This is the accessible text file for GAO report number GAO-11-45 
entitled '2010 Census: Key Efforts to Include Hard-to-Count 
Populations Went Generally as Planned; Improvements Could Make the 
Efforts More Effective for Next Census' which was released on December 
14, 2010. 

This text file was formatted by the U.S. Government Accountability 
Office (GAO) to be accessible to users with visual impairments, as 
part of a longer term project to improve GAO products' accessibility. 
Every attempt has been made to maintain the structural and data 
integrity of the original printed product. Accessibility features, 
such as text descriptions of tables, consecutively numbered footnotes 
placed at the end of the file, and the text of agency comment letters, 
are provided but may not exactly duplicate the presentation or format 
of the printed version. The portable document format (PDF) file is an 
exact electronic replica of the printed version. We welcome your 
feedback. Please E-mail your comments regarding the contents or 
accessibility features of this document to Webmaster@gao.gov. 

This is a work of the U.S. government and is not subject to copyright 
protection in the United States. It may be reproduced and distributed 
in its entirety without further permission from GAO. Because this work 
may contain copyrighted images or other material, permission from the 
copyright holder may be necessary if you wish to reproduce this 
material separately. 

United States Government Accountability Office:
GAO: 

Report to Congressional Requesters: 

December 2010: 

2010 Census: 

Key Efforts to Include Hard-to-Count Populations Went Generally as 
Planned; Improvements Could Make the Efforts More Effective for Next 
Census: 

GAO-11-45: 

GAO Highlights: 

Highlights of GAO-11-45, a report to congressional requesters. 

Why GAO Did This Study: 

To overcome the long-standing challenge of enumerating hard-to-count 
(HTC) groups such as minorities and renters, the U.S. Census Bureau 
(Bureau), used outreach programs, such as paid advertising, and 
partnered with thousands of organizations to enlist their support for 
the census. The Bureau also conducted Service-Based Enumeration (SBE), 
which was designed to count people who frequent soup kitchens or other 
service providers, and the Be Counted/Questionnaire Assistance Center 
(QAC) program, designed to count individuals who believed the census 
had missed them. As requested, GAO assessed how the design of these 
efforts compared to 2000 and the extent to which they were implemented 
as planned. GAO reviewed Bureau budget, planning, operational, and 
evaluation documents; observed enumeration efforts in 12 HTC areas; 
surveyed local census office managers; and interviewed Bureau 
officials. 

What GAO Found: 

The Bureau better positioned itself to reach out to and enumerate HTC 
populations in 2010 in part by addressing a number of key challenges 
from 2000. The Bureau’s outreach efforts were generally more robust 
compared to 2000. For example, compared to 2000, the Bureau used more 
reliable data to target advertising; focused a larger share of its 
advertising dollars on HTC groups, such as non-English-speaking 
audiences; and strengthened its monitoring abilities so that the 
Bureau was able to run additional advertising in locations where mail 
response rates were lagging. The Bureau also significantly expanded 
the partnership program by hiring about 2,800 partnership staff in 
2010 compared to around 600 in 2000. As a result, staff were not 
spread as thin. The number of languages they spoke increased from 35 
in 2000 to 145 for the 2010 Census. 

Despite these enhancements, the outreach efforts still faced 
challenges. For example, while most of the partnership staff GAO 
interviewed reported having mutually supportive relationships with 
local census offices, about half of the local census office managers 
surveyed were dissatisfied with the level of coordination, noting 
duplication of effort in some cases. Additionally, a tracking database 
that partnership staff were to use to help manage their efforts was 
not user-friendly nor was it kept current. 

The Bureau also improved the key enumeration programs aimed at HTC 
groups and the efforts were generally implemented as planned, but 
additional refinements could improve them for 2020. For example, the 
Bureau expanded SBE training by teaching staff how to enumerate all 
types of SBE facilities, which gave the Bureau more flexibility in 
scheduling enumerations, and advance visits helped enhance service 
providers’ readiness for the enumeration. Nevertheless, while most 
local census office managers were satisfied with SBE staffing levels, 
pockets of dissatisfaction existed and observers noted what appeared 
to be a surplus of enumerators with little work to do in some 
locations. While overstaffing can lead to unnecessarily higher labor 
costs, understaffing can also be problematic because it can affect the 
accuracy of the overall count, and it will be important for the Bureau 
to review the results of SBE to staff SBE efficiently in 2020. 

For the Be Counted/QAC program, the Bureau addressed visibility and 
site selection challenges from 2000 by developing banners to 
prominently display site locations and hours of operation and updating 
site selection guidance. For 2010, the Bureau opened around 38,000 
sites and completed the monthlong operation under budget. However, the 
Bureau experienced recurring challenges with ensuring that the sites 
were visible from street level and were in areas with potential for 
high levels of activity, and the overall effort was resource intensive 
relative to the average of 20 forms that were returned and checked in 
from each site. Moving forward, it will be important for the Bureau to 
explore ways to maximize the program’s ability to increase the number 
of forms checked in for 2020. 

What GAO Recommends: 

GAO recommends that the Bureau take steps to improve the effectiveness 
of its outreach and enumeration activities aimed at HTC groups, 
including developing a predictive model to better allocate paid 
advertising funds, improving coordination between partnership and 
local census staff, revisiting SBE staffing guidance, and ensuring Be 
Counted/QAC sites are more visible and optimally located. Commerce 
generally agreed with the overall findings and recommendations. 

View GAO-11-45 or key components. For more information, contact Robert 
Goldenkoff at (202) 512-2757 or goldenkoffr@gao.gov. 

