Methodology Used to Measure Census Coverage

Chapter
First Online:
Part of the SpringerBriefs in Population Studies book series (BRIEFSPOPULAT)

Abstract

The two primary methods used to assess the accuracy of the U.S. Census (Demographic Analysis and Dual Systems Estimates) are introduced. A short history of Demographic Analysis (DA) in assessing the U.S Census is presented. The methodologies for DA and Dual Systems Estimates are provided along with the potential errors and limitations in the DA method. The reasons why DA is the preferred method for assessing census coverage for young children are presented.

Keywords

Demographic analysis Dual systems estimates Post enumeration survey Census coverage measurement 
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

References

  1. Adams, J. W., & Kasakoff, A. B. (1991). Estimates of U.S. decennial census underenumeration based on genealogies. Social Science History, 15(4), 527–543.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Anderson, B. A. (2004). Undercount in China’s 2000 census in comparative perspective. PSC Research Report, No. 04-565, Population Studies Center, Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan.Google Scholar
  3. Aries, E., Schauman W. S., Eschbach K., Sorlie P. D., & Backlund E. (2008).The validity of race and hispanic origin reporting on death certificates in the United States (Vol. 148, 2). Hyattsville: National Center for Health Statistics, Vital Health Statistics.Google Scholar
  4. Bhaskar, R., Scopilliti, M., Hollman, F., & Armstrong, D. (2010). Plans for producing estimates of net international migration for the 2010 demographic analysis estimates. Census Bureau Working Paper No. 90.Google Scholar
  5. Bryan, T. (2004). Population estimates. In J Siegel & D Swanson (Eds.), The methods and materials of demography (2nd ed.) Elsevier Academic Press, pp. 523–560.Google Scholar
  6. Coale, A. J. (1955). The population of the United States in 1950 classified by age, sex and color-a revision of census figures. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 50, 16–54.Google Scholar
  7. Coale, A. J., & Rives, N. W. (1973). A statistical reconstruction of black population of the United States: 1880 to 1970: Estimates of true numbers by age and sex, birth rates, and total fertility. Population Index, 39(1), 3–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Coale, A. J., & Zelnick, M. (1963). New estimates of fertility and population in the United States. Princeton NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  9. Demographic Analysis Research Team. (2010). Estimates of net international migration in demographic analysis. Population Division, U.S. Census Bureau, presentation at 2010 Demographic Analysis Conference, Washington DC, December 6.Google Scholar
  10. Devine, J., Sink, L., DeSalvo, B., & Cortes R. (2010). The use of vital statistics in the 2010 demographic analysis estimates. Census Bureau Working Paper No. 88.Google Scholar
  11. Griffin, D. H. (2014). Final task force report: Task force on the undercount of young children. Memorandum for Frank A. Vitrano. Washington, DC:U.S. Census Bureau, February 2.Google Scholar
  12. Hacker, J. D. (2013). New estimates of census coverage in the United States: 1850–1930. Social Science History, 37(1), 71–101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Himes, C. L., & Clogg, C. C. (1992). An overview of demographic analysis as a method for evaluating census coverage in the United States. Population Index, 58(4), 587–607.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Hogan, H., Cantwell, P., Devine, J., Mule, V. T., & Velkoff, V. (2013). Quality and the 2010 census. Population Research and Public Policy, 32, 637–662.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Jensen, E. (2012). International migration and age-specific sex ratios in the 2010 demographic analysis. Paper presented at the Applied Demography Conference at the University of Texas at San Antonio Texas, January.Google Scholar
  16. Martin, E. (2007). Strength of attachment: Survey coverage of people with tenuous ties to residences. Demography, 44(2), 437–440.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Martin, J. A., Hamilton, B. E., & Ventura, S. J. (2011). Births: final data for 2009, National Vital Statistics System (Vol. 60, no. 1). Hyattsville, MD; National Center for Health Statistics.Google Scholar
  18. Mule, V. T. Jr. (2010). U.S. coverage measurement survey plans. Paper delivered at the Joint Statistical Meetings, Vancouver, Canada.Google Scholar
  19. Mulry, M. (2014). Measuring undercounts for hard-to-reach groups. In R. Tourangeau, B. Edwards, T. P. Johnson, K. M. Wolter, & N. Bates (Eds.), Hard-to-survey populations. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  20. National Center for Health Statistics. (2014). Assessing the quality of medical and health data from the 2003 Birth certificate revision: results from two states (Vol. 62, no. 2). National Vital Statistics Reports. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.Google Scholar
