2018EndtoEndCensusTest_Update Leave Study Plan

2018EndtoEndCensusTest_UpdateLeave_OpsAssessmentStudyPlan.docx

2018 End-to-End Census Test – Peak Operations

2018EndtoEndCensusTest_Update Leave Study Plan

OMB: 0607-0999

Document [docx]
Download: docx | pdf


  1. Introduction


The 2018 End-to-End Census Test is an important opportunity for the Census Bureau to ensure an accurate count of the nation’s increasingly diverse and rapidly growing population. It is the first opportunity to apply much of what has been learned from census tests conducted throughout the decade in preparation for the nation’s once-a-decade population census. The 2018 End-to-End Census Test will be held in three locations, covering more than 700,000 housing units: Pierce County, Washington; Providence County, Rhode Island; and the Bluefield-Beckley-Oak Hill, West Virginia, area.


The 2018 End-to-End Census Test will be a dress rehearsal for most of the 2020 Census operations, procedures, systems, and field infrastructure to ensure there is proper integration and conformance with functional and nonfunctional requirements. The test also will produce prototypes of geographic and data products. Note that the 2018 End-to-End Census Test results are based on three sites that were purposely selected and cannot be generalized to the entire United States.


This study plan documents how the Update Leave (UL) operation will be assessed, as guided by questions to be answered. The objectives of the 2018 End-to-End Census Test UL operation are to update address information and spatial data in-person for housing units in geographic areas with special enumeration needs and to hand-deliver questionnaire packages to those housing units. The operation was designed to support the enumeration of areas where the Census Bureau had concerns about accurate mail delivery and to determine the Census block location of each housing unit. The operation will be conducted in areas where housing units:

  • Do not receive mail through a city-style address (house number/street name) for the majority of housing units in the area.

  • Receive mail at a Post Office (P.O.) Box.

  • Have a city-style address but share a mail drop-off point with other housing units.


The UL operation will only occur in Providence County and will consist of a production phase and a quality control (QC) phase. The production phase begins on March 19, 2018, and ends on April 13, 2018. During this time, enumerators visit each living quarter in their assigned Basic Collection Unit1 (BCU), update the address, and leave a questionnaire package at living quarters designated as housing units. The questionnaire package contains a paper questionnaire for the residents to complete and mail back, as well as materials that instruct residents on how to complete the survey online or over the telephone. The estimated workload for the UL operation is around 2,000 housing units. The QC phase begins on March 26, 2018, and ends on April 20, 2018. During this time, different enumerators will verify the work that occurred during production by revisiting a sample of addresses to check the accuracy of the address information.


  1. Background


The following sections discuss the design of the Update/Leave operation from the 2010 Census and the design of the Update Leave operation for 2018.


2010 Census Update/Leave Operation


The last time an Update Leave operation occurred was during the 2010 Census. The objectives of the 2010 Census Update/Leave operation were to:

  • Verify addresses and map features.

  • Make corrections, additions, and deletions of addresses and map features to update the Master Address File (MAF)/Topologically Integrated Geographic Encoding and References (TIGER) database (MTdb).

  • Hand-deliver 2010 Census questionnaires to all housing units in Update/Leave areas.


The 2010 Census Update/Leave operation consisted of a production phase and a QC phase. During production, enumerators were equipped with a binder with lists of all known living quarters. Enumerators updated the list as they canvassed all blocks in their assignment areas (AAs). Enumerators visited every structure they found in their AAs to look for housing units and to attempt to contact an occupant at every address. If the address was a housing unit, and an occupant was available, the enumerator provided a questionnaire labeled with the address for the housing unit. If an occupant was unavailable, the enumerator placed the questionnaire in a plastic bag and left the labeled questionnaire where it could easily be seen by the occupant. In both cases, the occupant was asked to complete the questionnaire and return it by mail.


During the QC phase, a separate group of QC enumerators conducted Dependent Quality Control (DQC), where they checked a sample of addresses in each AA to determine if enumerators in Update/Leave production completed their work correctly. If the AA failed DQC, the same QC enumerator recanvassed the entire AA. Assignment areas that passed DQC or underwent any necessary recanvassing were then sent to the local census office (LCO), where office clerks reviewed each AA binder for legibility, completeness, and consistency. If an AA binder failed the office clerk’s review, the AA was sent back to the field to be recanvassed by the QC enumerator.


