional $1 billion from FY19 appropriations, still falls short of the funding that the Census Bureau calls for in their 2020 Census Life-Cycle Cost Estimate document.

Another notable impact affecting the U.S. Census Bureau is the Trump administration’s continued call for consolidating the U.S. Census Bureau, the Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA), and the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS).

The President’s budget request is a starting point for creating the FY2020 federal budget. Congress may consult the administration’s proposal as they work toward fleshing out more budget details in the coming months.

To read the entire analysis by COPAFS, follow this link.

Challenge #3: Citizenship Question and SCOTUS

Jason Jurjevich — Fri, 22 Feb 2019 22:50:59 +0000

Just one week after a federal judge in Washington ruled in favor of the U.S. Commerce Department by denying a request to block a citizenship question on the 2020 Census, the U.S. Supreme Court announced Friday, February 15 that they intend to hear arguments on the question.

Timeline. The justices are expected to hear the case on April 23, 2019, and release their decision by the end of June. This proposed timeline is being driven, in part, by a tight turnaround for printing the census forms. According to officials, the finalized form must be sent to the printers no later than June 2019.

A more detailed article about the U.S. Supreme Court announcement can be found here.

Challenge #3: A Citizenship Question TIMELY Update

Jason Jurjevich — Tue, 12 Feb 2019 22:02:39 +0000

On February 8, 2019, Dabney L. Friedrich, a federal judge in Washington D.C., ruled in favor of the U.S. Commerce Department by denying a request to block the citizenship question on the 2020 Census. This case, one of several cases across the U.S., was filed by the Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC). The plaintiffs challenged the decision to include the citizenship question by arguing that a privacy impact assessment should have been completed prior to adding the citizenship question on Census 2020 form.

On March 6, 2019, Richard Seeborg, a federal judge in California, became the second federal judge to block the administration’s plans for a citizenship question on the 2020 Census. Back in January 2019, New York District Court Judge Jesse Furman was the first judge ordering the administration to remove the citizenship question from the Census 2020 form.

What does this mean?

With one judge (i.e. Friedrich) ruling in favor of the administration and three ruling against (i.e. Seeborg, Furman, and Hazel), the decision now lies in the hands of the U.S. Supreme Court. More information is available here.

More information about EPIC v. Commerce can be found here.

More information on Judge Seeborg’s decision can be found here.

More information on Judge Hazel’s decision can be found here.

Challenge #1: Funding Update - Shutdown Edition (January 2019)

Jason Jurjevich — Wed, 16 Jan 2019 21:09:20 +0000

On December 22, 2018, the federal government entered a partial shutdown, furloughing approximately 800,000 federal employees. The U.S. Census Bureau is among the federal agencies without an approved budget for FY2019. However, as part of the FY2018 appropriations process, the Bureau received close to $1 billion in FY2019 for 2020 Census preparations. The Bureau estimates that these funds can support 2020 decennial work into February, 2019 without impacting the decennial enumeration. Critics have their doubts.

How did the Bureau run out of funding at such a critical juncture? The 115th Congress adjourned without agreeing on how to best fund the Bureau in FY2019, leaving it to the next Congress to reconcile the FY2019 House ($4.8B) and Senate ($3.8B) funding bills, which differ by approximately $1 billion. The primary difference between these funding levels, according to the Census Project, is that the House bill assumes that between $1.6B and $1.8B of the FY2019 appropriation will actually be spent in Quarter 1 of FY2020. Therefore, the House bill would appropriate only $3.4B in funding for FY2019.

Image courtesy of the U.S. Census Bureau (2018).

The Takeaway

Without a quick end to the already historically long government shutdown, the 2020 Census could be in serious trouble. At a time when the program should be ramping up by opening local offices, it’s imperative that Congress support expanded partnership staff and experts, a stepped-up communications campaign, and larger field infrastructure. Right now, the Census is operating on what equates to emergency funding. Before too long, this could have major implications for the decennial census, which is set to begin in earnest in Alaska in January 2020.

