Preparing For the 2000 Census Interim Report II (1997) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:
3 Addresses Linked to Geography: Cornerstone of 2000 Census
3 Addresses Linked to Geography: Cornerstone of 2000 Census
Pages 13-23
The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.
From page 13... ...
This is essential for accurate census counts and for statistical data for small geographic areas. Both the association of census responses with their correct locations and the inclusion of locations within the correct tabulation areas depend on the accuracy of the geographic framework and the address list.
|
From page 14... ...
As subsequent chapters illustrate, the offering of alternative means of response, the use of sample nonresponse follow-up, and the plans for integrated coverage measurement all depend on having a reliable dwelling list, referenced to correct geographic locations. For example, the matching of information coming from "Be Counted" forms to the census database requires complete and unambiguous address and geographic area identification.
|
From page 15... ...
Partnership is necessary. There are many potential partners who have an interest in a strong geographic framework and a complete address list for the census, including local governments as users of census data, data marketers, and other organizations, such as the USPS, which also requires accurate geographic representation of the country.
|
From page 16... ...
The Census Bureau plan calls for using DSF three or four times each year to update the MAF. The plan ensures that an update using DSF occurs immediately before each major use of the MAF to produce address lists, for independent reviews, for survey frames, or for census mail-outs.
|
From page 17... ...
In February 1995 the Census Bureau began an operation called Master Address File Geocoding Office Resolution (MAFGOR) that aims to resolve discrepancies between address range information in TIGER and the individual addresses in MAF.
|
From page 18... ...
While the various targeted checks planned in the MAF-TTGER updating program focus on the obvious problem areas, the pane} has not yet seen a plan for or demonstration of effective criteria for identifying specific kinds of problems. Recommendation: The Census Bureau should develop and make explicit the criteria it will use to determine which areas to include in each of its targeted updating checks.
|
From page 19... ...
These partnership programs supplement the regular updates through the DSF, as well as some of the targeted checks that the Census Bureau will be conducting. Local government involvement in the preparation of MAF culminates in the LUCA program, which provides a last opportunity for local governments to review the census address list and Doint out anv needed additions.
|
From page 20... ...
In fact, a well-planned communication program with local governments on LUCA will be crucial to its success. The communication plan should cover at least the following elements: · the importance to local governments of a hiph-nuality census, given its ,, effects on revenue distribution, local planning, and redistricting; · adequate advance warning of upcoming activities, time constraints, the nature of the work expected of local governments, and the process of review, feedback, and appeal; · a clear explanation of the potential impact of the local government's input on the quality and cost of the 2000 census, including, for example, the negative impact of either not checking the lists thoroughly in the expectation that the gaps will get fixed during a census enumeration, or flooding the Census Bureau with doubtful addresses in the mistaken belief that this strategy will maximize the area's eventual census count; · emphasis on the fact that LUCA supersedes the former local review of the precensus address list -- in other words, local governments will not get another chance after LUCA to review dwelling counts; and · how much flexibility the Census Bureau has in accommodating different formats of input and output in sending and receiving materials.
|
From page 21... ...
While we recognize that offering local governments the opportunity to participate in the updating of the address lists throughout the preparation of the census is a much more constructive approach, we are concerned that the abandonment of a postcensus local review of the type conducted in 1990 may be seen in isolation as the removal of an appeal right with potential financial implications for local areas. It is most important to ensure that local areas realize that LUCA has replaced this local review and are persuaded of the benefits of this change.
|
From page 22... ...
The success of the subsequent "Be Counted," nonresponse follow-up, and integrated coverage measurement procedures is constrained by the quality of the address list and its geographic referencing to the correct census tabulation blocks. Finally, the published census counts and statistical data for small areas are dependent on completed questionnaires and sampled nonresponse follow-up forms being referenced to the correct geographic areas.
|
From page 23... ...
Recommendation: The Census Bureau should develop and maintain on the MAF a system of quality indicators at or below the census tract level and should use these indicators as a means of identifying areas requiring special precensus fielc! checking to bring them up to an acceptable level of quality.
|
Key Terms
This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
More
information on Chapter Skim is available.