After the data capture of questionnaires returned by mail, the nonresponding housing units were identified and sent to either the Nonresponse Followup (NRFU) operation or the Vacant Delete Check (VDC) operation. If the Census Bureau did not receive enumeration response data for a housing unit that was part of the original universe of address records for Update/Leave, the nonresponding address was included in the NRFU operation. If the Census Bureau did not receive enumeration response data for a housing unit that was added during the Update/Leave operation, the nonresponding address was sent to the VDC operation.


The actual workload for the 2010 Census Update Leave operation was 12,552,247 housing units. Ultimately, the final number of housing units after MAF/TIGER processing was 12,526,032. The final status of those processed housing units are as follows:

  • Verify – 8,867,753 (70.8 percent)

  • Correction – 2,199,370 (17.5 percent)

  • Add – 573,405 (4.6 percent)

  • Delete – 449,015 (3.6 percent)

  • Uninhabitable – 222,830 (1.8 percent)

  • Duplicate – 91,162 (0.7 percent)

  • Empty mobile home sites – 75,226 (0.6 percent)

  • Nonresidential – 47,271 (0.4 percent)


The records that were in the actual workload but were not processed were either rejects or were not flagged as Update/Leave updates (after updating the block information). During the QC phase, about 6.0 percent of the AAs failed DQC, while about 5.0 percent of AA binders failed the office review.


Some of the key recommendations from the 2010 Census Update/Leave operation included:

  • Automating the Update/Leave operation in 2020.

  • Developing and using a bar coded system to record the processing ID on the questionnaire for added housing units.

  • Increasing the amount of time dedicated to testing.


2018 End-to-End Census Test Update Leave Operation


Originally, an Update Leave operation was not part of the 2018 End-to-End Census Test design. An Update Enumerate (UE) operation was originally planned, but because of managerial decisions and technology capability constraints, the Decennial Census Management Division (DCMD) and the Field Division (FLD) suggested adding an Update Leave operation. The areas in the test sites that were originally supposed to be enumerated via UE are now part of the UL operation. An Update Enumerate2 operation will still take place in the 2020 Census, but it will be restricted to remote areas of Alaska, Maine, other areas that are hard to access, and specifically designated areas (such as American Indian and Alaskan Native tribal lands).


For the most part, the UL operation procedures for production and QC will be the same as the 2010 Census Update/Leave operation. The one major change will be the use of an automated instrument to update the address list, which was a key recommendation from 2010. Enumerators will use the Listing and Mapping Application (LiMA) to update the address list and feature data. The QC phase will also utilize LiMA. The other key recommendation from 2010 to develop and use a bar coded system to record processing IDs was discussed throughout the decade. While LiMA does not have the functionality to scan a barcode, enumerators will be able to type the processing ID from the questionnaire package directly into LiMA, thus creating a link between a questionnaire package and a housing unit.


  1. Assumptions


The 2018 End-to-End Census Test Update Leave operation assumes:

  • The 2018 End-to-End Census Test will occur in three test sites: Pierce County, Washington; Providence County, Rhode Island; and the Bluefield-Beckley-Oak Hill, West Virginia, area.

  • The estimated Update Leave workload is around 89,000 HUs between the three test sites.

  • LiMA will handle address updates and updates to feature data.

  • Paradata and payroll data will provide the necessary information to calculate budget-related metrics.

  • The MAF Extract (MAFX) will provide the necessary address feature data.

  • The Sampling, Matching, Review, and Coding System (SMaRCS) will select the housing units for the QC reinterview.

  • Connectivity in rural areas works as expected.

  • Integrations between all systems will work properly.


  1. Scope of Assessment Content and Questions-To-Be-Answered


The following questions will be answered:

  1. How many addresses and BCUs were sent to Update Leave production? How many of those addresses were worked? How many of those BCUs were worked? How many BCUs were completed (had all of their addresses worked)?