For more information, check out these resources:

2018, July. Update on FY2019 Census Bureau Budget Action So Far. The Census Project.
2018. Fiscal Year 2019 Budget Summary ($3.8 billion). U.S. Census Bureau.
2018, June. House, Senate Bills Split on Census Funding. FCW. Authored by Chase Gunter.
2019, January. What the Shutdown Means for the Census. CitiesSpeak. Authored by Brian Egan.
2019, January. The Census Bureau says work on the 2020 count can go on for weeks. Experts say they have their doubts. Washington Post. Authored by Tara Bahrampour.

Challenge #3: A Citizenship Question and Census 2020: Quantifying the Undercount Risk in Oregon

Jason Jurjevich — Tue, 15 Jan 2019 22:30:50 +0000

The decision by U.S. Secretary of Commerce, Wilbur Ross, to include a citizenship question on the upcoming 2020 Census has generated much controversy. On January 15, 2019, a federal judge in New York District Court, Jesse Furman, ordered the administration to remove the citizenship question from the Census 2020 form. For now, Judge Furman’s decision means that respondents will not be asked about their citizenship in the 2020 census. On Thursday, January 16, 2019, the Trump administration filed paperwork challenging this order, and is now asking the U.S. Supreme Court to take the court case.

The census, held every 10 years, is charged by the U.S. Constitution to count everyone. Securing a fair and accurate count is not only critical for determining political representation, but also ensures fair distribution of federal resources to state, county, and local municipalities. The concern among many is that the citizenship question would yield lower census response rates among certain groups, namely non-citizens, persons of color, children, and individuals of lower socioeconomic status. The lower response rates generated by the citizenship question, combined with a tendency to undercount these groups in the first place, together would increase the overall census undercount, effectively leading to underrepresentation. Census advocates point to other concerns about the question as well, including: an unclear and uncertain justification for adding the question, and the question not being formally tested by the U.S. Census Bureau.

To quantify the undercount risk of the citizenship question in Oregon, we followed a framework outlined in a recent article by Beth Jarosz of the Population Reference Bureau (PRB). Using data from the American Community Survey (ACS), we set out to estimate how many Oregon residents live in a household with at least one non-citizen, principally because these households would be more likely to be undercounted. We report the following four takeaways for Oregon:

Total Population. The data show that nearly a half-million (456,900), or almost 1 in 9 Oregonians live with at least one non-citizen, meaning they would be more likely to be undercounted with a citizenship question in the upcoming decennial census.
Age. Children are more likely to live with at least one non-citizen, meaning that children would be more likely to be undercounted. Some 162,000 Oregonians 19 years and under live with a non-citizen, including almost 1 in 5 children between 0-9 years of age (Table 1). Children are already a historically undercounted group; a citizenship question would make it more difficult to accurately count children in Oregon and across the U.S.
Race/Ethnicity. A citizenship question would make it more difficult to count Oregonians of color. Roughly 78% of Oregonians living with a non-citizen are persons of color, despite making up 24% of the state’s population (Table 2). Individuals of color more likely to be undercounted include Asian or Pacific Islander and Hispanic individuals, where 43% and 53% live with at least one non-citizen, respectively.
Housing Tenure and Poverty. A citizenship question would also make it more difficult to count Oregonians with limited means. Roughly 17% of Oregon renters and 19% of Oregonians living below the poverty level live with non-citizens, and are at elevated risk of being undercounted (Table 3). Renters make up about 37% of Oregon’s population but comprise nearly 56% of the population at risk of being undercounted. Similarly, Oregonians living below the poverty level make up 16% of the Oregon population but make up nearly 26% of the at-risk population.

Table 1. Oregonians Living With at Least One Non-Citizen by Age Cohort, 2012-2016.

