Research Proposal Guidelines

CES RDC Research Proposal Guidelines
Persons wishing to conduct research at a Census Bureau Research Data Center must
submit a research proposal using the CES website (www.ces.census.gov). The following
guidelines describe the research proposal submission process. This is the only procedure that
can be employed to submit a research proposal.

The Proposal Process
Preliminary Proposal Development
Researchers who wish to develop a proposal to conduct research at one of the Census
Bureau’s Research Data Centers (RDC) should first contact the RDC administrator at the center
where the research will be conducted (see list of RDC contacts elsewhere). The researcher
should discuss the proposed project with the administrator to determine whether the research fits
with the Bureau’s mandate, is feasible, and is likely to provide benefits to Census Bureau
programs under Title 13 of the U.S. Code.
The first step in the proposal process is for the researcher to register as a user with CES
by opening an account through the Center’s website (www.ces.census.gov). Once an account
has been opened, the user receives a system-generated email message containing an initial
password. The user can change this password at the first login session. All researchers must
have a user account in order to submit preliminary and final proposals to CES.
Working closely with the RDC administrator, researchers develop a preliminary research
proposal that includes information about the researcher(s), site where the research will be carried
out, purpose of the research, funding source, requested datasets, desired software, a brief
narrative description of the research project and proposed benefits to the Census Bureau. The
researcher enters this information via the CES on-line proposal management system accessible
on the CES website.
Once a preliminary proposal has been submitted, the RDC administrator reviews it and
advises the researcher of any suggestions for improvement or refinement. The administrator
must approve the preliminary proposal before the researcher can submit a final proposal to CES.
Both CES and the RDCs entertain proposals from doctoral students who seek access to
confidential data for dissertation research. Proposals that list dissertation research as the
motivation must include the student’s primary advisor as a co-principal investigator. CES
recommends that the advisor also apply for Special Sworn Status (see below) if he or she expects
to view any intermediate output.
Final Proposal Submission
Researchers should consult with the RDC administrator about the content and form of a
final research proposal before submitting the proposal through the CES on-line management
system. The final proposal consists of four separate documents in Adobe Acrobat Portable

Document Format (PDF): (1) Curriculum vitae of all investigators on the proposed project, (2)
Abstract of the proposal, (3) Project description (full proposal), and (4) Statement of benefits to
the Census Bureau. Failure on the part of researchers to consult fully with the RDC
administrator before submission of proposal files can result in a decision by CES to decline to
review the proposal.
The four document files should conform to the following requirements:
•

•

•

Curriculum vitae. This single file should contain vitae for all researchers on the proposed
project. Each person’s vitae should be limited to two single spaced pages in length, and
should contain only the following information:
o Name and contact information, including email address
o Education history and employment history (primary employment)
o Five most recent publications
o Five publications most relevant to the proposal
o Ph.D. advisor(s) if applicable
o Names of Ph.D. students advised to completion, if applicable
o Names of all recent collaborators (last two years)
Proposal Abstract. This document should be no longer that one single-spaced page or
two double-spaced pages and it should capture the essence of the project proposal. The
data sets, and years of data, that will be used must be stated. Within the abstract, one or
two sentences should succinctly state what the project would do and the data it will use.
The abstract must also address the proposed benefits to the Census Bureau. The abstract
must include, at the top of the first page, a project title and the names of all researchers.
Project Description (full proposal). This document should describe in as much detail as
possible the nature of the research question(s), description of the methodology (including
models to be estimated, how model variables will be measured and hypotheses to be
tested), Census and non-Census data sets to be used, expected outcomes, and should
contain a list of references cited. The proposal should be aimed at a competent social
scientist who is not necessarily a specialist in the field or on the topic within the field.
The proposal should:
o Be limited to no more than fifteen (15) single-spaced pages or thirty (30) doublespaced pages (inclusive of references).
o Contain a title and the names of all researchers at the top of the first page.
o Include appropriate headings and subheadings throughout the document to assist
reviewers in following the proposal narrative.
o Use a font size of at least 11 point and should have at least one-half inch margins
all around. Twelve point font and one-inch margins are preferred.
o Number all pages.
o Contain a separate section identifying all data sets, Census Bureau and other, the
project will use. Public-use Census Bureau data that will be used in the project
must be included in this section. Years of data needed must also be stated. If the
project would make links among data sets, the links must be indicated, and the
method for making the links must be specified.

