BRFSS Summary Data Quality Report with Response Rates

Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System
2023 Summary Data Quality Report
August 6, 2024

Page 1 of 25

Table of Contents
Introduction ..........................................................................................................................3
Interpretation of BRFSS Response Rates ............................................................................4
BRFSS 2023 Call Outcome Measures and Response Rate Formulae .................................5
Tables of Outcomes and Rates by State ...............................................................................9
References ..........................................................................................................................25

Page 2 of 25

Introduction
The Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS) is a state-based, CDC-assisted healthdata collection project and partnership of state health departments, CDC’s Division of Population
Health, and other CDC programs and offices. It comprises telephone surveys conducted by the
health departments of all 50 states, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, the US Virgin Islands,
and Guam.
This Summary Data Quality Report presents detailed descriptions of the 2023 BRFSS calling
outcomes and call summary information for each of the participating states and territories. All
BRFSS public-use data are collected by landline telephone and cellular telephone to produce a
single data set aggregated from the 2023 BRFSS territorial- and state-level data sets. The
variables and outcomes provided in this document are applicable to a combined data set of
responses from participants using landline telephones and cellular telephones within each of the
states and territories.
The inclusion of data from cellular telephone interviews in the BRFSS public release data set has
been standard protocol since 2011. In many respects, 2011 was a year of change—both in
BRFSS’s approach and methodology. As the results of cellular telephone interviews were added
in 2011, so were new weighting procedures that could accommodate the inclusion of new
weighting variables. Data users should note that weighting procedures are likely to affect trend
lines when comparing BRFSS data collected before and after 2011. Because of these changes,
users are advised NOT to make direct comparisons with pre-2011 data, and instead, should begin
new trend lines with that year. Details of changes beginning with the 2011 BRFSS are provided
in the Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report (MMWR), which highlights weighting and
coverage effects on trend lines.1 Each year of data collection since 2011 has included a larger
percentage of calls from the cell phone sample. In 2023, a majority of the BRFSS interviews
were conducted by cell phone. The annual code books provide information on the number and
percentage of calls conducted by landline and cell phone by year.
The measures presented in this document are designed to summarize the quality of the 2023
BRFSS survey data. Response rates, cooperation rates, and refusal rates for BRFSS are
calculated using standards set by the American Association for Public Opinion Research
(AAPOR). The BRFSS has calculated 2023 response rates using AAPOR Response Rate #4.2
Based on the AAPOR guidelines, response rate calculations include assumptions of eligibility
among potential respondents or households that are not interviewed. Changes in the geographic
distribution of cellular telephone numbers by telephone companies and the portability of landline
telephone numbers are likely to make it more difficult than in the past to determine which
telephone numbers are out-of-sample and which telephone numbers represent likely households.
The BRFSS calculates likely households and eligible persons using the proportions of eligible
households/persons among all phone numbers where eligibility has been determined. This
eligibility factor appears in calculations of response, cooperation, resolution, and refusal rates.
Page 3 of 25

Interpretation of BRFSS Response Rates
Because this report reflects the inclusion of BRFSS cellular telephone interviews, contextual
information on cellular telephone response rates is provided below. Although cellular telephone
response rates are generally lower than landline telephone response rates across most surveys,
the BRFSS has achieved a cellular telephone response rate that compares favorably with other
similar surveys (Table 1). Moreover, since the initial inclusion of cell phone respondents, the
proportion of the sample that is interviewed by cell phone has increased. In many states, cell
phone respondents represent the majority of the sample. Since 2012, median BRFSS cell phone
response rates have risen slightly. Overall, BRFSS response rates have leveled off in the past few
years, with landline rates declining and cell phone rates improving. In 2023, the screening of
eligible landline phone numbers has improved—which may account for a slight improvement in
the proportion of numbers identified as working phone numbers in the landline sample. This
change would not necessarily increase response rates. The leveling-off of telephone survey
response rates is noted for other federal surveys as well—although in one report, authors noted
that the accelerated declines in response rates seen in 6 other surveys were not seen in BRFSS
and one other survey.3
Table 1.
Examples of Survey Response Rates

Survey

Year(s)

Overall Response
Rates

2021–22

9.2%

a

California Health Interview Survey (CHIS)

b

National Health Interview Survey

2023

48.8%

c

Am Time Use Survey

2023

36.9%

BRFSS d,e
2023
44.7%
a
California Health Interview Survey. CHIS 2021–2022 Methodology Series: Report 4—
Response Rates. Los Angeles, CA: UCLA Center for Health Policy Research, 2023. Tables 69. https://healthpolicy.ucla.edu/sites/default/files/202309/chis_2021_2022_methodologyreport4_responserates_final_09112023.pdf
Accessed 14 August 2024
b
National Center for Health Statistics. National Health Interview Survey, 2023. Public-use
data file and documentation.
https://ftp.cdc.gov/pub/Health_Statistics/NCHS/Dataset_Documentation/NHIS/2023/srvydesc508.pdf. Table 4. Accessed 20 August 2024.
c