Source: American Community Survey (ACS), Public Use Microdata Sample (PUMS), 2012-2016 (five-year combined estimates)

Table 2. Oregonians Living With at Least One Non-Citizen by Race/Ethnicity, 2012-2016.

Source: American Community Survey (ACS), Public Use Microdata Sample (PUMS), 2012-2016 (five-year combined estimates)

Table 3. Oregonians Living With at Least One Non-Citizen by Housing Tenure and Poverty Status, 2012-2016.

Source: American Community Survey (ACS), Public Use Microdata Sample (PUMS), 2012-2016 (five-year combined estimates)

A printer friendly version of this article can be accessed here.

Challenge #2: Change in Leadership [Update]

Jason Jurjevich — Tue, 08 Jan 2019 22:08:08 +0000

On Wednesday, January 2, 2019, the U.S. Senate unanimously voted to approve President Trump’s nominee for Director of the U.S. Census Bureau, Dr. Steven Dillingham. Dr. Dillingham has more than 25 years of statistical, research, senior management, and legal experience in the federal government. He previously served as Director of the Bureau of Justice Statistics and the Bureau of Transportation Statistics. Both of these agencies support national surveys in partnership with the Census Bureau. Dr. Dillingham earned his BA at Winthrop University, received his JD, MPA, and PhD from the University of South Carolina, and completed his MBA at George Washington University and LLM at Georgetown University.

Dr. Ron Jarmin, a government economist who served as the Interim Director of the Census Bureau following former Director John Thompson’s resignation in 2017, is expected to fulfill the role of Deputy Director of the U.S. Census on a permanent basis.

For more information:

2019. Senate Confirms Trump’s Census Bureau Director Nominee Steven Dillingham. NPR. Authored by Hansi Lo Wang.

Challenge #3: Legal Challenge to the Citizenship Question

Jason Jurjevich — Fri, 07 Dec 2018 23:04:39 +0000

On November 27, 2018, closing arguments wrapped up in a lawsuit challenging the U.S. Census Bureau’s decision to include a citizenship question in the 2020 Census. The federal court case, State of New York et. al. v. U.S. Department of Commerce et. al., was brought forward by the Attorneys General of New York and 16 other states, as well as representatives from seven cities and the U.S. Conference of Mayors. According to the Brennan Center for Justice, the plaintiffs assert that the decision to include a citizenship question is “unconstitutional and otherwise illegal.”

As a result of this legal challenge, much information surrounding the timing, communications, and justification of the decision to request a citizenship question has emerged. For example, as reported by Tara Bahrampour of the Washington Post, a June 2017 memo penned by Secretary of Commerce, Wilbur Ross, indicates that Secretary Ross was considering adding the citizenship question to the 2020 Census when he was confirmed by the U.S. Senate in February 2017. This is a particularly noteworthy event because it directly contradicts Ross’ congressional testimony to the U.S. House Ways and Means Committee. In March 2018, Secretary Ross told the House committee that he added the question because of a December 2017 request from the Department of Justice.

To provide more clarity to this complex chain of events, we constructed a timeline detailing the course of events, providing a simplified version largely based on reporting by Hansi Lo Wang of National Public Radio (NPR).