•

o Contain a separate section stating the proposed duration of the project in absolute
amounts of time (e.g. 14 months) and a desired starting date. This section should
also state the intensity of RDC lab use (e.g. 15 hours per week).
o Not include a separate title page, which will be counted against the page limit.
o Not include any appendices unless approved in advance by the RDC
administrator. Unapproved additional pages will count against the page limit, and
may be sufficient cause for CES to decline to review the proposal.
Benefits Statement. This document has no length limitation, although brevity and
concise presentation are encouraged. The statement should address clearly how the
project would provide one or more of the nine (9) Title 13 benefits listed on the CES
website.

Researchers must submit all proposal related documents through the CES website.
Experience shows that PDF files can take several minutes to upload successfully to the proposal
management system. The person uploading the files should wait until he or she receives a
message that the upload process has completed successfully before exiting the management
system and closing her or his web browser.
Proposal Review Process
Research proposals submitted to CES are reviewed on the basis of five major criteria:
•
•

Scientific merit. This criterion relates to the project’s likelihood of contributing to
existing knowledge. Evidence that a Federal-funding agency such as NSF or NIH has
approved the proposal for support constitutes one indication of scientific merit.
Benefit to Census Bureau programs. Proposals must demonstrate that the research is
likely to provide one or more Title 13 benefits to the Bureau. A research project must
demonstrate that its predominant purpose is to benefit Census Bureau programs. If a
project has as its predominant purpose one, or any combination, of the following criteria
it will be considered to have as its predominant purpose increasing the utility of Title 13,
Chapter 5 data (Researchers should consult an RDC administrator for more information).
o Understanding and/or improving the quality of data produced through a Title 13,
Chapter 5 survey, census, or estimate;
o Leading to new or improved methodology to collect, measure, or tabulate a Title
13, Chapter 5 survey, census, or estimate;
o Enhancing the data collected in a Title 13, Chapter 5 survey or census. For
example:
Improving imputations for non-response;
Developing links across time or entities for data gathered in censuses and
surveys authorized by Title 13, Chapter 5;
o Identifying the limitations of, or improving, the underlying Business Register,
Household Master Address File, and industrial and geographical classification
schemes used to collect the data;
o Identifying shortcomings of current data, collection programs and/or documenting
new data collection needs;

•
•
•

o Constructing, verifying, or improving the sampling frame for a census or survey
authorized under Title 13, Chapter;
o Preparing estimates of population and characteristics of population as authorized
under Title 13, Chapter 5;
o Developing a methodology for estimating non-response to a census or survey
authorized under Title 13, Chapter 5; and
o Developing statistical weights for a survey authorized under Title 13, Chapter 5.
Clear need for non-public data. The proposal should demonstrate the need for and
importance of non-public data. The proposal should explain why publicly available data
sources are not sufficient to meet the proposal’s objectives.
Feasibility. The proposal must show that the research can be conducted successfully
with the methodology and requested data.
Risk of disclosure. Output from all research projects must undergo and pass disclosure
review.
o Tabular and graphical output presents a higher risk to disclosure of confidential
information than do coefficients from statistical models.
o The Census Bureau is required by law to protect the confidentiality of data
collected under its authorizing legislation, Title 13, U.S. Code.
o Some data files are collected under the sponsorship of other agencies. In
providing restricted access to these data CES must adhere to all applicable laws
and regulations.
o Researchers may be required to sign non-disclosure documents of survey sponsors
or other agencies that provide data for their research projects.