  2. How many addresses were worked during Update Leave production? What was the final field action outcome for each worked address?

  3. Summary of Update Leave Costs

    1. What was the total cost of Update Leave training and production? How does this compare to the total budgeted cost?

    2. What were the detailed sources of the total cost of Update Leave training and production? How does this compare to the total budgeted costs for each source?

    3. What was the cost per address worked during production?

  4. Summary of Update Leave Enumerator Productivity Metrics

    1. What was the enumerator production rate (addresses worked per hour)?

    2. How many miles did an enumerator drive per address worked?

  5. Summary of the Update Leave Quality Control Operation?

    1. How many addresses and BCUs were selected for the QC operation? What percentage of addresses within the BCU were selected for the QC operation?

    2. How many BCUs passed the QC operation? How many BCUs failed the QC operation?

    3. What is the distribution of failed BCUs, by enumerator?

  6. What were the major findings from debriefings and observation reports?

  7. What were the key lessons learned and recommendations for the future?


  1. Methodology


Update Leave Production Methodology


Enumerators will be responsible for listing all living quarters in their assigned BCUs using LiMA. Field procedures for UL will be similar to the Address Canvassing operation field procedures. Enumerators will attempt to contact a knowledgeable person at each housing unit to verify the address. If a knowledgeable person is unavailable, the enumerator will list the address by observation. If an enumerator encounters an address that is not on their list, they will add the address to their list. After updating the address, the enumerator will leave a questionnaire package at the housing unit.


Addresses of known group quarter (GQ) structures and transitory locations (TLs) will be listed on the enumerators address list, but the enumerator will not work these types of addresses. They will not update the address, and they will not leave a questionnaire package at GQs or TLs. If an enumerator encounters a GQ or TL that is not on their address list, they will add the address to their list and will identify the address as a GQ or TL. They will not leave a questionnaire package at the added GQ or TL.


Update Leave Quality Control Methodology


The QC phase of Update Leave will be conducted by different enumerators than the production phase. These QC enumerators will also use LiMA.


The QC plan will rely on a scoring system in which each BCU will be assigned a specific point score (details are TBD). A BCU that receives a high point score will be more likely to be selected for QC. Additionally, a random sampling of BCUs with low point scores and average point scores will be selected for QC.


The Sampling, Matching, Review, and Coding System (SMaRCS) will select the BCUs to be worked and a random starting location from which the enumerator will start work. SMaRCS will also determine the number of housing units to check within each BCU, as well as the number of allowable addresses with errors in each BCU. SMaRCS will also select a sample of addresses marked as “Delete” or “Duplicate” to be verified. The sample sizes of addresses and the allowable number of errors will vary based on the size of the BCU.


There will be two phases to the QC operation: a String Check phase and a Delete Check phase. During the String Check, the enumerator will follow normal listing rules to list addresses until the sample size is met. BCUs that fail the String Check will be entirely reworked (recanvassed) by the QC enumerator. If the BCU passes the String Check, the QC enumerator will begin the Delete Check phase and check a sample of addresses that were marked as “Delete” or “Duplicate.” If the BCU fails the Delete Check, the QC enumerator will recanvass all addresses marked as “Delete” or “Duplicate” in the BCU. If the BCU passes the Delete Check, the QC enumerator is finished with the BCU.


Questions-To-Be-Answered Table Shells


  1. How many addresses and BCUs were sent to Update Leave production? How many of those addresses were worked? How many of those BCUs were worked? How many BCUs were completed (had all of their addresses worked)?


Source(s): MAF Extract, GRF


Total Number of BCUs


Total Number of Addresses



BCU

Total Number of Addresses in BCU

Percent of Total Number of Addresses

















BCU

Total Number of Addresses in BCU

Total Number of Addresses in BCU Worked

Percent of Addresses in BCU Worked

Was the BCU Completed?



























  1. How many addresses were worked during Update Leave production? What was the final field action outcome for each worked address?