TIMELINE

2017
- February
  - Wilbur Ross is confirmed by the U.S. Senate as Secretary of Commerce.
- May
  - In an e-mail to Secretary Ross, Earl Comstock, Director, Office of Policy and Strategic Planning at the U.S. Department of Commerce, said “We need to work with Justice to get them to request that citizenship be added back as a census question.”
- July
  - In an e-mail exchange between Secretary Ross and former Kansas Secretary of State, Kris Kobach, Kobach indicated he discussed adding the citizenship question “at the direction of Steve Bannon,” President Trump’s former chief strategist.
- August
  - In an e-mail to Comstock, Secretary Ross asked: “Where is the DoJ in their analysis? If they still have not come to a conclusion please let me know your contact person and I will call the AG.”
- November
  - In an e-mail to the General Counsel of the Department of Commerce, Secretary Ross noted: "Census is about to begin translating the questions into multiple languages. We are out of time. Please set up a call for me tomorrow with whoever is the responsible person at Justice. We must have this resolved."
- December
  - The U.S. Department of Justice formally requests the Department of Commerce consider adding a citizenship question to the 2020 Census.
2018
- March
  - Secretary Ross testifies to U.S. House Ways and Means Committee that his decision to add a citizenship question was because of the Department of Justice request initiated in December 2017.
- April
  - A lawsuit is filed in several U.S. District Courts by cities and states challenging the inclusion of the citizenship question on the 2020 Census.
- June
  - As reported by Hansi Lo Wang of NPR, Secretary Ross issues a memo, as part of the New York et al. legal challenge, indicating that Ross “seeded the Justice Department’s request for a citizenship question.”
- November
  - The State of New York et. al. v. U.S. Department of Commerce et. al. court case commences on November 5 and concludes on November 27.
2019
- February
  - The U.S. Supreme Court will determine whether Secretary Ross can be deposed to clarify the underlying circumstances of his decision to request a citizenship question.
    - More information forthcoming on this topic.
2020
- April 1, 2020 Census Day

For additional background on this topic, see:

2018. ‘I will call the AG’: Trump Officials Pushed for Citizenship Question. NPR. Authored by Hansi Lo Wang.
2018. Wilbur Ross’ False Claim to Congress that the Census Citizenship Question was DOJ’s Idea. Washington Post. Authored by Salvador Rizzo.
2018. Wilbur Ross Actively Pushed to Add Citizenship Question to 2020 Census, Documents Show. Washington Post. Authored by Tara Bahrampour.
2018. Lawsuit Documents Shed Light on Decision to Add Citizenship Question. NPR. Authored by Hansi Lo Wang.
2018. All documents related to the State of New York et. al. v. U.S. Department of Commerce et. al. court case.

Challenge #1: Funding Update (April 2018)

Jason Jurjevich — Tue, 17 Apr 2018 09:44:40 +0000

In the wake of continuing budget resolutions, which funded the U.S. Census Bureau at 2017 levels ($1.5 billion), the President signed an omnibus spending bill in March 2018 increasing FY 2018 funding for the Bureau by more than $1.3 billion, to $2.8 billion. The increase in funding, $1.1 billion more than the administration's request, was celebrated news among census advocates. However, given that the 2020 Census is now less than two years away, many advocates are now turning their attention to funding for FY2019. Information about the U.S. Census Bureau's funding request for FY2019, $3.8 billion, is available here.

Image courtesy of the U.S. Census Bureau (2018).

The Takeaway

The increased funding for FY2018 is good news for achieving a fair and accurate census count in 2020. At the same time, it is important to recognize that over the past several years the Bureau has implemented a number of cuts to operational planning in response to budget uncertainty and inadequate funding. Some decisions, such as reducing the number of 2020 census field test sites, at this point cannot be reversed. Other decisions however, including proposed reductions to partnership and communications programs, can be reinstated with adequate funding. To this point, a recent article in FCW points out that the March 2018 budget agreement includes an accompanying report directing the Bureau to staff and conduct its partnership and communications programs "no less than that conducted during fiscal year 2008 in preparation for the 2010 decennial census."

For more information, check out these resources:

2018, March. Omnibus Boosts Census Funding. FCW. Authored by Chase Gunter.
2017, November. Critical Census Budget Action Needed. The Census Project.
2018. U.S. Census Bureau Plans & Budget.

Challenge #3: Justification for Including a Citizenship Question

Jason Jurjevich — Thu, 05 Apr 2018 07:59:23 +0000

In March 2018, Secretary of Commerce, Wilbur Ross, instructed the U.S. Census Bureau to include a question on citizenship in the 2020 census. The justification for including a question on citizenship, as outlined in a March 2018 memo, is based on a December 2017 request by the U.S. Justice Department. The U.S. Justice Department asserts citizenship data are essential to secure "important protections against racial discrimination in voting" and therefore "the Department needs a reliable calculation of citizen voting-age population (CVAP) in localities where voting rights violations are alleged or suspected."