Both Census Bureau and external experts on subject matter, datasets and disclosure risk
review all proposals. Relevant data sponsors and data custodians also review proposals that
request certain datasets.
Any proposals seeking to use datasets that contain Federal Tax Information (FTI) must
also be reviewed for approval by the Internal Revenue Service. Researchers must consult the
relevant RDC administrator to determine whether their proposal would use data that contain FTI.
The review process is both lengthy and rigorous requiring that researchers exhibit patience
throughout. Failure on the part of researchers to consult fully with the RDC administrator on this
point before submission of proposal files can result in a decision by CES to reject the proposal
for review.
The Center for Economic Studies accepts proposals for review at any time during the
year. Reviewed proposals receive one of two ratings:
•
•

Approved. The proposal successfully addresses all of the review criteria mentioned
above.
Not Approved. The proposal fails to meet most or all review criteria, and may be
resubmitted as a new preliminary proposal only after substantial revision and approval by
the RDC administrator.

The Project Review Coordinator communicates the outcome of the review process to the
contact researcher, which includes a review synopsis, an explanation for the decision, and copies
of the expert reviews. Projects that seek Federal Tax Information (FTI) normally require an
additional two to three months to gain final approval.
Projects that request data containing FTI must be reviewed by the Internal Revenue
Service to ensure that the predominant purpose of the research is to contribute to Census Bureau
programs under Title 13, Chapter 5 of the U.S. Code (See the IRS Criteria Document and above
for a list and description of approved Title 13 benefits). No proposal will gain approval from
both Census and the IRS if its predominant purpose is not to deliver Title 13 benefits.
Post Approval Process
Approval of research proposals by CES, and the IRS if FTI is requested, is merely the
first step in a multi-step process before research can actually commence. In many instances,
CES must obtain permissions to access certain data from the survey sponsors, data custodians or
the Census Bureau program areas who control such access. This process can range from a few
weeks to many months depending upon the nature and status of data sharing agreements between
Census and sponsoring agencies, whether Federal or State.
Once a project has been approved, all researchers who expect to access confidential data
must undergo a background investigation, including fingerprinting. After completion of the
background check, the Census Bureau grants Special Sworn Status (SSS) to each researcher,
which subjects them to incarceration of up to five years and/or fines of up to $250,000 if they
knowingly or inadvertently disclose confidential information on individuals, households or
businesses. All SSS individuals must take annual training in the use and protection of Title 13
data, and Title 26 data if FTI are to be used in the project. RDC administrators deliver this
training.
All researchers on the project must register with CES by opening a user account through
the Center’s website (www.ces.census.gov).
All approved research projects are governed by a written agreement between the
researcher(s) and the Census Bureau. The agreement stipulates the start and end dates for the
project, responsibilities of both parties with respect to procedures and practices, and if the
research project is conducted at the CES RDC, fee payment. All researchers on the project must
sign this agreement with the Census Bureau, or if added to the project after the agreement is
signed, an addendum to the agreement. If the research project is conducted at an RDC partner
institution, an agreement with the RDC partner institution may be required as well
The Center for Economic Studies encourages researchers to assess carefully the time
period over which they request access and to make efficient use of their lab time, but also to
anticipate that disclosure review may require modification to computer output before it can be
released. Requests for time extensions beyond the agreement end date undergo careful
evaluation and rarely gain approval. All access to confidential data and facilities associated with
a given research project will end at midnight on the end dates specified in the written agreement

for that research project. These dates must be consistent with the dates specified in the approved
proposal.
Timing
Researchers should expect a minimum of three months to elapse between the final
proposal submission and the actual commencement of research. This duration can vary greatly
by individual proposal depending upon data permissions required, IRS review, background
checks, software and datasets requested, and the number of proposals under consideration.
Researchers can help speed up the process by the following:
• Adhere closely to all practices and procedures for proposal submission as given on the
CES website.
• Work closely with their RDC administrator on proposal development and on any
requested revisions or clarifications to proposals or predominant purpose statements.
• Provide CES with the terms of use for any datasets they wish to bring to the lab.
• Process their SSS paperwork quickly.