[End of section] 

Contents: 

Letter: 

Background: 

The Bureau's Outreach and Promotion Efforts Were Generally More Robust 
Compared to Those in 2000 and Were Implemented as Planned, but They 
Could Be Further Improved: 

The Bureau Enhanced Enumeration Programs Aimed at HTC Groups; 
Additional Refinements Could Improve Them for 2020: 

Conclusions: 

Recommendations for Executive Action: 

Agency Comments and Our Evaluation: 

Appendix I: Comments from the Department of Commerce: 

Appendix II: GAO Contact and Staff Acknowledgments: 

Related GAO Products: 

Tables: 

Table 1: Comparison of 2000 and 2010 Census Paid Media Budget: 

Table 2: 2010 Census Paid Media Budget by Target Audience: 

Table 3: Comparison of 2000 and 2010 Paid Media Activities: 

Table 4: 2010 Partnership Activities Compared to Those in 2000: 

Table 5: Comparison of 2000 and 2010 SBE Operations: 

Table 6: Comparison of 2000 and 2010 Be Counted/QAC Programs: 

Figures: 

Figure 1: Reporting Structure for Regional Census Centers: 

Figure 2: Be Counted Forms Prominently Displayed at Brooklyn Be 
Counted/QAC Site: 

Figure 3: Be Counted Forms Not Prominently Displayed at Fresno Be 
Counted/QAC Site: 

[End of section] 

United States Government Accountability Office: 
Washington, DC 20548: 

December 14, 2010: 

The Honorable Thomas R. Carper: 
Chairman: 
The Honorable John McCain: 
Ranking Member: 
Subcommittee on Federal Financial Management, Government Information, 
Federal Services, and International Security: 
Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs: 
United States Senate: 

The Honorable Darrell E. Issa: 
Ranking Member: 
Committee on Oversight and Government Reform: 
House of Representatives: 

The Honorable William Lacy Clay: 
Chairman: 
The Honorable Patrick T. McHenry: 
Ranking Member: 
Subcommittee on Information Policy, Census, and National Archives: 
Committee on Oversight and Government Reform: 
House of Representatives: 

A complete and accurate census is becoming an increasingly daunting 
task, in part because the nation's population is growing larger, more 
diverse, and more reluctant to participate. When the census misses a 
person who should have been included, it results in an undercount; an 
overcount occurs when an individual is counted more than once. Such 
errors are particularly problematic because of their differential 
impact on various subgroups. Minorities, renters, and children, for 
example, are more likely to be undercounted by the census while more 
affluent groups, such as people with vacation homes, are more likely 
to be enumerated more than once. As census data are used to apportion 
seats in Congress, redraw congressional districts, and allocate 
billions of dollars in federal assistance to states and local 
governments, improving coverage and reducing the differential 
undercount[Footnote 1] are critical. 

To help reduce the undercount for the 2010 Census, the U.S. Census 
Bureau (Bureau) embarked on a number of outreach and enumeration 
activities aimed at getting the hard-to-count (HTC) populations to 
participate in the census. On the outreach side, the Bureau 
implemented a communications campaign that included paid media and 
partnership activities (among others) to target advertisements and 
engage government and community organizations in support of the 
census. On the enumeration side, the Bureau relied on such efforts as 
Service-Based Enumeration (SBE) to enumerate individuals residing in 
less conventional housing, such as shelters and tent encampments, and 
the Be Counted/Questionnaire Assistance Centers (QAC) programs to 
count people who believed they did not receive a census form. 

One key to a successful census is a high mail participation rate, 
which helps the Bureau obtain more accurate data and reduce costs. The 
mail participation rate--which the Bureau defines as the percentage of 
forms mailed back by households that received them--was 74 percent for 
2010, the same as in 2000.[Footnote 2] Considering the nation's 
diversity and other sociodemographic trends that adversely affect 
participation rates, this was an important accomplishment. 

Because of your interest in the Bureau's efforts to boost census 
participation and reduce the differential undercount, we reviewed the 
design and implementation of key outreach and enumeration programs 
aimed at HTC populations. In so doing, we paid particular attention to 
assessing (1) how the design of these programs compared to 2000 and 
(2) the extent to which the Bureau implemented these programs as 
planned and where refinements might be needed should these efforts be 
used in the 2020 Census. 

This report is one of three we are releasing today.[Footnote 3] Of the 
other two, one assesses the implementation of key field data 
collection operations, and the other examines the implementation of 
operations aimed at reducing census coverage errors. Both reports 
identify preliminary lessons learned, as well as potential focus areas 
for improvement for the 2020 Census. 

To assess how the Bureau's efforts to reach out to and enumerate HTC 
populations compared to 2000, we reviewed and analyzed budget, 
planning, operational, and evaluative data and documents for the 2000 
and 2010 paid media, partnership, SBE, and Be Counted/QAC activities. 
We chose these activities because they constitute the majority of the 
budget for outreach efforts or, according to the Bureau, were 
enumeration activities that contributed to reducing the differential 
undercount in 2000. For example, paid advertising accounted for 
approximately 39 percent ($258,738,551) of the Bureau's originally 
planned $660 million communication campaign effort, and the 
partnership program accounted for over 56 percent ($364,331,089) of 
the campaign.[Footnote 4] According to the Bureau, the Be Counted/QAC 
program was an important part of the Bureau's efforts to enumerate 
people often missed by the census, including people who had no usual 
residence on Census Day, such as transients, migrants, or seasonal 
farm workers. In addition, we attended presentations on the paid media 
program by the Bureau and its contractor, DraftFCB, which assisted the 
Bureau with creating promotional campaigns to research, develop, and 
target the paid advertising efforts. We also reviewed Bureau, 
Department of Commerce Inspector General, and our reports on the 2010 
and 2000 censuses, and interviewed cognizant Bureau officials at 
headquarters and local census offices. 

To evaluate whether implementation proceeded as planned and identify 
areas for improvement in 2020, we conducted 78 observations of 
enumerators as they visited SBE facilities, including 22 targeted non- 
sheltered outdoor locations (TNSOL)--such as parks and under bridges 
where people experiencing homelessness were sometimes counted. We 
interviewed enumerators in 12 urban local census offices across the 
country, such as those in Boston, Chicago, Dallas, and Los Angeles, 
and interviewed enumerators' supervisors, known as crew leaders, in 
some of the local census offices we visited.[Footnote 5] Further, we 
conducted observations of 51 Be Counted/QAC sites in 12 urban areas. 
For the SBE and Be Counted/QAC observations, we selected offices 
located in HTC areas as determined by data from the 2000 Census. While 
these sites were not selected randomly, we considered factors such as 
ethnic and geographic diversity in selecting them. 