Since 2005, the American Community Survey (ACS) has collected and tabulated CVAP data, making it the go-to dataset for voting-related research and policy. The smallest geographic unit that ACS (including CVAP) data are available is the census block-group, which is a collection of census blocks often averaging around 1,500 people. The U.S. Justice Department argues that having CVAP data at the census block (smallest unit of census geography often containing a few hundred people) is essential for enforcing Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act (VRA).

As others have pointed out (e.g. Sherman, Elliot, and Rizzo), what remains unclear is how block-level data will lead to better enforcement of the VRA. This is an important point, especially considering the potential drawbacks of including a citizenship question that has not been fully tested. As former U.S. Justice Department official Justin Levitt points out, any improvement in citizenship data would likely be offset by the undercount of immigrant and minority groups, leading to data that is more precise but far less accurate.

Click on the image below for more information and resources on citizenship data from the ACS:

Challenge #3: Controversy of the Citizenship Question

Jason Jurjevich — Wed, 04 Apr 2018 07:38:46 +0000

In March 2018, Secretary of Commerce, Wilbur Ross, instructed the U.S. Census Bureau to include a question on citizenship in the 2020 census. The decision has generated much attention and controversy, particularly among scholars and civil rights groups who argue that asking about citizenship will decrease census response rates, particularly among Hispanic/Latino populations, and more broadly threaten a fair and accurate census.

Why is the decision to ask individuals about their citizenship status controversial?

1. Undercount. Certain hard-to-count populations, including children, rural residents, individuals of color, immigrants, and the homeless are already undercounted in the census. Experts, including the Census Scientific Advisory Committee and others, point to data showing that the citizenship question will increase the undercount among immigrant and minority groups. Also, lower response rates mean the bureau must follow up with respondents using alternative methods (e.g. phone or in-person interviews), which are more expensive. Experts warn that in the end, this proposal would increase overall costs of administering the census.

2. Data Accuracy. To evaluate and assess proposed changes to question design, response categories, and other elements of data collection, the U.S. Census Bureau conducts a National Content Test often several years before the decennial census. Given that citizenship data are already collected in the American Community Survey (ACS), the bureau did not include a question on citizenship in the 2015 National Content Test. Former Director of the U.S. Census Bureau, John Thompson, notes that including a citizenship question that has not been tested will likely affect “the rate, quality, and truthfulness of response” and will “run the risk of introducing serious undercounts for many population groups in the 2020 Census.”

3. Politicization. Civil rights groups, population and statistical research organizations, and other opponents of the citizenship question argue that the unusual timing, along with the rationale for including the question, point to a politically motivated decision. In response, many organizations have issued public statements, are pursuing litigation (e.g. NAACP and Attorneys General), and/or advancing other forms of direct action to oppose the citizenship question.

On the other hand, supporters of the citizenship question, including the Heritage Foundation, argue that the data are essential for enforcing the Voting Rights Act (VRA).

For more information about the citizenship question, see these additional blog posts:

What is the justification for collecting data on citizenship in Census 2020?

Where do citizenship data come from? Have citizenship data been collected in previous censuses? (Future post)

For additional background on this topic, see:

2018. The 2020 Census is Adding a Citizenship Question. What Happens Next? CityLab. Authored by Kriston Capps.
2018. Educational Leadership Fund. Citizenship and Legal Status Questions on the 2020 Census. Factsheet.
2017. U.S. Officials Worry Immigrant Fears Could Make Census Inaccurate. Reuters. Authored by Mica Rosenberg.
2017. White House Proposal to Ask Immigration Status in Census Could Have Chilling Effect, Experts Say. Washington Post. Authored by Tara Bahrampour.
2017. Furor Greets Request to Add Citizenship Question to 2020 Census. Science Magazine. Authored by Jeffrey Mervis.