Am Time Use Survey
Bureau of Labor Statistics (sponsor)/by the U.S. Census Bureau. American Time Use Survey
User’s Guide, 2023 Understanding ATUS 2003 to 2023. https://www.bls.gov/tus/atususersguide.pdf
Table 3.3. Accessed 14 August 2024.
d
BRFSS response rates are presented here as median rates for all participating states and territories.
e Response

rate (RR) formulae may differ by survey:
CHIS—AAPOR RR#4 (like BRFSS)
NHIS—AAPOR RR#2
ATUS—AAPOR RR#2

Page 4 of 25

The following tables present landline telephone and cellular telephone calling outcomes and
rates. The BRFSS cellular telephone survey was collected in a manner similar to that of the
BRFSS landline telephone survey. One important difference, however, is that interviews
conducted by landline telephones include random selection among adults within households,
while cellular telephone interviews are conducted with adults who are contacted on personal
(nonbusiness) cellular telephones. The report presents data on three general types of measure by
state:
1. Call outcome measures, including response rates, which are based on landline telephone
disposition codes.
2. Call outcome measures, including response rates, which are based on cellular telephone
disposition codes.
3. A weighted response rate, based on a combination of the landline telephone response rate
with the cellular telephone response rate proportional to the total sample used to collect the
data for a state.
For clarity, BRFSS recommends that authors and researchers referencing BRFSS data quality
include the following language, below. Note the places where authors should include information
specific to their projects.
Response rates for BRFSS are calculated using standards set by the American Association for Public Opinion
Research (AAPOR) Response Rate Formula #4 Standards-Definitions-10th-edition.pdf (aapor.org) (p86).
Response rate is the number of respondents who completed the survey as a proportion of all eligible and likelyeligible people. The median survey response rate for all participating states, territories and Washington, DC, in
2023 was 44.7 and ranged from 21.7 to 63.1.a Response rates for states and territories included in this analysis
had a median of [provide median] and ranged from [provide range],b For detailed information see the BRFSS
Summary Data Quality Report c
Response rates and ranges should reflect the year(s) included in the analyses.
Response rates for states selected for analysis should be included here. This sentence may be omitted if all states
are used in the analysis.
c
See the Summary Data Quality Report for the year(s) included in the analyses. The 2023 document is available
at: https://www.cdc.gov/brfss/annual_data/2023/pdf/2023-sdqr-508.pdf.
a

b

BRFSS 2023 Call Outcome Measures and Response Rate Formulae
The calculations of calling-outcome rates are based on final disposition codes that are assigned
after all calling attempts have been exhausted. The BRFSS may make up to 15 attempts to reach
a respondent before assigning a final disposition code. In 2023, the BRFSS used a single set of
disposition codes for both landline and cell phones, adapted from standardized AAPOR
disposition codes for telephone surveys. A few disposition codes apply only to landline
telephone or to cellular telephone sample numbers. For example, answering-device messages
may confirm household eligibility for landline telephone numbers but are not used to determine
eligibility of cellular telephone numbers. Disposition codes reflect whether interviewers have
Page 5 of 25

completed or partially completed an interview (1000 level codes), determined that the household
was eligible without completing an interview (2000 level codes), determined that a household or
respondent was ineligible (4000 level codes), or was unable to determine the eligibility of a
household or respondent (3000 level codes). Partially completed interviews are those that have
collected all information needed to weight responses (about 12 minutes into the survey
questionnaire, not including time for eligibility screening). The table below illustrates the codes
used by the BRFSS in 2023, and it notes the instances where codes are used only for landline
telephone or cellular telephone sample numbers.
The Disposition Code Table below uses terms to define and categorize outcomes, which include
the following:
•
•

•
•
•

•

Respondent: A person who is contacted by an interviewer and who may be eligible for
interview.
Private residence: Persons residing in private residences or college housing are eligible.
Persons living in group homes, military barracks or other living arrangements are not
eligible. Persons living in vacation homes for 30 days or more are eligible. Eligibility is
ascertained by asking each potential respondent whether they live in a private residence. If
the respondent is unsure whether their residence qualifies, additional definitions of residences
are provided.
Landline telephone: A telephone that is used within a specific location, including traditional
household telephones, Voice Over Internet Protocol (VOIP), and Internet phones connected
to computers in a household.
Cellular telephone: A mobile device that is not tied to a specific location for use.
Selected respondent: A person who is eligible for interview. For the cellular telephone
sample, a selected respondent is an adult associated with the phone number who lives in a
private residence or college housing within the United States or territories covered by the
BRFSS. For the landline telephone sample, a selected respondent is the person chosen for
interview during the household enumeration section of the screening questions.
Personal cellular telephone: A cellular telephone that is used for personal calls. Cellular
telephones that are used for both personal and business calls may be categorized as personal
telephones and persons contacted on these phones are eligible for interview. Persons using
telephones that are exclusively for business use are not eligible for interview.