Source(s): Address Update File, UTS Reports


Field Action Outcome

Number of Addresses

Percent of Addresses

Verify



Correction



Add



Delete



Nonresidential



Uninhabitable



Duplicate



Empty Mobile Home/Trailer Sites



Total




  1. Summary of Update Leave Costs

    1. What was the total cost of Update Leave training and production? How does this compare to the total budgeted cost?


Source(s): DAPPS Data, UTS Reports



Total Budget

Actual Cost

Percent of the Total Budget Used

Training




Production




Total





    1. What were the detailed sources of the total cost of Update Leave training and production? How does this compare to the total budgeted costs for each source?


Source(s): DAPPS Data, UTS Reports



Budgeted Hours

Actual Hours

Percent of Budgeted Hours Used

Budgeted Labor Costs

Actual Labor Costs

Percent of Budgeted Labor Costs Used

Training







Production







Total









Budgeted Miles

Actual Miles

Percent of Budgeted Miles Used

Budgeted Miles Cost

Actual Miles Costs

Percent of Budgeted Miles Costs Used

Training







Production







Total









Budgeted Other Costs

Actual Other Costs

Percent of Budgeted Other Costs Used

Training




Production




Total





    1. What was the cost per address worked during production?


Source(s): DAPPS Data, UTS Reports, Address Update File


Total Production Cost


Total Number of Addresses Worked


Average Cost per Address Worked



  1. Summary of Update Leave Enumerator Productivity Metrics

    1. What was the enumerator production rate (addresses worked per hour)?


Source(s): DAPPS Data, UTS Reports, Address Update File


Total Number of Addresses Worked


Total Number of Hours Worked


Average Number of Addresses Worked per Hour



    1. How many miles did an enumerator drive per address worked?


Source(s): DAPPS Data, UTS Reports, Address Update File


Total Number of Miles Driven


Total Number of Addresses Worked


Average Number of Miles Driven per Address



  1. Summary of the Update Leave Quality Control Operation?

    1. How many addresses and BCUs were selected for the QC operation? What percentage of addresses within the BCU were selected for the QC operation?


Source(s): SMaRCS


Total Number of BCUs


Total Number of BCUs Selected


Percentage of BCUs Selected



Total Number of Addresses Worked


Total Number of Addresses Selected


Percentage of Addresses Selected



    1. How many BCUs passed the QC operation? How many BCUs failed the QC operation?


Source(s): SMaRCS


Outcome of BCUs that were Selected

Number

Percent

Pass



Fail



Total




    1. What is the distribution of failed BCUs, by enumerator?


Source(s): SMaRCS


Number of Failed BCUs

Number of Enumerators

Percent

0



1



2



3



4



Total





Data Requirements


Data Source

Description

Date of Availability

Decennial Response File (DRF)

Response data used for postprocessing.

TBD

Decennial Applicant Personnel and Payroll System (DAPPS)

Payroll data related to operational costs.

TBD

Universal Tracking System (UTS) reports

High-level reports used by managers to evaluate the operation.

TBD

Listing and Mapping Application (LiMA) data and paradata

All address update and feature information and other data not needed for response-processing purposes.

TBD

Master Address File Extract (MAFX)

Address information and feature data about the addresses in the operation.

TBD

Address Update File

Address information and field action codes.

TBD

Sampling, Matching, Review and Coding System (SMaRCS)

All reinterview data and paradata.

TBD

Enumerator and supervisor debriefing reports

Feedback from enumerators and supervisors about various aspects of the operation.

TBD

Observation reports

Reports created after shadowing enumerators in the field.

TBD

Field Staff Data

Data that links enumerators to supervisors.

TBD


  1. Risks/Limitations


Risks

  1. Limited resources are in place to design and develop the necessary systems and instrument(s) to conduct QC in the field for UL. If priorities are not set appropriately for QC design and development, then a statistically sound QC program for the 2018 End-to-End Census Test may not be implemented and an outgoing level of quality for data cannot be ensured for UL.

  2. Natural disasters in the form of hurricanes, floods, epidemics, etc., are uncontrolled events that could affect the willingness and ability of the population in non-UL type of enumeration areas (TEAs) to participate in the 2018 End-to-End Census Test. If a natural disaster occurs in a non-UL TEA at or around the time of the 2018 End-to-End Census Test, and the decision is made to redesignate the area as a UL TEA (transferring the workload to the UL operation), then UL will need the ability to be expanded in time to provide full coverage of the impacted geographic area.

