My aforementioned relative would definitely have gone over the edge if she
had a request for her Social Security number as well. Can someone explain
the rationale for this before those of us on the local end start catching
flak as well?
Thanks to Mr. Castagneri for posting some talking points on the basis for
the long-form questions - our letters to the editor here similarly
"truncate" the citizenry's obligations. Does anyone know the specific
requirement for asking the journey-to-work question (when as well as where),
vehicles owned, and other transportation-related questions? I don't.
And thanks to Ms. Murakami for the link to the Census "scoreboard." It's
quite instructive in pointing out that (unless your senator is Majority
leader) we are quite homogenized in this country in our desire (or lack
thereof) to fill out questionnaires in spite of our regional reputations.
(Out west, even the land of the Freemen has the same response rate as the
state with an outbreak of long form envy.) Though I suppose such
state-level averages do mask some important distinctions within our society.
Sam Granato
A thought for the day:
"Whine for those who can't." - Ian Shoales
> -----Original Message-----
> From: klamberton(a)pagnet.org [SMTP:klamberton(a)pagnet.org]
> Sent: Friday, March 31, 2000 8:42 AM
> To: Ed Christopher; ctpp-news maillist
> Subject: [CTPP] Experimental Census Forms
>
> At 09:31 AM 3/31/00 -0500, Ed Christopher wrote:
> >anyone along the CTPP listserve get a copy of one these very special
> >forms. It is my understanding that you would know the difference since
> >it also asks for your SSN. If anyone knows more information about this
> >experiemnet please pass the information along.-
>
> If this is an actual program I find this very alarming. We are having
> enough problems explaining the American Community Survey which is out here
> in Pima County, AZ without having another form - espcially one asking for
> SSN. We have been doing informational peices for our elderly population
> explaining how to know a form is the real one and not a elder fraud scam
> and one of the facts we use is that no Census form will ask for SSN or ask
> for money. Appreciate any information on this that can be forwarded- KLL
> Karen L. Lamberton
> Transportation Planner
> 177 N. Church Ave., Suite 501
> Tucson, AZ 85701
>
> (520) 628-5313
anyone along the CTPP listserve get a copy of one these very special
forms. It is my understanding that you would know the difference since
it also asks for your SSN. If anyone knows more information about this
experiemnet please pass the information along.--thanks
(when responding make sure to hit respond all and respond to the list
and not just just the author.)
=======================
March 27, 2000
Dear Member of Congress:
As you know, Census 2000 questionnaires have arrived at households
throughout the country. Approximately 135,000 of these questionnaires
will not be the standard Census forms, but will be part of the Census
2000 Testing and Experimentation Program. The results from this program
will help guide post-2000 planning and testing for the 2010 Census, and
provide useful information for the American Community Survey, as well as
other census surveys and operations.
Of these 135,000 questionnaires, approximately 93,000 are short forms
and 42,000 are long forms. These forms are actual decennial
questionnaires that contain design and content variation reflecting the
design of those experiments included in this program. The appearance of
these experimental forms in most cases is similar to the standard Census
2000 forms.
The schedule for these experimental forms is concurrent with standard
Census 2000 activities. Data capture and processing of experimental
forms also is concurrent with the Census schedule, although experimental
forms will be processed at one location, the National Processing Center
in Jeffersonville, Indiana. An operator assistance program, similar to
the Census 2000 Telephone Questionnaire Assistance, will also be in
place to answer respondent questions on completing these forms.
We bring this to your attention to answer any inquiries you may receive
from your constituents on this matter. Please call Congressional
Affairs at 301-457-2123 if you have any questions.
Sincerely,
signed
Robin J. Bachman
Chief, Congressional Affairs
submission from [Vicki.L.Lewis(a)ccmail.census.gov]
No change between 1990 and 2000, however, the sampling rate in rural areas is higher than non-rural areas as much as 1:2 ratio compared to
the 1:6. So your chances of getting a long form if your "rural house" is truly in a "rural area " as defined by the Census Bureau was much
higher. Lucky you!