Table 2.
2023 Disposition Codes for Landline Telephones and Cellular Telephones
Category

Interviewed
(1000-level codes)

Code

Description

1100

Completed interview

1200

Partially completed interview

Page 6 of 25

Table 2.
2023 Disposition Codes for Landline Telephones and Cellular Telephones
Category

Eligible, Non-Interview
(2000 level codes)

Unknown Eligibility

Not Eligible

Code

Description

2111

Household level refusal (used for landline only)

2112

Selected respondent refusal

2120

Break off/termination within questionnaire

2210

Selected respondent never available

2320

Selected respondent physically or mentally unable to
complete interview

2330

Language barrier of selected respondent

3100

Unknown if housing unit

3130

No answer

3140

Answering device, unknown whether eligible

3150

Telecommunication barrier (i.e. call blocking)

3200

Household, not known if respondent eligible

3322

Physical or mental impairment (household level)

3330

Language barrier (household level)

3700

On never-call list

4100

Out of sample

4200

Fax/data/modem

4300

Nonworking/disconnected number

4400

Technological barrier
(i.e., fast busy, phone circuit barriers)

4430

Call forwarding/pager

4460

Landline telephone number
(used for cellular telephone only)

4500

Non-residence/business

4900

Miscellaneous, non-eligible

Factors affecting the distribution of disposition codes by state include differences in telephone
systems, sample designs, surveyed populations, and data collection processes. Table 3 defines
the categories of disposition codes used to calculate outcome and response rates illustrated in
Tables 4A through 6.

Page 7 of 25

Table 3.
Categories of 2023 Landline and Cellular Telephone Disposition Codes

Category

Disposition Code
Definitions

Formulae
Abbreviation

Completed
Interviews

1100+1200

COIN

Eligible

1100+1200+2111+2112+2120+2210+2320+2330

ELIG

Contacted Eligible

1100+1200+2111+2112+2120+2210+2320+2330

CONELIG

Terminations and
Refusals

2111+2112+2120

TERE

Ineligible Phone
Numbers

All 4000 level disposition codes

INELIG

Unknown Whether
Eligible

All 3000 level disposition codes

UNKELIG

Eligibility Factor

ELIG/(ELIG + INELIG)

E

The disposition codes are categorized according to the groups illustrated in Table 3 to produce
rates of resolution, cooperation, completion, refusal, and response. In accordance with population
surveillance standards, the proportions of people who may have been eligible for interview, but
who were not able to be interviewed, are accounted for in the formulae.
Eligibility Factor
E = ELIG/ (ELIG + INELIG)
The Eligibility Factor is the proportion of eligible phone numbers from among all sample
numbers for which eligibility has been determined. The eligibility factor, therefore, provides a
measure of eligibility that can be applied to sample numbers with unknown eligibility. The
purpose of the eligibility factor is to estimate the proportion of the sample that is likely to be
eligible. The eligibility factor is used in the calculations of refusal and response rates. Separate
eligibility factors are calculated for landline telephones and cellular telephone samples for each
state and territory.
Resolution Rate
((ELIG + INELIG) / (ELIG+INELIG+UNKELIG))*100
The Resolution Rate is the percentage of numbers in the total sample for which eligibility has
been determined. The total number of eligible and ineligible sample phone numbers is divided by
the total number of phone numbers in the entire sample. The result is multiplied by 100 to
calculate the percentage of the sample for which eligibility is determined. Separate resolution
rates are calculated for landline telephone and cellular telephone samples for each state and
territory.
Page 8 of 25

Interview Completion Rate
(COIN / (COIN + TERE)) * 100
The Interview Completion Rate is the rate of completed interviews among all respondents who
have been determined to be eligible and selected for interviewing. The numerator is the number
of complete and partially completed interviews. This number is divided by the number of
completed interviews, partially completed interviews, and all break offs, refusals, and
terminations. The result is multiplied by 100 to provide the percentage of completed interviews
among eligible respondents who are contacted by interviewers. Separate interview completion
rates are calculated for landline telephone and cellular telephone samples for each state and
territory.
Cooperation Rate
(COIN / CONELIG) *100
The AAPOR Cooperation Rate is the number of complete and partial complete interviews
divided by the number of contacted and eligible respondents. The BRFSS Cooperation Rate
follows the guidelines of AAPOR Cooperation Rate #2. Separate cooperation rates are calculated
for landline telephone and cellular telephone samples for each state and territory.
Refusal Rate
(TERE / (ELIG + (E * UNKELIG))) * 100
The BRFSS Refusal Rate is the proportion of all eligible respondents who refused to complete an
interview or terminated an interview prior to the threshold required to be considered a partial
interview. Refusals and terminations (TERE) are in the numerator, and the denominator includes
all eligible numbers and a proportion of the numbers with unknown eligibility. The proportion of
numbers with unknown eligibility is determined by the eligibility factor (E as described above).
The result is then multiplied by 100 to provide a percentage of refusals among all eligible and
likely to be eligible numbers in the sample. Separate refusal rates are calculated for landline
telephone and cellular telephone samples for each state and territory.
Response Rate
(COIN / ((ELIG + (E * UNKELIG))) * 100
A Response Rate is an outcome rate with the number of complete and partial interviews in the
numerator and an estimate of the number of eligible units in the sample in the denominator. The
BRFSS Response Rate calculation assumes that the unresolved numbers contain the same
percentage of eligible households or eligible personal cell phones as the records whose eligibility
or ineligibility are determined. The BRFSS Response Rate follows the guidelines for AAPOR
Response Rate #4. It also is similar to the BRFSS CASRO Rates reported prior to 2011. Separate
eligibility factors are calculated for landline telephone and cellular telephone samples for each
state and territory and a combined Response Rate for landline telephone and cellular telephone
also is calculated. The combined landline telephone and cellular telephone response rate is
generated by weighting to the respective size of the two samples. The total sample equals the
landline telephone sample plus cellular telephone sample. The proportion of each sample is
Page 9 of 25