To gain greater insight on the partnership program, we interviewed 11 
partnership staff who represented historically HTC populations and 
different ethnic groups in the Bureau's Atlanta, Charlotte, 
Philadelphia, and Los Angeles regions. We selected these regions based 
on, in part, the allocation of partnership staff, but the sites were 
not randomly selected and results cannot be generalized nationwide. 

To obtain information on the local implementation of the Bureau's 
outreach and enumeration efforts, we surveyed the Bureau's entire 
population of 494 local census office managers (LCOM) using a series 
of online questionnaires about their experience in managing local 
census office activities and enumeration efforts. The surveys were 
conducted in six waves from March through September 2010. Each survey 
had a response rate of at least 70 percent and was thus sufficiently 
reliable for providing evidence to support our findings, conclusions, 
and recommendations. 

We analyzed Bureau data on the distribution of Be Counted/QAC sites 
among HTC census tracts and local census offices. We analyzed cost and 
progress data for SBE and Be Counted/QACs and analyzed data on 
partnership and Be Counted/QAC activities from the automated system 
the Bureau used to track its partnership contacts, the Integrated 
Partnership Contact Database.[Footnote 6] To further identify and 
assess the Bureau's outreach and enumeration efforts for HTC 
populations, we interviewed Bureau officials to obtain additional 
details about paid media, partnerships, SBE, and Be Counted/QAC. 

This report is part of our larger review of lessons learned from the 
2010 Census that can help inform the Bureau's planning efforts for 
2020. The Bureau is also evaluating its efforts to reach out to and 
enumerate HTC populations and plans to issue the results by December 
2012. 

We conducted this performance audit from January 2010 to December 2010 
in accordance with generally accepted government auditing standards. 
Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain 
sufficient, appropriate evidence to provide a reasonable basis for our 
findings and conclusions based on our audit objectives. We believe 
that the evidence obtained provides a reasonable basis for our 
findings and conclusions based on our audit objectives. 

On December 8, 2010, the Secretary of Commerce provided written 
comments on the draft report, which are reprinted in appendix I. The 
Department of Commerce generally agreed with the overall findings and 
recommendations of the report. 

Background: 

To improve participation in the census among HTC groups as well as the 
general population, the Bureau implemented a number of outreach and 
enumeration activities from January 2008 through September 2010. In 
this report, we focus on the following four efforts: 

* paid media, 

* partnerships, 

* SBE, and: 

* Be Counted/QAC. 

The four components of the outreach efforts, known collectively as the 
Integrated Communications Campaign, were paid media, a partnership 
program, public relations and an educational program called Census in 
Schools. According to Bureau officials, the components were designed 
to work together to unify census messages and communicate them to 
diverse audiences via various outlets in order to improve mail 
response and reduce the differential undercount. An appropriation in 
the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (Recovery Act) 
allowed the Bureau to increase the communications campaign's initial 
budget of $410 million by an additional $220 million.[Footnote 7] 

The Bureau's regional census centers (RCC) were responsible for 
administering the partnership program, with partnership coordinators 
and team leaders at each RCC overseeing the work of the partnership 
specialists and partnership assistants. Local census offices played a 
more limited role in outreach efforts, and while the local census 
offices reported to RCCs, they had a different reporting structure 
than the partnership program. 

SBE was meant to help ensure that people without conventional housing 
were included in the count. From March 28 through March 30, 2010, the 
Bureau attempted to enumerate those without conventional housing at 
facilities where they received services or at outdoor locations, such 
as parked cars, tent encampments, and on the street. The Bureau 
developed a list of potential outdoor locations based on several 
sources, including 2000 Census data and input from community leaders. 

The Bureau's Be Counted program, which ran from March 19 to April 19, 
2010, was designed to reach those who may not have received a census 
questionnaire, including people who did not have a usual residence on 
April 1, 2010, such as transients, migrants, and seasonal farm 
workers.[Footnote 8] The program made questionnaires available at 
community centers, libraries, places of worship, and other public 
locations throughout the country. Individuals were to pick up the 
forms from these sites and mail the completed questionnaires to the 
Bureau. Some of the sites also included a staffed QAC to help people, 
especially those with limited English proficiency, complete their 
questionnaires. 

The Bureau's Outreach and Promotion Efforts Were Generally More Robust 
Compared to Those in 2000 and Were Implemented as Planned, but They 
Could Be Further Improved: 

Paid Media Plans Built in Better Targeting: 

The Bureau refined its paid media efforts for 2010, in part to address 
challenges from the 2000 Census. For example, in 2000, to target 
advertising to certain population groups and areas, the Bureau used 
data on measures of civic participation, such as voting in elections. 
However, the Bureau noted that civic participation did not appear to 
be a primary indicator of an individual's willingness to participate 
in the census. To better motivate participation among different 
population groups, for 2010 the Bureau used, among other data sources, 
actual participation data from the 2000 Census, as well as market and 
attitudinal research that identified five mindsets people have about 
the census. These mindsets ranged from the "leading edge" (those who 
are highly likely to participate) to the "cynical fifth" (those who 
are less likely to participate because they doubt the census provides 
tangible benefits and are concerned that the census is an invasion of 
privacy and that the information collected will be misused). The 
Bureau used this information to tailor its paid media efforts. 
Moreover, in 2000 the Bureau did not buy additional paid media in 
areas with unexpectedly low participation rates. For 2010, the Bureau 
set aside more than $7 million to rapidly target paid media in 
response to specific events leading up to the census or to areas with 
unexpectedly low mail participation rates. 

Overall, the Bureau budgeted about $297.3 million on paid media in 
2010, about $57 million (24 percent) more than in 2000 in constant 
2010 dollars. The Bureau's 2010 paid media budget reflected several 
increases. On a unit cost basis, spending increased from an average of 
about $2.05 per housing unit in 2000 to $2.25 per housing unit in 
2010, in constant 2010 dollars. Also, the Bureau increased the 
percentage of the budget for media development costs from 33 percent 
in 2000 to 43 percent in 2010. Table 1 compares the paid media 
spending in 2000 to 2010. 