A High-Risk Census?

Jason Jurjevich — Tue, 06 Mar 2018 17:22:43 +0000

In 2017, the Government Accountability Office (GAO) released a report deeming Census 2020 "High Risk."

What does this mean?
One of the main tasks of the GAO is to call attention to federal programs and initiatives that are at high risk of not meeting their program objectives/mandates or are most in need of transformation. In their 2017 report, the GAO called out three areas of concern around Census 2020, leading to its "high risk" assessment. These include:

Implementing Innovations
To address the increasing cost of administering the decennial census, the U.S. Census Bureau plans to implement a number of data and technological innovations to secure a smarter and more efficient census. The GAO report lists four specific innovations of concern: 1) relying on innovations that are previously unused (e.g. web-based data collection), 2) challenges of using administrative records (e.g. tax returns), 3) the need to better understand household non-response and, 4) recent decisions to cancel field testing.

Critical Information Technology Uncertainties
The redesign of the 2020 census incorporates a number of new and modified information technology systems to make the decennial census more efficient, but these sytems also introduce additional challenges and risks.

Unreliable 2020 Cost Estimate
The GAO finds that the cost estimate for Census 2020 does not conform to best practices, and therefore falls short of what it considers a high-quality estimate.

Future blog posts will adderss these issues in more depth. In the meantime, for more information, check out the GAO report:

2017. 2020 Decennial Census. Government Accountability Office (GAO).

PBS News Hour: The 2020 Census is at risk

Jason Jurjevich — Fri, 09 Feb 2018 18:45:00 +0000

This PBS News Hour clip provides an historical overview of the census, and highlights the importance of the data for allocating resources, including funding for schools, hospitals, roads, and public utilities. PBS News Hour correspondent Hari Sreenivasan sits down with former Director, Kenneth Prewitt, to discuss the risks for the 2020 census.

Challenge #1: Funding

Jason Jurjevich — Fri, 09 Feb 2018 18:30:00 +0000

Funding for the 2020 census is moving in the wrong direction. According to a November 2017 Politico report, the U.S. Census Bureau received roughly $200 million below the agency’s request in FY 2017. What's more, proposed funding for FY 2018 is lower than previous decades, when funding levels typically increase in ramp-up years leading to the launch of the census (see the figure below).

Why does this matter?

Conducting a census of more than 325 million Americans is a tall task requiring lots of planning, testing, and outreach. The implications of reduced funding are already being felt. Some examples include: 1) cancellation of 2020 census field testing, 2) proposed cuts to offices and staff and, 3) delayed release of the 2017 economic census.

*See this April 2018 blog post for an update on census funding.

For more information, check out this resource:

2017. Is Washington Bungling the Census? Politico. Authored by Danny Vinik.

Challenge #2: Change in Leadership

Jason Jurjevich — Fri, 09 Feb 2018 18:30:00 +0000

Serving as Director of the U.S. Census Bureau since 2013, John Thompson announced his resignation as Director in 2017. Experts point out that the mid-decade change in leadership creates a number of challenges. Counting more than 325 million Americans is difficult enough, but the bureau is also championing a number of new initiatives for the 2020 census. These changes, largely efforts to control costs and improve efficiency, include: 1) internet response, 2) better use of local and administrative data and, 3) new approaches for information technology.

For more information:

2017. U.S. Census Director Resigns Amid Turmoil Over Funding of 2020 Count. Washington Post. Authored by Tara Bahrampour.
2017. The Head of the Census Resigned. It Could Be as Serious as James Comey. Time. Authored by Haley Sweetland Edwards.
2017. Bad News for Everyone! The 2020 Census is Already in Trouble. Wired Magazine. Authored by Aarian Marshall.
2017. New Acting Director to Oversee 'High Risk' Census. NPR. Authored by Hansi Lo Wang.