calculated using the total sample as the denominator. The formulae for the proportions of the
sample are found below:
P1 = TOTAL LANDLINE SAMPLE /
(TOTAL LANDLINE SAMPLE + TOTAL CELL PHONE SAMPLE);
P2 = TOTAL CELL PHONE SAMPLE /
(TOTAL LANDLINE SAMPLE + TOTAL CELL PHONE SAMPLE);
The formula for the Combined Landline Telephone and Cellular Telephone Weighted Response
Rate, therefore, is described below:
COMBINED RESPONSE RATE=
(P1 * LANDLINE RESPONSE RATE) + (P2 * CELL PHONE RESPONSE RATE).

Tables of Outcomes and Rates by State
The tables on the following pages illustrate calling outcomes in categories of eligibility, rates of
cooperation, refusal, resolution, and response by landline telephone and cellular telephone
samples.
 Tables 4A and 4B provide information on the size of the sample and the numbers and
percentages of completed interviews, cooperation rates, terminations and refusals, and
contacts with eligible households by state and territory.
 Tables 5A and 5B provide information on the number and percentage of landline telephone
and cellular telephone sample numbers that are eligible, ineligible, and of unknown
eligibility.
 Table 6 provides response rates for landline telephone samples, cellular telephone samples,
and combined samples.

Page 10 of 25

Table 4A. Landline Sample.
Completions, Terminations and Refusals, Contacted Eligible Households and Total Sample by State
COIN

TERE

CONELIG

COOP

State*

N

%

N

%

N

%

%

Total
Sample

AL

959

2.1

339

0.7

1,304

2.9

73.5

45,209

AK

1,048

1.2

713

0.8

1,799

2.1

58.3

84,750

AZ

2,251

1.8

1,320

1.1

3,662

3.0

61.5

121,740

AR

1,421

2.8

733

1.4

2,219

4.3

64.0

51,090

CA

2,684

0.2

1,226

0.1

4,108

0.3

65.3

1,294,110

CO

900

2.1

565

1.3

1,523

3.6

59.1

42,481

CT

1,000

2.8

691

1.9

1,719

4.7

58.2

36,330

DE

959

0.5

475

0.2

1,502

0.8

63.8

194,850

DC

800

2.1

537

1.4

1,380

3.7

58.0

37,320

FL

3,480

1.8

2,926

1.5

6,561

3.4

53.0

195,360

GA

2,409

1.7

2,463

1.7

5,012

3.4

48.1

145,350

HI

1,583

1.5

666

0.6

2,400

2.2

66.0

108,270

ID

980

2.3

252

0.6

1,266

2.9

77.4

43,350

IL

502

1.0

201

0.4

725

1.5

69.2

48,150

IN

2,176

1.8

1,684

1.4

3,959

3.3

55.0

121,140

IA

1,474

3.5

556

1.3

2,137

5.1

69.0

42,300

KS

1,855

1.5

787

0.6

2,730

2.2

67.9

122,095

LA

581

1.0

341

0.6

932

1.7

62.3

56,310

ME

4,323

0.7

1,019

0.2

5,411

0.9

79.9

576,843

MD

4,550

2.2

3,638

1.7

8,356

4.0

54.5

209,490

MA

1,136

1.0

282

0.2

1,436

1.2

79.1

116,362

MI

2,709

3.1

1,360

1.6

4,133

4.7

65.5

87,180

MN

2,610

0.7

998

0.3

3,713

1.0

70.3

354,300

MS

408

1.3

84

0.3

494

1.6

82.6

31,546

MO

1,592

2.1

531

0.7

2,172

2.9

73.3

75,009

MT

1,945

1.5

675

0.5

2,660

2.1

73.1

129,240

11 of 25

Table 4A. Landline Sample.
Completions, Terminations and Refusals, Contacted Eligible Households and Total Sample by State
COIN