Table 1: Comparison of 2000 and 2010 Census Paid Media Budget: 

Component: Total paid media; 
2000 paid media[A](In 2010 dollars): $240,593,921; 
2010 paid media[B]: $297,346,773; 
Difference: $56,752,852 (24 percent). 

Component: Paid media development (production, labor, research, and 
other costs); 
2000 paid media[A](In 2010 dollars): 80,187,677; 
2010 paid media[B]: $129,025,327; 
Difference: $48,837,650 (61 percent). 

Component: Paid media buys; 
2000 paid media[A](In 2010 dollars): 160,406,244; 
2010 paid media[B]: $168,321,446; 
Difference: $7,915,202 (4.9 percent). 

Source: U.S. Census Bureau data. 

[A] These are 2000 paid media actual costs. 

[B] These are 2010 paid media estimated budget costs. 

[End of table] 

According to the Bureau, the cost increased for paid media development 
in part because of the extensive research done to target the media to 
specific groups and areas and because advertising was created in 12 
more languages than in 2000. For example, to determine where paid 
media efforts may have the greatest impact, the Bureau developed 
predictive models based on 2000 census data and the evaluations of the 
partnership and paid media efforts from 2000. The models were provided 
to its contractor, DraftFCB, to aid in making paid media decisions. By 
better targeting paid media buys by area and message, the Bureau 
expected to more effectively reach those who have historically been 
the hardest to count. However, according to the Bureau, two factors--
the use of evaluations from 2000 that did not isolate the impact of 
paid media from other components of the Bureau's outreach efforts, 
such as the partnership program, and the age of the data used--may 
have limited the model's ability to predict where paid media efforts 
had the greatest impact. 

In a further effort to reach HTC groups, in 2010 the Bureau budgeted 
more for paid media that targeted HTC groups, like non-English-
speaking audiences, than on the national audience, which was not the 
case in 2000, as shown in table 2. 

Table 2: 2010 Census Paid Media Budget by Target Audience: 

Component: Total paid media buys; 
2000 paid media[A] (in 2010 dollars): $160,406,244; 
2010 paid media[B]: $168,321,446; 
Difference: $7,915,202 (4.9 percent). 

Component: Mass audience (general population); 
2000 paid media[A] (in 2010 dollars): 84,441,528; 
2010 paid media[B]: $81,915,970; 
Difference: $-2,525,558 (-3 percent). 

Component: Ethnic/language audience; 
2000 paid media[A] (in 2010 dollars): 75,964,716; 
2010 paid media[B]: $86,405,476; 
Difference: $10,440,760 (14 percent). 

Source: U.S. Census Bureau data. 

[A] These are 2000 paid media actual costs. 

[B] These are 2010 paid media estimated budget costs. 

[End of table] 

Additionally, the Bureau strengthened its outreach efforts in 2010 by 
improving its monitoring and evaluation activities. For example, 
throughout the census the Bureau monitored the public's awareness and 
attitudes toward the census via surveys and by tracking relevant 
blogs. The Bureau used five sources of information, including national 
polls and actual mail participation rates, to monitor metrics such as 
individuals' understanding of the census, perceived benefits from 
participating in the census, and barriers to participating in the 
census. As a result, the Bureau used this information to identify 
markets and groups where additional outreach was needed. Table 3 
compares key aspects of the 2000 and 2010 paid media activities. 

Table 3: Comparison of 2000 and 2010 Paid Media Activities: 

Paid media activities: Campaign development and targeting; 
2000 Census: Targeted advertisements by segmenting the population into 
three groups of census participation likelihood, based on measures of 
civic participation in an area, such as school board involvement; 
2010 Census: Targeted advertisements based in part on actual 2000 
participation rates and attitudinal research. 

Paid media activities: Campaign development and targeting; 
2000 Census: Developed paid media messages in 16 languages; 
2010 Census: Developed paid media messages in 28 languages. 

Paid media activities: Campaign development and targeting; 
2000 Census: No electronic and Web-based communications made available; 
2010 Census: Electronic and Web-based communications made available. 

Paid media activities: Campaign development and targeting; 
2000 Census: Targeted the majority of paid media resources to national 
mass audience; 
2010 Census: Targeted the majority of paid media resources to 
ethnic/non-English language audiences. 

Paid media activities: Implementation; 
2000 Census: Did not establish a media contingency fund for unexpected 
events; 
2010 Census: Established a $7.4 million rapid response/media 
contingency fund to address unexpected events, such as lower response 
rates in certain areas. 

Paid media activities: Monitoring; 
2000 Census: Did not have the ability to measure the effectiveness of 
paid media during the census; 
2010 Census: Used national polling and other methods to measure the 
effectiveness of paid media during the census. 

Paid media activities: Evaluation; 
2000 Census: Evaluated the impact of the communications campaign as a 
whole on awareness of the census; 
2010 Census: Conducted controlled experiments measuring the impact of 
increased paid media exposure on mail response and made plans to 
evaluate the impact of individual components of the communications 
campaign, including paid media, on awareness and likelihood to 
participate in the census. 

Source: GAO analysis of U.S. Census Bureau information. 

[End of table] 

Paid Media Used Market Research to Better Target HTC Populations: 

The Bureau generally implemented its 2010 paid media campaign as 
planned, targeting different segments of the HTC population. For 
example, to reach younger audiences, which are typically hard to 
count, the Bureau used new methods such as podcasts, YouTube videos, 
and social media networks such as Facebook and Twitter in addition to 
traditional TV and radio broadcasts. To reach people with limited 
English proficiency, the Bureau ran banner advertisements on, for 
example, Chinese language Web sites that linked directly to the 
Chinese language page of the Bureau's own Web site and targeted local 
radio advertisements to various ethnic audiences. Moreover, to reach 
audiences through their media habits and interests, the Bureau 
integrated census messages into regularly scheduled television 
programming in an attempt to appeal to people in new and more personal 
ways. For example, a Spanish-language soap opera made one of its 
characters an enumerator. 