  3. The cost of the UL operation can be greatly impacted by the prevailing economic conditions at the time of the 2018 End-to-End Census Test. If the economic conditions are relatively strong at the time of the 2018 End-to-End Census Test, then the costs to recruit and hire qualified employees may increase.

  4. Enumerator hiring is estimated to be a 60-day process. If, because of unanticipated attrition, or other factors, the UL operation needs to hire more enumerators than projected, then the time required for hiring would adversely affect UL’s ability to complete the operation on time, and there may be a need to recruit, and get clearance for, more enumerators than are initially hired.

  5. If any aspects of the UL operation currently planned for the 2018 End-to-End Census Test are descoped, then the results from the 2018 End-to-End Census Test may not accurately model the performance of the UL operation for the 2020 Census.


Limitations


The 2018 End-to-End Census Test Update Leave operation will take place in particular local areas. The results cannot be generalized to the entire nation.


  1. Measures of Success


The following criteria will be used to determine the success of the 2018 End-to-End Census Test Update Leave operation:

  • The 2018 End-to-End Census Test is completed with no corruption or confusion of data from the different phases of Update Leave within LiMA.

  • Questionnaire IDs linked using LiMA are sent to OCS and accessible for incoming responses.

  • Update Leave production is completed on schedule.

  • Update Leave QC is completed on schedule.

  • The actual cost of Update Leave production did not exceed the budget.

  • The actual cost of Update Leave QC did not exceed the budget.

  • Address updates from Update Leave were accepted by GEO.

  • Housing units that self-respond before the initial NRFU universe is created are not part of the initial NRFU universe.

  • New addresses that were added during production are successfully removed from the enumeration universe if a self-response is received.

  • New addresses that were added during production are successfully sent to NRFU if a self-response is not received.

  • Addresses that were marked as GQs or TLs were removed from the UL and NRFU universe and sent to the appropriate followup operation.


  1. Division Responsibilities


Division

People

Responsibilities

Decennial Census Management Division (DCMD)

Julia Lopez

Andrey Fomil

Bruce Barr

Keeping the milestone schedule.

Updating the risk register.

Defining the measures of success.

Assisting with study plan and analysis report writing.

Assisting with data acquisition;

Decennial Statistical Studies Division (DSSD)

Robert Fitzsimmons

Ryan King

Mary Frances Zelenak

Rafael Morales

RJ Marquette

Writing the study plan and assessment report.

Acquiring all data.

Analyzing response data.

Analyzing instrument data.

Analyzing quality control data.


Field Division (FLD)

Karen Field

Darlene Griffith

Kim Canada

Develop field training instruments.

Population Division (POP)

Warren Davis

Kristin Koslap

Rochelle Brown

Provide subject matter expertise on residence rules, coverage, and demographic and housing unit characteristsics.

Geography Division (GEO)

Tanya Ann Sadrak

Alexandra T Zablotny

Provide address and spatial data.


  1. Milestone Schedule


Below are the standard schedule activities for the development of the study plan and operational assessment report. Regard those highlighted in bold block-face as the key milestone activities. Definitions of acronyms are noted in the glossary section.


Activity ID

Activity Name

Orig Duration

Start

Finish

Update Leave Assessment Study Plan


First Draft

 

 

 

 

 18UET-20620

Prepare First Draft of Update Leave Assessment Study Plan


6

 5/19/17

5/26/17

18UET-20630

Distribute First Draft of Update Leave Assessment Study Plan to the Assessment Sponsoring DCMD ADC and Other Reviewers


1

 5/30/17

5/30/17

 18UET-20640

Incorporate DCMD ADC and Other Comments to Update Leave Assessment Study Plan


17

5/31/17

6/23/17

Initial Draft

 

 

 

 

 18UET-20880

Prepare Initial Draft Update Leave Assessment Study Plan


8

6/26/17

7/5/17

18UET-20650

Distribute Initial Draft Update Leave Assessment Study Plan to Evaluations & Experiments Coordination Brach (EXC)