TERE

CONELIG

COOP

State*

N

%

N

%

N

%

%

Total
Sample

NE

2,349

2.2

843

0.8

3,231

3.0

72.7

108,990

NV

480

1.2

231

0.6

721

1.8

66.6

41,091

NH

3,556

4.3

1,170

1.4

4,778

5.8

74.4

82,260

NJ

1,707

1.6

1,526

1.4

3,312

3.1

51.5

106,350

NM

831

2.0

393

0.9

1,256

3.0

66.2

41,910

NY

2,121

1.7

2,052

1.6

4,222

3.3

50.2

126,870

NC

485

1.3

102

0.3

596

1.6

81.4

38,040

ND

1,200

3.7

836

2.6

2,074

6.4

57.9

32,482

OH

2,770

1.9

2,299

1.6

5,239

3.6

52.9

147,030

OK

1,085

2.0

310

0.6

1,463

2.8

74.2

53,015

OR

504

0.9

104

0.2

613

1.1

82.2

55,217

RI

627

2.0

449

1.4

1,105

3.6

56.7

31,020

SC

2,575

2.1

2,246

1.8

4,974

4.0

51.8

123,060

SD

1,060

0.5

156

0.1

1,230

0.6

86.2

213,759

TN

652

1.4

293

0.6

959

2.0

68.0

47,160

TX

1,872

0.7

1,624

0.6

3,640

1.4

51.4

261,180

UT

1,769

2.7

688

1.0

2,516

3.8

70.3

66,268

VT

1,146

2.9

620

1.5

1,789

4.5

64.1

40,050

VA

2,661

0.6

847

0.2

3,648

0.8

72.9

457,950

WA

3,962

4.5

1,789

2.0

5,802

6.5

68.3

88,800

WV

1,243

3.0

492

1.2

1,766

4.3

70.4

41,400

WI

4,861

0.6

1,826

0.2

6,903

0.9

70.4

770,370

WY

1,702

0.7

535

0.2

2,303

0.9

73.9

251,370

GU

308

1.4

217

1.0

566

2.6

54.4

22,050

PR

189

1.3

74

0.5

295

2.1

64.1

14,070

VI

299

0.5

133

0.2

439

0.8

68.1

57,960

12 of 25

Table 4A. Landline Sample.
Completions, Terminations and Refusals, Contacted Eligible Households and Total Sample by State
COIN

TERE

CONELIG

COOP

State*

N

%

N

%

N

%

%

Total
Sample

Minimum

408

0.2

84

0.1

494

0.3

48.1

14,070

Maximum

4,861

4.5

3,638

2.6

8,356

6.5

86.2

1,294,110

Mean

1,787

1.8

949

0.9

2,712

2.7

66.2

155,017

Median

1,583

1.6

688

0.8

2,172

2.8

66.5

87,810

*States listed in order by FIPS code. During 2023, Kentucky and Pennsylvania were unable to collect enough data
to meet the minimum requirements to be included in this public data set.

13 of 25

Table 4B. Cell Phone Sample.
Completions, Terminations and Refusals, Contacted Eligible Households and Total Sample by State
COIN

TERE

CONELIG

COOP

State*

N

%

N

%

N

%

%

Total
Sample

AL

3,246

3.4

617

0.7

3,886

4.1

83.5

94,172

AK

4,355

2.0

836

0.4

5,295

2.5

82.2

214,620

AZ

9,756

3.3

2,156

0.7

12,275

4.1

79.5

300,000

AR

3,930

3.5

1,010

0.9

5,103

4.5

77.0

112,350

CA

8,525

0.8

1,956

0.2

10,811

1.0

78.9

1,104,060

CO

7,832

4.1

1,742

0.9

9,807

5.1

79.9

191,070

CT

9,002

2.7

2,435

0.7

11,946

3.6

75.4

328,673

DE

3,468

1.2

799

0.3

4,337

1.5

80.0

289,770

DC

2,203

2.5

508

0.6

2,815

3.2

78.3

87,480

FL

8,856

2.2

2,814

0.7

12,165

3.1

72.8

395,550

GA

5,601

2.2

1,917

0.8

7,868

3.1

71.2

254,430

HI

6,120

5.5

1,205

1.1

7,516

6.8

81.4

111,330

ID

6,136

3.9

904

0.6

7,286

4.6

84.2

157,272

IL

4,512

2.3

992

0.5

5,646

2.9

79.9

197,100

IN

8,964

3.5

2,410

1.0

11,813

4.7

75.9

253,320

IA

7,675

6.5

1,092

0.9

8,907

7.5

86.2

118,830

KS

8,281

3.0

1,263

0.5

9,777

3.6

84.7

273,286

LA

4,919

1.8

1,725

0.6

6,703

2.5

73.4

269,707

ME

8,196

2.6

795

0.2

9,420

2.9

87.0

320,767

MD

13,530

3.3

3,536

0.9

17,526

4.3

77.2

408,390

MA

8,473

1.6

982

0.2

10,389

2.0

81.6

525,323

MI

7,362

3.1

1,799

0.8

9,598

4.1

76.7

234,780

MN

13,130

1.0

2,795

0.2

16,229

1.3

80.9

1,254,210

MS

3,652

2.0

549

0.3

4,233

2.3

86.3

185,306

MO

5,582

4.7

1,039

0.9

6,926

5.8

80.6

119,334

MT

5,296

3.6

574

0.4

5,913

4.0

89.6

147,870

14 of 25

Table 4B. Cell Phone Sample.
Completions, Terminations and Refusals, Contacted Eligible Households and Total Sample by State
COIN