The Bureau also took advantage of its improved monitoring capacity and 
implemented a rapid response initiative to address markets with 
lagging mail participation rates or unforeseen events that might have 
affected response rates in certain markets. For example, as Census Day 
approached, the Bureau continuously tracked the public's attitudes 
toward the census to help determine the impact of its outreach 
activities. The Bureau found that while the percentage of people 
saying they would definitely participate in the census increased from 
about 50 percent in December 2009 to about 89 percent in March 2010, 
the data indicated that specific populations would have lower 
participation rates. As a result, the Bureau ran additional 
advertising targeted at the following groups, among others: 

* 18-to 24-year-olds whose attitudes on their intent to participate in 
the census were not changing over time; 

* English-speaking Hispanics who appeared less likely than Spanish- 
speaking Hispanics to understand the benefits of census participation; 
and: 

* Hasidic Jews in Brooklyn, New York, because mail participation rates 
were lagging in neighborhoods known to have significant Hasidic 
populations. 

Further, in late March, the Bureau identified 23 specific media 
markets with mail participation rates significantly below the national 
average. Following rapid response efforts in these areas, 13 of these 
markets showed a significant increase in mail participation rates 
compared to the national average. 

The Bureau originally budgeted $7.4 million for its rapid response 
efforts, but added approximately $28 million from a separate 
management reserve fund as data analysis showed a need for media 
intervention, for a total of about $35 million. Of this $35 million, 
about $31.8 million was allocated to new media purchases and about $3 
million went to media production and other costs. Of the $31.8 
million, the Bureau budgeted about $17.3 million (54 percent) of the 
rapid response paid media funding for the general population and $14.5 
million (45 percent) for specific ethnic and language audiences. 

The Bureau plans to assess the impact of the communications campaign 
on respondent attitudes and behaviors. For example, to determine how 
much it should invest in the paid media campaign, the Bureau held an 
experiment in 2010 where it flooded certain markets with more paid 
advertising than was used in other, similar markets. When the 
evaluation of this research is completed as scheduled in 2012, it 
could help the Bureau better determine whether greater levels of 
advertising would be cost-effective in terms of increasing the mail 
response rate of various races and ethnic groups. Moving forward, it 
will be important for the Bureau to use these evaluation results not 
only for planning 2020 Census-taking activities, but, as was the case 
for 2010, also for aiding in the development of a predictive model 
that could help the Bureau determine which media outlets provide the 
best return on investment in terms of raising awareness of the census 
and encouraging participation for specific demographic groups. The 
model could combine data from the 2000 and 2010 enumerations and 
inform allocation decisions for paid media. 

Partnership Efforts Were More Comprehensive Than in the 2000 Census: 

In designing the 2010 partnership program, the Bureau took a number of 
steps aimed at expanding its reach and addressing challenges from the 
2000 Census. For example, in 2000, the Bureau hired about 600 
partnership staff in the field who were responsible for mobilizing 
local support for the census by working with local organizations to 
promote census participation. However, we reported in 2001 that 
partnership specialists' heavy workload may have limited the level of 
support they were able to provide individual local census offices. 
[Footnote 9] To help improve its ability to mobilize local support for 
2010, the Bureau created a new position, the partnership assistant, 
[Footnote 10] and hired about 2,800 partnership staff, about five 
times the number of partnership staff hired in 2000.[Footnote 11] 
Thus, the Bureau increased the ratio of partnership staff per county 
and staff were not spread as thin. 

Additionally, for 2000, the Bureau developed a database to track, 
plan, and analyze partnership efforts. We reported that the database 
was not user-friendly, which led to inefficiencies and duplication of 
effort.[Footnote 12] For 2010, the Bureau revamped the partnership 
database to make it more user-friendly and to improve management's 
ability to use the information to monitor the progress of partnership 
activities. For example, while the 2000 database was mainly a catalog 
of census partner organizations, the 2010 database was designed to 
enable the Bureau to more actively manage the program in part by 
generating reports on value-added goods and services that partners 
provided, such as free training space. Table 4 compares key aspects of 
the 2000 and 2010 partnership activities. 

Table 4: 2010 Partnership Activities Compared to Those in 2000: 

Partnership program activities: Implementation; 
2000 Census: Hired about 600 partnership staff; 
2010 Census: Hired about 2,800 partnership staff. 

Partnership program activities: Implementation; 
2000 Census: Recruited about 140,000 partner organizations; 
2010 Census: Recruited more than 255,000 partner organizations. 

Partnership program activities: Implementation; 
2000 Census: Partnership staff spoke 35 languages; 
2010 Census: Partnership staff spoke 145 languages. 

Partnership program activities: Monitoring; 
2000 Census: Did not establish real-time metrics to measure value-
added and limited real-time tracking of partnership activities; 
2010 Census: Established metrics to measure value-added contributions 
of partners and real-time tracking of partnership activities. 

Partnership program activities: Monitoring; 
2000 Census: Developed a partnership database to track partnership 
efforts. Bureau staff reported that the database was cumbersome and 
not user-friendly; 
2010 Census: Revamped partnership database by, among other things, 
allowing for up-to-date monitoring of partner activity and a new Web-
based interface. 

Partnership program activities: Evaluation; 
2000 Census: Evaluated the impact of the communications campaign as a 
whole on awareness of the census, but had no ability to isolate the 
effect of partnership efforts; 
2010 Census: Plans to evaluate the impact of individual components of 
the communications campaign on awareness of and likelihood to 
participate in the census, including the impact of the partnership 
program on raising awareness and affecting the participation rate. 

Source: GAO analysis of U.S. Census Bureau information. 

