Advertisement

Population Research and Policy Review

, Volume 25, Issue 3, pp 293–303 | Cite as

The American Community Survey: general commentary on the findings from external evaluations

  • Robert ScardamaliaEmail author
Original Paper

Abstract

As part of the Census Bureau’s effort to prove the operational feasibility of the American Community Survey (ACS), the Bureau contracted with local experts to conduct comparative analyses of the 1999–2001 ACS estimates with the 2000 Census data for various test counties. One of the goals of the ACS is to replace the decennial census long form. The resulting research papers analyzed various quality measures (response rates, allocation rates, and so on), conceptual differences in the two instruments, and statistical reliability in an effort to add to our assessment of the ACS as an adequate replacement instrument for collecting long form data. This paper discusses the results of these four research efforts and presents conclusions and recommendations for further Census Bureau action and research. The quality of traditional long form data, the importance of accurate population estimates and an accurate Master Address File (MAF), and continued research on the quality of small area data are discussed.

Keywords

American Community Survey Imputation Allocation Statistical reliability Population estimates Seasonality 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. DeMaio, T. J., & Hughes, K. A. (2003). Report of cognitive research on the residence rules and seasonality questions on the American Community Survey. Study series, survey methodology #2003–08. Washington DC: U.S. Census Bureau.Google Scholar
  2. Gordon, N. M. (2004). Race and ethnicity testing update and discussion. Washington DC: Presentation to the Decennial Census Advisory Committee, U.S. Census Bureau.Google Scholar
  3. ORC Macro. (2002). The American Community Survey: Challenges and opportunities for HUD, Final Report, Executive Summary. Calverton MD. September 27, 2002.Google Scholar
  4. U.S. Census Bureau. (2004). Census 2000 participation rates. In U.S. Census Bureau–Census 2000 Gateway [online]. Available from http://www.census.gov/dmd/www/rates.html [March 27, 2006].Google Scholar
  5. U.S. Census Bureau. (2005). Meeting 21st century demographic data needs: Implementing the American Community Survey [Online]. Available from http://www.census.gov/acs/www/AdvMeth/Reports.htm [March 27, 2006].Google Scholar
  6. U.S. Government Accountability Office [GAO]. (2004). American Community Survey: Key unresolved issues. Wahington DC: GAO-05–82.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.New York State Department of Economic DevelopmentAlbanyUSA

Personalised recommendations