TERE

CONELIG

COOP

State*

N

%

N

%

N

%

%

Total
Sample

NE

10,841

3.5

1,816

0.6

12,857

4.1

84.3

311,185

NV

2,126

2.6

342

0.4

2,534

3.1

83.9

81,735

NH

3,441

5.9

464

0.8

3,961

6.8

86.9

58,020

NJ

7,870

2.0

2,835

0.7

11,152

2.8

70.6

392,100

NM

2,309

3.4

556

0.8

2,905

4.2

79.5

68,746

NY

15,653

2.2

6,007

0.8

22,665

3.2

69.1

718,770

NC

3,037

3.8

343

0.4

3,403

4.3

89.2

79,798

ND

4,801

5.3

1,145

1.3

6,070

6.6

79.1

91,320

OH

10,747

2.7

3,038

0.8

14,388

3.7

74.7

391,980

OK

5,603

3.8

1,064

0.7

6,719

4.5

83.4

147,957

OR

5,502

2.8

583

0.3

6,537

3.4

84.2

194,971

RI

5,401

4.1

1,311

1.0

6,954

5.2

77.7

133,290

SC

7,544

3.1

1,836

0.8

9,990

4.1

75.5

243,780

SD

5,022

1.7

315

0.1

5,842

2.0

86.0

290,435

TN

4,914

1.9

1,505

0.6

6,480

2.5

75.8

264,084

TX

7,420

2.4

2,182

0.7

10,142

3.3

73.2

311,460

UT

9,633

5.2

1,467

0.8

11,948

6.4

80.6

186,421

VT

6,396

4.2

1,224

0.8

7,760

5.1

82.4

151,230

VA

3,939

1.4

619

0.2

4,609

1.7

85.5

272,850

WA

22,978

7.1

4,025

1.2

27,438

8.5

83.7

323,550

WV

3,156

3.1

362

0.4

3,534

3.4

89.3

102,690

WI

8,151

0.9

1,546

0.2

9,837

1.1

82.9

866,910

WY

2,888

1.1

473

0.2

3,397

1.2

85.0

274,890

GU

1,253

3.0

353

0.8

1,692

4.1

74.1

41,748

PR

4,510

8.7

244

0.5

4,777

9.2

94.4

52,117

VI

2,017

2.6

427

0.6

2,472

3.2

81.6

76,740

15 of 25

Table 4B. Cell Phone Sample.
Completions, Terminations and Refusals, Contacted Eligible Households and Total Sample by State
COIN

TERE

CONELIG

COOP

State*

N

%

N

%

N

%

%

Total
Sample

Minimum

2,126

0.8

315

0.1

2,534

1.0

69.1

58,020

Maximum

22,978

13.2

6,007

1.3

27,438

13.2

89.6

1,254,210

Mean

6,897

3.4

1,500

0.6

8,680

4.1

80.5

283,820

Median

6,120

3.0

1,205

0.7

7,516

3.8

80.6

243,780

*States listed in order by FIPS code. During 2023, Kentucky and Pennsylvania were unable to collect enough data
to meet the minimum requirements to be included in this public data set.

16 of 25

Table 5A. Landline Sample.
Categories of Eligibility by State (Landline Only).
ELIG

INELIG

UNKELIG

State*

N

%

N

%

N

%

AL

1,304

2.9

34,307

75.9

9,598

21.2

AK

1,799

2.1

75,249

88.8

7,702

9.1

AZ

3,662

3.0

97,987

80.5

20,091

16.5

AR

2,219

4.3

42,332

82.9

6,539

12.8

CA

4,108

0.3

1,097,058

84.8

192,944

14.9

CO

1,523

3.6

32,953

77.6

8,005

18.8

CT

1,719

4.7

26,006

71.6

8,605

23.7

DE

1,502

0.8

139,596

71.6

53,752

27.6

DC

1,380

3.7

29,228

78.3

6,712

18.0

FL

6,561

3.4

155,108

79.4

33,691

17.2

GA

5,012

3.4

115,006

79.1

25,332

17.4

HI

2,400

2.2

82,339

76.0

23,531

21.7

ID

1,266

2.9

35,990

83.0

6,094

14.1

IL

725

1.5

38,143

79.2

9,282

19.3

IN

3,959

3.3

97,990

80.9

19,191

15.8

IA

2,137

5.1

31,953

75.5

8,210

19.4

KS

2,730

2.2

103,332

84.6

16,033

13.1

LA

932

1.7

43,497

77.2

11,881

21.1

ME

5,411

0.9

443,231

76.8

128,201

22.2

MD

8,356

4.0

156,144

74.5

44,990

21.5

MA

1,436

1.2

70,617

60.7

44,309

38.1

MI

4,133

4.7

68,116

78.1

14,931

17.1

MN

3,713

1.0

278,894

78.7

71,693

20.2

MS

494

1.6

25,926

82.2

5,126

16.2

MO

2,172

2.9

62,352

83.1

10,485

14.0

MT

2,660

2.1

96,760

74.9

29,820

23.1

NE

3,231

3.0

83,793

76.9

21,966

20.2
17 of 25

Table 5A. Landline Sample.
Categories of Eligibility by State (Landline Only).
ELIG