> Subject: Re: [CTPP] Long form blues
> Has there been a change in the long-form sampling rate?
> I have two residences (an inner-city condo, and a rural house), and managed to
> get the long form at BOTH. Fortunately, I'm told I should only fill out one...
>
> /Steve Colman
I guess I'll share my two cents.... Positve media attention overall.
Since we have the 2nd worse congestion (see TTI report) we're more than happy to show that it takes
about the same time to get around as it did ten years ago. We're more than proud to let
Uncle Sam know we have a boatload of new millionaire's. As to where you usually work...
well that is a bit of a problem...
generally on Monday you start out at Microsoft, Tuesday you resign, Wednesday you start your own firm, Thursday, your so rich you don't
know what to do and on Friday you retire.
Attached FYI are responses I've been getting off the list to my
"long form" question. I'll just respond to the second one and say that I'm
sure that the folks at the Census Bureau are quite aware of how well the
citizenry responds to surveys, and that they are also under alot of pressure
from various interest groups -- including transportation planners -- to
provide what has been succinctly described as "mo' data."
***********************************
> recieved the long form at my house and it is a bugger to fill out. Will
> probably take 3 or 4 days to complete. Real difficult stuff.
***
> I received the long form in 1990 and this year. The 2000 long form is
> much
> more detailed and much longer than the 1990 form. I can understand why
> people may refuse to complete it. This year's from goes way beyond
> journey-to-work data and asks for information, such as annual utility
> costs,
> that many people do not track. It will take more than a couple of hours
> research for me to provide accurate answers. The Census Bureau must have
> forgotten that the average American head of household is not a bureaucrat.
***
> there is a report on the subject. As I recall the decline in response
> rates
> was slight and not the basis for concern about non-response from
> minorities.
***
> It is strange that CTPP people would be complaining about the long form.
> That whole program is dependent on it.
>
> All census data is confidential for 72 years. Then it is released for
> historical research. In WWII the military asked the Census Bureau for the
> location of Japanese. They were denied access. I have participated in
> LUCA (Local Update Census Addresses). I have had to sign numerous
> confidentiality agreements in order to receive the data files. These
> files
> contain nothing but addresses, no names or any other data. Yet it took an
> act of congress to allow the Bureau to make these lists available to local
> governments for review. I am expected to destroy all files and maps when
> the review is finished.
>
> The long form may be a pain, but it provides much valuable information.
> This may be the last census with a long form. If so, it is the end of
> detailed data for small geography.
***
> Our local weekly newspaper - with big circulation - is
> pushing the invasion of privacy button with respect to
> filling out the long form. Particularly on the income
> questions. I received the long form and have to admit
> that they have a point. I'll bet that 2000 returns will hit
> an all time low response rate.
***
> My understanding was that in 1990 the long-form response rate was not that
> different from the short-form rate. I've had an earfull too. I'm sure
> some of response results from an increased sensativity to privacy issues
> over the past decade. My only response has been to gently encourage
> people to fill out what they can.
>
Did anyone ever figure out from the '90 Census the difference in
non-response rates between short-form and long-form households? I'm getting
an earful from friends and relatives right now who got the long form. I'm
starting to understand better the rationale for getting away from the long
form toward the ACS (if in fact this was part of the rationale).
Dear CTPP-News people:
Some friends and I had a dinner party yesterday, and 3 of 5 received
the Census 2000 long form. Of course, I didn't get one, so I have
"long form envy". Luckily for our region the press is picking up good
stories about "long form envy" instead of the libertarian cr*p about
invasion of privacy. And, yes, my friends had concerns about the
level of research (in hours?!) needed to provide accurate answers
about utility costs....
In Ron Tweedie's example, it may prove useful if the Census Bureau in
coordination with the State Data Center could provide the local
newspaper editor the reasons and rationale for collecting this long
form data. If congestion and poverty are issues in your metropolitan
area, then household income is an absolutely critical data need. And
I do believe there are Census Bureau documents citing the chapter and
verse of the US Code where each census data item is required. (It's
somewhere on the Bureau's WWW site.)