[End of table] 

The Partnership Program Was Significantly Expanded, but Coordination 
and Monitoring Issues from 2000 Persisted: 

Aided by the Recovery Act funding that allowed the Bureau to increase 
its presence in local communities, the Bureau's outreach efforts 
resulted in recruiting over 100,000 more partners and increasing by 
over 100 the number of languages spoken by partnership staff. The 
Bureau estimated that it would spend about $280 million on partnership 
program costs from fiscal years 2007 through 2011, including $120 
million from the Recovery Act--an increase of 54 percent from 2000. 
[Footnote 13] To expand partnership activities in HTC areas, the 
Bureau used its allocation of Recovery Act-funded partnership staff in 
regions with large HTC populations. As a result, while in 2000 the 
average ratio was one partnership staff member for every five 
counties, in 2010 the average ratio was almost one partnership staff 
member for every county. 

Partnership specialists conducted outreach activities that addressed 
the concerns of HTC communities in their areas. For example, one 
partnership specialist in the Atlanta region organized a conference of 
leaders in the Vietnamese community to ease their concerns about the 
confidentiality of census data. Another partnership specialist in the 
Los Angeles region leveraged the credibility of several large national 
Iranian and Arab organizations to help convince local community 
leaders that the census was mandated by law and that their 
constituents should complete and return census forms. Further, an LCOM 
in the Dallas region told us that partnership specialists worked to 
get a letter from the Mayor that helped enumerators gain access to 
local gated communities and apartment complexes. 

Coordination Issues Persisted Despite Additional Bureau Guidance: 

During the 2000 Census, LCOMs we surveyed said that the reporting 
structure for partnership specialists may have led to communication 
and coordination hurdles between the partnership staff and local 
census office staff. As a result, we recommended that the Bureau 
explore ways to increase the coordination and communication between 
the partnership specialists and the LCOMs.[Footnote 14] To address 
coordination and communication challenges in 2010, the Bureau 
developed additional guidance for partnership specialists and LCOMs, 
revised partnership training materials, and held meetings between 
regional operations staff and partnership staff to discuss ways to 
enhance communications. For example, the Bureau revised the LCOMs' 
handbook to explain that partnership specialists and local census 
office staff have a responsibility to work together to ensure that 
they do not duplicate each others' efforts. In addition, the 
partnership training manual specifically stated that partnership 
specialists should participate in local census office management 
meetings, provide management teams with their schedules of planned 
meetings and activities in advance, and update LCOMs on their 
completed activities. 

Moreover, most of the partnership staff we interviewed reported 
working closely or having mutually supportive relationships with local 
census office staff. For example, partnership staff in the Atlanta and 
Charlotte regions said that they attended training with local census 
office staff, and one partnership specialist told us that training 
gave them a better understanding of the roles and responsibilities of 
local census offices. 

However, LCOMs we surveyed provided a more mixed view of the 
coordination and communication between the partnership program and 
local census offices. On the one hand, 39 percent of 395 LCOMs 
responding to our March survey said they were generally or very 
satisfied with partnership staff's assistance with local 
challenges.[Footnote 15] In addition, some managers provided positive 
comments in the open ended section of the survey about partnership 
staff's assistance. For example, one LCOM commented that partnership 
staff assisted with local census office recruiting activities, such as 
setting up and providing materials for promotional events. In another 
example, a manager from the Boston region said that the local census 
office staff and the partnership specialist worked as one team and 
contributed to the success of the census. These results varied 
regionally, with more satisfaction in the Bureau's Boston, Los 
Angeles, and Dallas regions than in the Philadelphia and New York 
regions. 

On the other hand, the results of our survey of LCOMs also highlight 
areas for improvement. In March, 50 percent of 393 LCOMs responding 
said they were generally or very dissatisfied with coordination 
between local census offices and partnership staff and a similar level 
of dissatisfaction was found in a follow-up survey we conducted in May 
after the nonresponse follow-up operation started.[Footnote 16] Among 
the responses of those LCOMs who elaborated on their satisfaction with 
coordination between local census offices and partnership staff, a key 
theme was a lack of cooperation or interaction between the partnership 
and local census office staffs. A manager from the Chicago region said 
that though the partnership specialist was good, the organizational 
structure and upper management did not allow for proper interaction. 
The manager said that at first, communication between the local census 
office staff and the partnership specialist was prohibited by the 
partnership specialist team leader, which impeded the local census 
office's ability to make valuable community connections. 

One reason for the coordination challenges between local census 
offices and partnership staff could be their different reporting 
structures. As shown in figure 1, LCOMs and partnership specialists 
report to different officials, and the official who oversees both 
positions is two levels above the LCOM and three levels above the 
partnership specialist. 

Figure 1: Reporting Structure for Regional Census Centers: 

[Refer to PDF for image: organizational structure] 

Top level: 
Regional directors. 

Second level, reporting to Regional directors: 
Assistant regional census managers. 

Third level, reporting to Assistant regional census managers: 
* Area manager: 
- Local census office manager; 
* Partnership coordinator: 
- Senior partnership specialist; Partnership specialist. 

Source: U.S. Census Bureau. 

[End of figure] 

According to Bureau officials, this reporting structure was 
established to allow partnership specialists to coordinate their 
efforts with other partnership specialists in the same geographical 
areas and share common problems and solutions. Further, some 
partnership specialists were responsible for reaching out to specific 
ethnic groups in areas covered by different local census offices, 
making it logistically difficult for the specialists to report to one 
local census office. 

But among the LCOMs who elaborated on their responses to our survey, a 
key theme was dissatisfaction with this reporting structure. For 
example, one manager reported that the partnership program and local 
census office operations are too disconnected, adding that at times 
both partnership staff and local census office staff were doing the 
same tasks. The manager said that the partnership program was an 
essential part of a successful census, but only when performed in 
conjunction with local census office operations. Another manager said 
that the partnership program needs a direct link to the local census 
office and suggested that a position such as an assistant manager for 
partnership be added to the local census office staff. Such a 
position, the manager explained, would solidify the communication 
between the partnership program and the local census office. 

Regardless of the management structure, what is clear is that more 
positive experiences seemed to result when LCOMs and partnership 
specialists dovetailed their efforts. Better communication between 
partnership specialists and LCOMs may have enhanced the Bureau's 
capacity to reduce duplicative efforts, close any gaps in outreach to 
community organizations with significant HTC populations, and leverage 
opportunities to achieve a more complete and accurate count. 