1


7/6/17

7/6/17

18UET-20660

EXC Distributes Initial Draft Update Leave Assessment Study Plan to the DROM Working Group for Electronic Review


1

7/6/17

7/6/17

 18UET-20670

Receive Comments from the DROM Working Group on the Initial Draft <<operation name>> Assessment Study Plan


10

7/10/17

7/20/17


Schedule the Update Leave Study Plan for the IPT Lead to Meet with the DROM Working Group



1

7/20/17

7/20/17

 18UET-20680

Discuss DROM Comments on Initial Draft Update Leave Assessment Study Plan


1

 7/20/17

7/20/17

Final Draft

 

 

 

 

  18UET-20690

Prepare Final Draft of Update Leave Assessment Study Plan


15

 7/21/17

 8/10/17

 18UET-20700

Distribute Final Draft of Update Leave Assessment Study Plan to the DPMO and the EXC


1

8/11/17 

8/11/17

 18UET-20710

Schedule and Discuss Final Draft Update Leave Assessment Study Plan with the 2020 PMGB


14

 8/12/17

8/26/17

 18UET-20720

Incorporate 2020 PMGB Comments for Update Leave Assessment Study Plan


5

8/27/17 

9/1/17

 18UET-20890

Prepare FINAL Update Leave Assessment Study Plan


5

9/2/17 

9/6/17

 18UET-20730

Distribute FINAL Update Leave Assessment Study Plan to the EXC


1

 9/7/17

9/7/17

  18UET-20690

EXC Staff Distributes the Update Leave Assessment Study Plan and 2020 Memorandum to the DCCO

 

3

 9/8/17

9/10/17

 

DCCO Staff Process the Draft 2020 Memorandum and the Update Leave Assessment Study Plan to Obtain Clearances (DCMD Chief, Assistant Director, and Associate Director)

 

30

9/11/17

10/10/17

 

DCCO Staff Formally Release the Update Leave Assessment Study Plan in the 2020 Memorandum Series


1

 10/11/17

10/11/17

Update Leave Assessment Report


First Draft of Assessment Report



Receive, Verify, and Validate Update Leave Assessment Data


20




Examine Results and Conduct Analysis


20



 18UET-21040

Prepare First Draft of Update Leave Assessment Report

 

15

 8/30/18

9/20/18

 18UET-21050

Distribute First Draft of Update Leave Assessment Report to the Assessment Sponsoring DCMD ADC and Other Reviewers

 

1

 9/21/18

9/21/18

 18UET-21060

Incorporate DCMD ADC and Other Comments Update Leave Assessment Report

 

7

 9/24/18

10/1/18

Initial Draft of Assessment Report

 18UET-21070

Prepare Initial Draft Update Leave Assessment Report

 

8

 10/1/18

10/15/18

 18UET-21090

Distribute Initial Draft Update Leave Assessment Report to Evaluations & Experiments Coordination Br. (EXC)

 

1

10/16/18

10/16/18

 18UET-21100

EXC Distributes Initial Draft Update Leave Assessment Report to the DROM Working Group for Electronic Review

 

1

10/16/18

10/16/18

 18UET-21110

Receive Comments from the DROM Working Group on the Initial Draft Update Leave Assessment Report

 

10

 10/17/18

10/30/18


Schedule the Update Leave Report for the IPT Lead to Meet with the DROM Working Group


10

10/31/18

11/14/18

 18UET-21120

Discuss DROM Comments on Initial Draft Update Leave Assessment Report

 

1

 11/15/18

11/15/18 

Final Draft of Assessment Report

18UET-21130

Prepare Final Draft of Update Leave Assessment Report

 

25

 11/16/18

12/21/18

 18UET-21140

Distribute Final Draft of Update Leave Assessment Report to the DPMO and the EXC

 

1

12/24/18 

12/24/18

 18UET-21150

Schedule and Discuss Final Draft Update Leave Assessment Report with the 2020 PMGB

 

14

12/26/18

1/9/19

 18UET-21160

Incorporate 2020 PMGB Comments for Update Leave Assessment Report

 

 

 

10

1/10/19

1/24/19

Final Assessment Report

 18UET-21080

Prepare FINAL Update Leave Assessment Report

 

