Abstract
In 2010 the U.S. Census Bureau will achieve its goal of eliminating the long form sample from the decennial census and will produce its first set of five-year data products from the full sample American Community Survey (ACS). This paper provides an overview of the call for change that prompted the Census Bureau to pursue the development of a new approach to collecting socioeconomic and housing data. The paper details the evolution of the ACS from its earliest origins to its current design and describes that design in detail. The current design has benefited from external debate and consultation. Work such as that described later in this journal exemplifies the key role that external users and advisors have played, and will continue to play, in the evolution of the ACS. Over the past 10 years, the Census Bureau has undertaken research and testing to demonstrate operational feasibility and to assess survey quality. Research has also compared ACS and Census 2000 data. ACS staff are involved in survey improvement efforts and continue to confront survey challenges. In the next few years the ACS will give priority to developing user tools to aid all users in the correct interpretation of multi-year estimates. The ultimate validation of the ACS is, however, in the hands of users. Continued input from the people who are responsible for administering and evaluating programs, identifying local needs, and planning for the future will allow the ACS to grow in value and utility.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Alexander, C. H. (1992). An initial review of possible continuous measurement designs. Internal Census Bureau Report CM-2. U.S. Census Bureau.
Alexander, C. H. (1993a). Three general prototypes for a continuous measurement system. Internal Census Bureau Report CM-1. U.S. Census Bureau.
Alexander, C. H. (1993b). Proposed technical research to select a continuous measurement prototype. Internal Census Bureau Report CM-3. U.S. Census Bureau.
Alexander, C. H. (1993c). Determination of sample size for the intercensal long form survey prototype. Internal Census Bureau Report CM-8. U.S. Census Bureau.
Alexander, C. H. (1993d). Overview of research on the “continuous measurement” alternative for the U.S. Census Bureau. Internal Census Bureau Report CM-11. U.S. Census Bureau.
Alexander, C. H. (1994). Progress on the continuous measurement prototype. Internal Census Bureau Report CM-2. U.S. Census Bureau.
Alexander, C. H. (no date). A prototype design for continuous measurement. Internal Census Bureau Report CM-7. U.S. Census Bureau.
Dahl, S. (1998). Weighting the 1996 and 1997 American Community Surveys. Internal Census Bureau report presented to the ACS Symposium. U.S. Census Bureau.
Dawson, K., Sebold, K., Love, S., & Weidman, L. (1995). Collecting census long form data over the telephone: Operational results of the 1995 CM CATI Test. Presented at the 1996 annual meeting of the American Statistical Association.
Dillman, D. (1978). Mail and telephone surveys. New York: John Wiley and Sons.
Dillman, D., Clark, J., & Treat, J. (1994). Influence of 13 design factors on completion rates to decennial census questionnaires. Paper presented at the annual research conference of the U.S. Census Bureau, Arlington VA.
Ferrari, P. (1998). 1996 American Community Survey versus 1990 Decennial Census—Household size and characteristics by response mode. Internal Census Bureau report presented to the ACS Symposium. U.S. Census Bureau.
Gage, L. (2004). Comparison of Census 2000 and American Community Survey 1999–2001 estimates. San Francisco and Tulare Counties, California. Report submitted to U.S. Census Bureau.
Griffin, D. H. (2005). Selected quality measures for ACS full implementation. Internal Census Bureau memorandum.
Hansen, W. H., Hurwitz, W. N., & Bershad, M. A. (1961). Measurement errors in censuses and surveys. Bulletin of the International Statistical Institute, V38, 359–374.
Herriot, R., Bateman, D., & McCarthy, W. F. (1989). The Decade Census Program—A new approach for meeting the nation’s needs for sub-national data. Proceedings of the American Statistical Association Social Statistics Section 1989. pp. 351–355.
Hough, G. C. & Swanson, D. A. (2004). The 1999–2001 American Community Survey and the 2000 Census. Data quality and data comparisons. Multnomah County, Oregon. Report submitted to U.S. Census Bureau.
Johnson, B, & Rowland, S. (1989). Directions for the future of the U.S. decennial census in the 21st century. Proceedings of the American Statistical Association Social Statistics Section 1989. pp. 339–344.
Kish, L. (1981). Using cumulated rolling samples to integrate census and survey operations of the Census Bureau. Washington DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.
Love, S., Dalzell, D., & Alexander, C. (1995). Constructing a major survey—Operational plans and issues for continuous measurement. Presented at the 1995 annual meeting of the American Statistical Association.