Despite Revamping, the Partnership Database Remained Problematic: 

The partnership tracking database could also benefit from refinements. 
Despite improvements, partnership staff raised concerns about its user-
friendliness similar to those reported in 2000. In 2010, all the 
partnership specialists we interviewed reported that data entry was 
time consuming, and 8 of the 11 partnership staff we interviewed 
reported that they needed help with data entry in order to keep the 
database current. The Bureau expected to use the partnership database 
to more accurately monitor and improve partnership efforts nationally; 
thus the difficulty partnership staff found in updating the system is 
noteworthy. 

Initially, no partnership assistants were authorized to access the 
database because the Bureau wanted to ensure that data were entered 
into the system consistently. The Bureau was also concerned about the 
additional costs associated with purchasing licenses for the large 
number of partnership assistants. However, in response to regional 
partnership staff's concerns over the partnership specialists' 
struggles to update the database in a timely manner, the Bureau 
procured approximately 400 licenses for select partnership assistants 
in August 2009. But in interviews with partnership specialists from 
March through May 2010, they told us that they continued to experience 
difficulty meeting the data entry requirements. 

Further, Bureau managers could not be sure if information in the 
partnership database was up-to-date. Bureau officials told us that 
they expected partnership specialists to immediately log any contact 
they had with a partner into the database. However, our analysis of 
reports from the database showed, on average, that about 35 percent of 
users did not update the database on a weekly basis from March 4 
through April 22, 2010. According to Bureau headquarters officials 
responsible for managing the partnership program, because the 
partnership data were not always current, they took the extra step of 
organizing weekly telephone calls between headquarters and regional 
partnership staff in order to gain the most up-to-date information on 
partnership activities. More current information during a crucial time 
period around Census Day, April 1, could have better positioned the 
Bureau to quickly identify and address problem areas. Further, Bureau 
managers would likely have had better data for redeploying partnership 
resources to low responding areas with significant HTC populations 
during different census operations. 

Aligning the Delivery of Promotional Materials with the Hiring of 
Partnership Staff Could Foster More Effective Relationships with 
Partner Organizations: 

Although the Bureau developed English and foreign language promotional 
materials--both in hard copy and for the Bureau's Web page--for 
partnership specialists and assistants to use when recruiting partner 
organizations, the materials were not available when partnership 
specialists were first hired. Eight of the 11 partnership specialists 
and assistants we interviewed reported that because promotional 
materials were not available when needed, it was more difficult for 
them to build relationships with potential partners. Specifically, the 
Bureau began hiring partnership specialists in January 2008. However, 
delivery of the promotional materials did not start until April 2009, 
more than a year after partnership specialists first came on board. 
Although this still left a year until Census Day, by not having 
promotional materials on hand when partnership staff first began their 
work, the Bureau may have missed opportunities to develop and 
strengthen relationships with organizations that had the ability to 
influence census participation among HTC groups. 

Further, three of the eight partnership staff who worked with non- 
English-speaking communities said it was difficult to obtain in- 
language materials when needed. For example, one partnership employee 
in the Los Angeles region reported being unable to engage Korean 
churches until after January 2010 when the needed in-language 
materials first became available (according to Bureau officials, in-
language materials took longer to develop than English language 
materials because of the need to ensure accurate translations). 

Bureau officials acknowledged that the schedule for hiring partnership 
staff and the delivery of promotional materials were not well aligned. 
In the interim, the Bureau provided partnership staff with talking 
points to help them reach out to organizations in the early phase of 
the program. 

Moving forward, it will be important for the Bureau to take a fresh 
look at recurring problems in the partnership program, as well as 
reconsider time frames for the availability of promotional materials. 
Through improving communication and coordination between partnership 
and local census office staff, developing a user-friendly database to 
more effectively monitor the program's progress, and ensuring that 
promotional materials are available for distribution when partnership 
specialists are first hired, the Bureau would better position itself 
to promote the census to HTC populations. 

The Bureau Enhanced Enumeration Programs Aimed at HTC Groups; 
Additional Refinements Could Improve Them for 2020: 

Aspects of 2010 SBE Were Refined to Address Implementation Issues from 
2000 and Better Enumerate HTC Groups: 

To improve its ability to count individuals without conventional 
housing, the Bureau made a number of improvements to SBE, many of 
which were designed to address challenges experienced in 2000. For 
example, in 2000, SBE enumerators were not trained to enumerate all 
types of SBE facilities, which limited the times when enumeration 
could occur. In response to service providers' requests for more 
flexibility on scheduling enumeration during the 3-day operation, the 
Bureau trained census workers to enumerate all types of SBE 
facilities. This change made training more consistent nationwide and 
enabled the Bureau to better accommodate last-minute schedule changes. 

Further, in some cases in 2000, the supply of census forms and 
training materials provided to the local offices was not adequate. In 
2010, the Bureau reduced the number of form types used for enumerating 
individuals at SBE facilities from four to a single multipurpose form. 
According to Bureau officials, this change allowed them to provide an 
adequate number of forms to local census offices and also helped 
increase efficiency. 

The Bureau took several steps that helped it identify a larger number 
of SBE facilities in 2010 than in 2000, thereby positioning the Bureau 
to conduct a more complete count. The actual number of SBE facilities 
the Bureau enumerated in 2000 was 14,817, whereas for 2010 the Bureau 
had plans to enumerate 64,626 sites--four times more than previously 
enumerated.[Footnote 17] The steps included working more closely with 
local and national partner organizations and assigning partnership 
assistants a role in identifying service-providing facilities. The 
Bureau also developed better guidance for partnership assistants to 
identify TNSOLs, relying in part on input from partner organizations, 
such as church groups and service providers that were familiar with 
outdoor areas where people often spent the night. Further, the Bureau 
used public mailings and technology, such as the Internet, to find a 
broader spectrum of facilities, as compared to local telephone 
listings that were used in 2000. Table 5 compares key aspects of the 
2000 and 2010 SBE operations. 