  21. National Research Council. (2004). The 2000 census: Counting under adversity, panel to review the 2000 census. In C. F. Citro, D. L. Cork & J. L. Norwood (Eds.), Committee on national statistics, division of behavioral and social science and education. The National Academy Press, Washing DC, Page 254.Google Scholar
  22. National Research Council. (2009). Coverage measurement in the 2010 census. In R. M. Bell & M. Cohen (Eds.), Panel on correlation bias and coverage measurement in the 2010 decennial census. Committee on National Statistics, Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education, Washington, DC: National Academy Press.Google Scholar
  23. O’Hare, W. P., Robinson, J. G., West, K., & Mule, T. (2012). Comparing demographic analysis and dual-systems estimates results for children. Paper presented at the Southern Demographic Association Conference, Williamsburg VA, October 11–12.Google Scholar
  24. Ortman, J. M., Hollman, F. W., & Guarneri, C. E. (2012). Measuring multiple‐race births in the United States. Presented at the Annual Meeting of the Population Association of America, San Francisco, CA: May 3–5, 2012.Google Scholar
  25. Pitkin, J., & Park, J. (2005). The gap between births and census counts of children born in California: Undercount or transnational movement? Paper presented at the Population Association of America Conference, Philadelphia PA. March.Google Scholar
  26. Price, D. O. (1947). A check on the underenumeration in the 1940 census. American Sociological Review, 12, 44–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Robinson, J. G. (2000). Accuracy and coverage evaluation: Demographic analysis results. U.S. Census Bureau, DSSD Census 2000 procedures for operations Memorandum Series B-4, U.S. Census Bureau. Page 1.Google Scholar
  28. Robinson, J. G. (2010). Coverage of population in census 2000 based on demographic analysis: The history behind the numbers. U.S. Census Bureau, Working Paper No. 91.Google Scholar
  29. Schachter, J. (2008). Estimating native emigration from the United States. Memorandum date December 24, delivered to the U.S .Census Bureau.Google Scholar
  30. Shores, R. (2002). Accuracy and coverage evaluation revision ii adjustment for correlation bias. DSSD, A.C.E. REVISION II MEMORANDUM SERIES PP-53, U.S. Bureau of the Census, Dec.Google Scholar
  31. Shores, R., & Sands, R. (2003) Correlation bias estimation in the accuracy and coverage evaluation revision II. In Proceedings of the Survey Research methods Section, Joint Statistical Meetings.Google Scholar
  32. Siegel, J. S., & Zelnik, M. (1966). An evaluation of coverage in the 1960 U.S. census of population by techniques of demographic analysis and by composite methods. In Proceedings of the Social Statistics Section of the American Statistical Association: (1966): 71–85. Washington, D.C.: American Statistical Association.Google Scholar
  33. U.S. Census Bureau. (2003). Technical assessment of A.C.E. revision II. Washington, DC: U.S. Census Bureau.Google Scholar
  34. U.S. Census Bureau. (2010a). The development and sensitivity analysis of the 2010 demographic analysis estimates. Population Division Background paper of DA Conference Dec 6, 2010. 11/29/2010, Table 2, U.S. Census Bureau, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
  35. U.S. Census Bureau. (2010b). Tables released at December 2010 conference.Google Scholar
  36. U.S. Census Bureau. (2012a). Documentation for the revised 2010 demographic analysis middle series estimates. U.S. Census Bureau, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
  37. U.S. Census Bureau. (2012b). DSSD 2010 census coverage measurement memorandum series #2010-G-11. 2010 Census Coverage Measurement Estimation Reports: Adjustment for Correlation Bias, U.S. Bureau of the Census, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
  38. U.S. Office of Management and Budget. (1997). Revisions to the standards for the classification of federal data on race and ethnicity. Statistical Policy Directive 15, Federal Register Notice, October 30.Google Scholar
  39. Velkoff, V. (2011). Demographic evaluation of the 2010 census. Paper presented at the 2011 PAA annual Conference, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
  40. Wachter, K.W., & Freedman, D. A. (1999). The fifth cell: correlation bias in U.S. census adjustment. Technical Report Number 570. Berkeley: Department of Statistics, University of California.Google Scholar
  41. West, K. (2012). Using medicare enrollment file for the DA 2010 estimates. Paper presented at the Applied Demography Conference at the University of Texas at San Antonio Texas, January.Google Scholar
  42. Zeller, A. (2006). Inconsistency between accuracy and coverage evaluation revision II and demographic analysis estimates for children 0 to 9 years of age. Paper presented at the American Statistical Association annual conference.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.O’Hare Data and Demographic Services LLCEllicott CityUSA

Personalised recommendations