INELIG

UNKELIG

State*

N

%

N

%

N

%

NV

721

1.8

32,134

78.2

8,236

20.0

NH

4,778

5.8

58,907

71.6

18,575

22.6

NJ

3,312

3.1

78,300

73.6

24,738

23.3

NM

1,256

3.0

33,088

79.0

7,566

18.1

NY

4,222

3.3

89,202

70.3

33,446

26.4

NC

596

1.6

30,121

79.2

7,323

19.3

ND

2,074

6.4

24,159

74.4

6,249

19.2

OH

5,239

3.6

114,478

77.9

27,313

18.6

OK

1,463

2.8

44,593

84.1

6,959

13.1

OR

613

1.1

40,616

73.6

13,988

25.3

RI

1,105

3.6

23,498

75.8

6,417

20.7

SC

4,974

4.0

97,003

78.8

21,083

17.1

SD

1,230

0.6

174,966

81.9

37,563

17.6

TN

959

2.0

34,698

73.6

11,503

24.4

TX

3,640

1.4

214,866

82.3

42,674

16.3

UT

2,516

3.8

53,077

80.1

10,675

16.1

VT

1,789

4.5

32,859

82.0

5,402

13.5

VA

3,648

0.8

393,748

86.0

60,554

13.2

WA

5,802

6.5

67,158

75.6

15,840

17.8

WV

1,766

4.3

29,188

70.5

10,446

25.2

WI

6,903

0.9

563,016

73.1

200,451

26.0

WY

2,303

0.9

208,838

83.1

40,229

16.0

GU

566

2.6

11,766

53.4

9,718

44.1

PR

295

2.1

11,979

85.1

1,796

12.8

VI

439

0.8

54,537

94.1

2,984

5.1

Minimum

494

0.3

23,498

60.7

5,126

9.1

Maximum

8,356

6.5

1,097,058

88.8

200,451

38.1
18 of 25

Table 5A. Landline Sample.
Categories of Eligibility by State (Landline Only).
ELIG

INELIG

UNKELIG

State*

N

%

N

%

N

%

Mean

2,805

2.7

122,498

78.3

29,713

19.0

Median

2,219

2.8

68,116

78.5

15,840

18.3

*States listed in order by FIPS code. During 2023, Kentucky and Pennsylvania were unable to collect enough data
to meet the minimum requirements to be included in this public data set.

19 of 25

Table 5B. Cell Phone Sample.
Categories of Eligibility by State (Cell Phone Only).
ELIG

INELIG

UNKELIG

State*

N

%

N

%

N

%

AL

3,886

4.1

26,946

28.6

63,340

67.3

AK

5,295

2.5

169,702

79.1

39,623

18.5

AZ

12,275

4.1

164,154

54.7

123,571

41.2

AR

5,103

4.5

62,415

55.6

44,832

39.9

CA

10,811

1.0

356,719

32.3

736,530

66.7

CO

9,807

5.1

86,055

45.0

95,208

49.8

CT

11,946

3.6

145,702

44.3

171,025

52.0

DE

4,337

1.5

94,258

32.5

191,175

66.0

DC

2,815

3.2

45,606

52.1

39,059

44.6

FL

12,165

3.1

189,135

47.8

194,250

49.1

GA

7,868

3.1

125,724

49.4

120,838

47.5

HI

7,516

6.8

36,259

32.6

67,555

60.7

ID

7,286

4.6

83,026

52.8

66,960

42.6

IL

5,646

2.9

96,307

48.9

95,147

48.3

IN

11,813

4.7

122,158

48.2

119,349

47.1

IA

8,907

7.5

54,763

46.1

55,160

46.4

KS

9,777

3.6

161,170

59.0

102,339

37.4

LA

6,703

2.5

108,654

40.3

154,350

57.2

ME

9,420

2.9

106,738

33.3

204,609

63.8

MD

17,526

4.3

196,060

48.0

194,804

47.7

MA

10,389

2.0

250,459

47.7

264,475

50.3

MI

9,598

4.1

126,957

54.1

98,225

41.8

MN

16,229

1.3

368,042

29.3

869,939

69.4

MS

4,233

2.3

84,534

45.6

96,539

52.1

MO

6,926

5.8

62,787

52.6

49,621

41.6

MT

5,913

4.0

57,796

39.1

84,161

56.9

NE

12,857

4.1

167,394

53.8

130,934

42.1
20 of 25

Table 5B. Cell Phone Sample.
Categories of Eligibility by State (Cell Phone Only).
ELIG