My concern right now is the interpretation by census respondents to
the term "last week" (as used in our journey-to-work questions.) We
have traditionally (incorrectly?) assumed that the term "last week"
refers to the "census reference week" or the last week of March in
1970, 1980, 1990 and 2000. Well, the Census Bureau mailed forms to
all (or most) americans the week of March 13-17. So, is "last week"
to be interpreted as the week before they received the form (March
6-10); the week before they fill out the form (either March 13-17, or
this week -- March 20-24, or next week -- March 27-31)!!!! The answer
is, probably yes, to all of the above. Yikes!
People are (and should be?) mailing in their long forms *RIGHT NOW*
and this "last week" ambiguity will be interesting. My thinking is
that people will substitute an "unusual last week" with a "usual last
week" if they want to provide "relevant" data to the Census Bureau.
In my own situation, I was in Phoenix last week on vacation. This
week I'm at home in Oakland. If I had a census long form, my
inclination would be to delay answering the census until *next* week,
when my "last week" commute pattern is more typical of my regular and
usual commute pattern. My friend showed me her long form packet, and
there were no apparent instructions to clarify what is "last week" or
even *WHEN AM I SUPPOSED TO MAIL THIS BACK?*
Given this ambiguity in terms of what is "last week," my
recommendation to the USDOT, Census Bureau, State DOTs and MPOs is to
start compilations of events of interest that may influence
journey-to-work patterns in *all* of March 2000:
1. Weather conditions (daily clippings from the newspapers, and
should report on natural events including quakes, floods,
snowstorms, precipitation levels, sunny days, etc.);
2. Labor conditions (transit union strikes or slowdowns; other major
labor events);
3. Gas Prices (we're now at $1.90 per gallon in the Bay Area, and
rising! Also, surveys of other transportation costs such as tolls,
fares, parking costs would be ideal to conduct this month and next.);
4. Road and Transit Network Status (important if new or expanded
facilities are opened in early 2000).
That's about it. Anybody else have ideas on things we should be
monitoring for understanding "last week"?
cheers,
Chuck Purvis, MTC
Our local weekly newspaper - with big circulation - is
pushing the invasion of privacy button with respect to
filling out the long form. Particularly on the income
questions. I received the long form and have to admit
that they have a point. I'll bet that 2000 returns will hit
an all time low response rate.
>>> "Granato, Sam" <SamG(a)cedar-rapids.org>
03/23/00 04:25pm >>>
Did anyone ever figure out from the '90 Census the
difference in
non-response rates between short-form and
long-form households? I'm getting
an earful from friends and relatives right now who got
the long form. I'm
starting to understand better the rationale for getting
away from the long
form toward the ACS (if in fact this was part of the
rationale).
This notice is for agencies participating in the Workplace Update program.
Two issues have been raised by some of the folks who have already begun
reviewing employer files in the Workplace Update program. We'd like to make
sure everyone takes note of the following:
1) We are NOT asking you to update or review the number of employees shown for
each employer. Those data have been provided for your use and reference only,
for example, to help you prioritize your work. But we don't need to have the
information updated or even verified. So don't spend any time researching or
looking at the number of employees data.
2) For most stores located in named shopping centers, you will find duplicate
records in the file. One record usually contains a street address (sometimes
only partial information) or some other physical location description. The
other record has the name of the shopping center in which the store is located
in the address field. We created this second record from the information in the
shopping center directory to make sure we could link the store to the shopping
center name. You do not need to update both records. You should correct the
record with the street address information, but you should just skip the record
with the shopping center name in the address field. There will also be a record
in the file for the each shopping center. It is important to make sure these
shopping center records are geocoded correctly because we will assign the
shopping center location to store records that have that name in their address
field. So, please make sure the shopping centers are in the file and geocoded
correctly.
The distribution of the Work-UP CDs did not go as quickly as we had hoped.
However, it looks like the last shipment should go out on Monday, March 27. If
you are participating in the program and have not received your materials by
Friday, March 31, please call us at (301) 457-2454. Thanks.
--Phil Salopek