Love, S. &. Diffendal, G. (1998). The 1996 American Community Survey monthly response rates, by mode. Internal Census Bureau report presented to the ACS Symposium. U.S. Census Bureau.
Love, S. & Griffin, D. (2003). A closer look at the quality of small area estimates from the American Community Survey. Presented at the 2003 annual meeting of the American Statistical Association.
ORC Macro. (2002). The American Community Survey: Challenges and opportunities for HUD. Report submitted to the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development.
Salvo, J. & Lobo, A. P. (1997). The American Community Survey: Nonresponse follow-up in the Rockland County test site. Presented at the 1997 annual meeting of the American Statistical Association.
Salvo, J., Lobo, A. P., & Calabrese, T. (2004). Small area quality: A comparison of estimates—2000 Census and the 1999-2001 ACS. Bronx, New York test site. Report submitted to U.S. Census Bureau.
Sawyer, T. C. (1993). Rethinking the Census: Reconciling the demands for accuracy and precision in the 21st century. Proceedings of the Research Conference on Undercounted Ethnic Populations 1993. pp. 431–437. U.S. Census Bureau.
Schneider, P. (2004). Content and data quality in Census 2000. Census 2000 testing, Experimentation and Evaluation Program Topic Report Number 12, TR-12. U.S. Census Bureau.
Schmertmann, C. P. (2000). 1990 Decennial Census versus 1996–7 American Community Survey data: Tract-level comparison of demographic indicators for Brevard, Florida. Tallahassee FL: Center for the Study of Population. Florida State University.
Taeuber, C. & Chambers, C. (1998). Fresh data every year: The American Community Survey can help improve the measure of poverty. Poverty Research News, Summer 1998.
Tersine, A. (1998). Item nonresponse: 1996 American Community Survey. Internal Census Bureau report presented to the ACS Symposium. U.S. Census Bureau.
U.S. Census Bureau. (1992). 2000 Census Research and Development Alternative Design Program. Internal Census Bureau report of the Year 2000 Research and Development Staff.
U.S. Census Bureau. (2001). Demonstrating operational feasibility. American Community Survey Evaluation Report Series, Report #1.
U.S. Census Bureau. (2002). Demonstrating survey quality. American Community Survey Evaluation Report Series, Report #2.
U.S. Census Bureau. (2004a). Comparing general demographic and housing characteristics with Census 2000. American Community Survey Evaluation Report Series, Report #4.
U.S. Census Bureau. (2004b). Comparing economic characteristics with Census 2000. American Community Survey Evaluation Report Series, Report #5.
U.S. Census Bureau. (2004c). The 2001–2002 operational feasibility report of the American Community Survey. American Community Survey Evaluation Report Series, Report #6.
U.S. Census Bureau. (2004d). Comparing quality measures: Comparing the American Community Survey’s three-year averages and Census 2000’s long form sample estimates. American Community Survey Evaluation Report Series, Report #7.
U.S. Census Bureau. (2004e). Comparison of the American Community Survey 3-year average and the Census 2000 sample for a sample of counties and tracts. American Community Survey Evaluation Report Series, Report #8.
U.S. Census Bureau. (2004f). Comparing social characteristics with Census 2000. American Community Survey Evaluation Report Series, Report #9.
U.S. Census Bureau. (2004g). Comparing selected physical and financial housing characteristics with Census 2000. American Community Survey Evaluation Report Series, Report #10.
U.S. Census Bureau. (2005a). American Community Survey: Quality measures. Accessed at: http://www.census.gov/acs/www/usedata/sse/index.htm.
U.S. Census Bureau. (2005b). American Community Survey: 2005 state and county sample sizes. 2005 ACS Documentation Memorandum Series #ACS-DOC-1.
U.S. Census Bureau. (2005c). Population estimates. Accessed at: http://www.census.gov/popest/estimates.php.
U.S. Department of Transportation, Bureau of Transportation Statistics. (1996). Implications of continuous measurement for the uses of census data in transportation planning. Washington DC.
Van Auken, P. M., Hammer, R. B., Voss, P. R., & Veroff, D. L. (2004). American Community Survey and Census comparison final analytical report. Vilas and Oneida Counties, Wisconsin. Flathead and Lake Counties, Montana. Report submitted to U.S. Census Bureau.
Waksberg, J. (1968). The role of sampling in population censuses: Its effects on timeliness and accuracy. Demographics, 5, 362–373.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Griffin, D.H., Waite, P.J. American Community Survey overview and the role of external evaluations. Popul Res Policy Rev 25, 201–223 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11113-006-0006-2
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11113-006-0006-2