INELIG

UNKELIG

State*

N

%

N

%

N

%

NV

2,534

3.1

34,324

42.0

44,877

54.9

NH

3,961

6.8

27,493

47.4

26,566

45.8

NJ

11,152

2.8

172,875

44.1

208,073

53.1

NM

2,905

4.2

35,234

51.3

30,607

44.5

NY

22,665

3.2

338,115

47.0

357,990

49.8

NC

3,403

4.3

32,317

40.5

44,078

55.2

ND

6,070

6.6

44,614

48.9

40,636

44.5

OH

14,388

3.7

196,505

50.1

181,087

46.2

OK

6,719

4.5

78,886

53.3

62,352

42.1

OR

6,537

3.4

66,722

34.2

121,712

62.4

RI

6,954

5.2

56,553

42.4

69,783

52.4

SC

9,990

4.1

104,984

43.1

128,806

52.8

SD

5,842

2.0

158,097

54.4

126,496

43.6

TN

6,480

2.5

88,826

33.6

168,778

63.9

TX

10,142

3.3

150,082

48.2

151,236

48.6

UT

11,948

6.4

91,104

48.9

83,369

44.7

VT

7,760

5.1

76,880

50.8

66,590

44.0

VA

4,609

1.7

100,469

36.8

167,772

61.5

WA

27,438

8.5

134,434

41.5

161,678

50.0

WV

3,534

3.4

62,795

61.2

36,361

35.4

WI

9,837

1.1

260,075

30.0

596,998

68.9

WY

3,397

1.2

166,183

60.5

105,310

38.3

GU

1,692

4.1

7,931

19.0

32,125

76.9

PR

4,777

9.2

26,556

51.0

20,784

39.9

VI

2,472

3.2

54,414

70.9

19,854

25.9

Minimum

2,534

1.0

26,946

28.6

26,566

18.5

Maximum

27,438

8.5

368,042

79.1

869,939

69.4
21 of 25

Table 5B. Cell Phone Sample.
Categories of Eligibility by State (Cell Phone Only).
ELIG

INELIG

UNKELIG

State*

N

%

N

%

N

%

Mean

8,680

4.1

123,002

47.0

152,138

48.9

Median

7,516

3.8

100,469

47.7

105,310

48.4

*States listed in order by FIPS code. During 2023, Kentucky and Pennsylvania were unable to collect enough data
to meet the minimum requirements to be included in this public data set.

22 of 25

Table 6. Response Rates for Landline and Cell Phone Samples

State*

Landline Response
Rate

Cell Phone
Response Rate

Combined Response
Rate

AL

57.9

27.3

37.3

AK

53.0

67.1

63.1

AZ

51.3

46.7

48.1

AR

55.8

46.3

49.3

CA

55.6

26.2

42.1

CO

48.0

40.1

41.5

CT

44.4

36.1

37.0

DE

46.2

27.2

34.9

DC

47.5

43.3

44.6

FL

43.9

37.0

39.3

GA

39.7

37.4

38.2

HI

51.6

32.0

41.7

ID

66.5

48.4

52.3

IL

55.9

41.3

44.2

IN

46.3

40.1

42.1

IA

55.6

46.2

48.6

KS

59.0

53.0

54.8

LA

49.2

31.4

34.5

ME

62.1

31.5

51.2

MD

42.8

40.4

41.2

MA

49.0

40.5

42.0

MI

54.3

44.6

47.2

MN

56.1

24.8

31.7

MS

69.2

41.3

45.4

MO

63.1

47.1

53.2

MT

56.2

38.6

46.8

23 of 25

Table 6. Response Rates for Landline and Cell Phone Samples

State*

Landline Response
Rate

Cell Phone
Response Rate

Combined Response
Rate

NE

58.0

48.8

51.2

NV

53.2

37.8

43.0

NH

57.6

47.1

53.3

NJ

39.6

33.1

34.5

NM

54.2

44.1

47.9

NY

37.0

34.7

35.0

NC

65.7

39.9

48.3

ND

46.7

43.9

44.6

OH

43.1

40.2

41.0

OK

64.4

48.2

52.5

OR

61.4

31.6

38.2

RI

45.0

37.0

38.5

SC

42.9

35.6

38.1

SD

71.0

48.5

58.1

TN

51.4

27.4

31.0

TX

43.0

37.6

40.1

UT

59.0

44.6

48.3

VT

55.4

46.1

48.1

VA

63.3

32.9

52.0

WA

56.1

41.9

45.0

WV

52.6

57.7

56.2

WI

52.1

25.8

38.2

WY

62.1

52.4

57.0

GU

30.4

17.1

21.7

PR

55.9

56.8

56.6

VI

64.6

60.5

62.3

24 of 25

Table 6. Response Rates for Landline and Cell Phone Samples

State*

Landline Response
Rate

Cell Phone
Response Rate

Combined Response
Rate

Minimum

30.4

17.1

21.7

Maximum

71.0

67.1

63.1

Mean

53.2

40.5

44.9

Median

54.3

40.3

44.6

*States listed in order by FIPS code. During 2023, Kentucky and Pennsylvania were unable to collect enough data
to meet the minimum requirements to be included in this public data set.

References
1. Pierannunzi C, Town M, Garvin W, Shaw F, Balluz L. Methodologic changes in the Behavioral Risk
Factor Surveillance System in 2011 and potential effects on prevalence estimates. MMWR.2012;
61(22):410-413. http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/mm6122a3.htm. Accessed 14 August
2024.
2. The American Association for Public Opinion Research. Standard Definitions: Final Dispositions of
Case Codes and Outcome Rates for Surveys (Revised 2023)
Standards-Definitions-10th-edition.pdf (aapor.org) pp 86, 87. Accessed 14 August 2024.
3. Czajka JL, Beyler A. Declining Response Rates in Federal Surveys: Trends and Implications (2016).
https://aspe.hhs.gov/system/files/pdf/255531/Decliningresponserates.pdf. p. viii. Accessed 13 August
2024.

25 of 25