10

 1/25/19

2/14/19

 18UET-21170

Deliver FINAL Update Leave Assessment Report to the EXC

 

1

 2/14/19

2/14/19

 

EXC Staff Distribute the FINAL Update Leave Report and 2020 Memorandum to the DCCO

 

3

 

 

 

DCCO Staff Process the Draft 2020 Memorandum and the FINAL Update Leave Report to Obtain Clearances (DCMD Chief, Assistant Director, and Associate Director)

 

30

 

 

 

DCCO Staff Formally Release the FINAL Update Leave Report in the 2020 Memorandum Series


1

 

 

 

EXC Staff Capture Recommendations of the FINAL Update Leave Report in the Census Knowledge Management SharePoint Application


1

 

 


  1. Review/Approval Table


Role

Electronic Signature

Date

Fact Checker or independent verifier



Author’s Division Chief (or designee)



DCMD ADC



DROM DCMD co-executive sponsor (or designee)



DROM DSSD co-executive sponsor (or designee)



Associate Director for R&M (or designee)



Associate Director for Decennial Census Programs (or designee) and 2020 PMGB





  1. Document Revision and Version Control History


VERSION/EDITOR

DATE

REVISION DESCRIPTION

EAE IPT CHAIR APPROVAL

v. 0.1/Robert Fitzsimmons

5/26/2017

First draft

Randall Neugebauer

v. 0.2/Robert Fitzsimmons

6/12/2017

Incorporated comments from the sponsoring DCMD ADC


v. 0.3/Robert Fitzsimmons

7/6/2017

Initial Draft; Incorporated comments from the UL IPT and the sponsoring DCMD ADC; version that was distributed to the DROM members


v. 0.4/Robert Fitzsimmons

8/21/2017

Final Draft; Incorporated comments from DROM




  1. Glossary of Acronyms


Acronym

Definition

AA

Assignment Area

ADC

Assistant Division Chief

BCU

Basic Collection Unit

DAPPS

Decennial Applicant Personnel and Payroll System

DCCO

Decennial Census Communications Office

DCMD

Decennial Census Management Division

DPMO

Decennial Program Management Office

DQC

Dependent Quality Control

DRF

Decennial Response File

DROM

Decennial Research Objectives and Methods Working Group

DSSD

Decennial Statistical Studies Division

EXC

Evaluations & Experiments Coordination Branch

FLD

Field Division

GEO

Geography Division

GQ

Group Quarter

HU

Housing Unit

IPT

Integrated Project Team

LCO

Local Census Office

LiMA

Listing and Mapping Application

MAF

Master Address File

MAFX

MAF Extract

MTdb

MAF/TIGER database

NRFU

Nonresponse Followup

PMGB

Portfolio Management Governance Board

POP

Population Division

QC

Quality Control

R&M

Research & Methodology Directorate

SMaRCS

Sampling, Matching, Review, and Coding System

TEA

Type of Enumeration Area

TIGER

Topologically Integrated Geographic Encoding and References

TL

Transitory Location

UE

Update Enumerate

UL

Update Leave

UTS

Universal Tracking System

VDC

Vacant Delete Check



  1. References

Marquette, R. (2017). 2018 End-To-End Census Test Update Leave Quality Assurance Plan. DSSD 2010 Decennial Census Memorandum, Q-4.


Snodgrass, S. & Zhang, B. (2012). 2010 Census Update/Leave Operational Assessment. 2010 Census Planning Memorandum Series, 185(Reissue).


Toribio, N., Johnson, N., & Snodgrass, S. (2017). 2018 End-to-End Census Test Address Canvassing Study Plan.


1 A Basic Collection Unit is a single, nationwide set of small geographic units for data collection. It replaces collection blocks and assignment areas (AAs) that were used before, and during, the 2010 Census.

2 Update Enumerate verifies the address and attempts to enumerate the household in-person, instead of leaving a questionnaire for the household to mail back.


File Typeapplication/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.wordprocessingml.document
Authordouglass Abramson
File Modified0000-00-00
File Created2021-01-21

© 2024 OMB.report | Privacy Policy