Table 5: Comparison of 2000 and 2010 SBE Operations: 

SBE activities: Planning and training; 
2000 Census: Used four different types of questionnaires to enumerate 
SBE facilities; 
2010 Census: Used one questionnaire to minimize confusion and 
facilitate the availability of supplies in a timely manner. 

SBE activities: Planning and training; 
2000 Census: Did not consolidate training for SBE facilities; 
2010 Census: Consolidated training for staff enumerating people living 
in group situations such as those in SBE facilities, thereby enabling 
enumerators to work on multiple operations and all types of SBE 
facilities. 

SBE activities: Planning and training; 
2000 Census: Questionnaires and training materials were insufficient, 
untimely, or both; 
2010 Census: Materials were generally timely and sufficient. 

SBE activities: Planning and training; 
2000 Census: Conducted advance visits to identify the population to be 
enumerated and issues that could affect enumeration; 
2010 Census: Same as 2000. 

SBE activities: Planning and training; 
2000 Census: Made no additions to list of SBE facilities and TNSOLs 
after the enumeration date; 
2010 Census: Allowed additions to list of SBE facilities and TNSOLs 
through the last day of SBE enumeration. 

SBE activities: Planning and training; 
2000 Census: Allowed no flexibility for facilities on when they would 
be enumerated; 
2010 Census: Provided facilities with flexibility on when they would 
be enumerated. 

SBE activities: Planning and training; 
2000 Census: Identified SBE sites by working with local governments 
and community-based organizations, reviewing facility listings from 
other census operations, and having local staff review the yellow 
pages; 
2010 Census: Expanded efforts to identify SBE sites by providing 
partnership staff with more guidance, including identifying TNSOLs, 
and by having headquarters staff work more closely with regional and 
local staff to develop a more complete list. 

SBE activities: Evaluation; 
2000 Census: Assessment included an examination of duplicate 
questionnaires and quality assurance procedures. Used results for 
future planning; 
2010 Census: Assessment will include (1) final workload volumes, 
costs, and quality assurance results; (2) information collected from 
debriefings; and (3) lessons learned. Plans to use results for future 
planning. 

Source: GAO analysis of U.S. Census Bureau information. 

[End of table] 

The Bureau Generally Implemented SBE Consistent with Its Operation 
Plans but Experienced Continuing Challenges: 

The Bureau generally implemented the SBE operation as planned, 
completing the 3-day operation on schedule, and spending $10.9 
million, slightly more than the $10.6 million budgeted for the 
operation. However, while the overall budget estimate for the 2010 SBE 
operation was more accurate than in 2000, the actual costs for local 
census offices in urban HTC areas was almost double the amount 
budgeted---$1.9 million compared to the actual cost of $3.6 million. 
[Footnote 18] Bureau officials said they will examine the data further 
to determine why the budget was exceeded in urban HTC areas. We have 
noted the Bureau's difficulties in developing accurate cost estimates 
for several other Bureau operations, and the cost overrun in urban HTC 
areas is another example of this.[Footnote 19] 

As in 2000, our observers noted that enumerators were professional, 
responsible, knowledgeable, and highly committed to fulfilling their 
responsibilities. For example, during heavy rain in the Boston area, 
enumerators remained focused on counting individuals living under 
overhangs and stairwells, despite the difficult conditions. Our 
observers in Brooklyn reported the same of enumerators there, although 
enumeration of the outdoor locations was delayed one night because of 
adverse weather conditions. Further, one of our observers reported 
that in Los Angeles, cultural advocates--individuals the Bureau hired 
to accompany enumerators and facilitate access to certain communities--
helped ease potentially tense situations. 

As described below, based on our observations and the results of the 
LCOM survey, SBE generally went well, and in some areas the Bureau 
appears to have addressed challenges it experienced in 2000. 

Enumeration Supplies Were Generally Adequate: 

Enumerators we spoke with reported having enough forms in 68 of 78 
sites we visited. Also, 76 percent of 359 LCOMs who responded to our 
question on the timing of the delivery of questionnaires and other 
enumerations supplies were generally or very satisfied. In contrast, 
during the 2000 Census, our observers noted that the timing of 
questionnaires and training materials was not always adequate at the 
locations they visited, which impeded enumerators' ability to conduct 
their work in a timely manner. 

Advanced Visits Helped Enhance Service Providers' Readiness for 
Enumeration: 

Our observers reported that facilities were prepared for SBE 
enumeration in 35 of 56 visits to SBE facilities. Furthermore, 73 
percent of 356 LCOMs who responded to our question about the readiness 
of SBE facilities were generally or very satisfied. In instances where 
facilities were not prepared, there appears to have been an 
expectation or communication gap. Despite advance visits from the 
Bureau, one representative at a Baltimore facility said she was not 
aware that census workers were expected, and would not allow 
enumeration to take place because it would disrupt the individuals' 
dinner and medication treatments. She was not receptive to the workers 
returning later the same evening. In another case, a Boston facility 
manager was not aware that the enumeration was to take place, but 
allowed the census workers to proceed. Bureau officials said that in 
some instances facility staff may not have communicated previous 
agreements for conducting the enumeration to new or other staff on 
duty at the time of the enumeration. 

Training Material Was Tailored to Accommodate Local Conditions: 

Of the LCOMs we surveyed, 65 percent of 359 LCOMs were generally or 
very satisfied that the content of SBE training materials was tailored 
to accommodate local conditions, such as taking into account whether 
an area was urban or rural. In 2000, enumerators expressed concern 
that the training they received did not always adequately prepare them 
for the wide range of scenarios they encountered. 

Despite these successes, the Bureau experienced some procedural and 
operational challenges during SBE implementation, some of which were 
similar to the Bureau's experience in 2000. 

Enumerators Did Not Always Follow Procedures: 

The Bureau's policy referred to in its SBE enumeration manual 
stipulates that when individuals state that they have already been 
enumerated elsewhere, the enumerator still must attempt to complete a 
questionnaire.[Footnote 20] While enumerators adhered to this 
procedure at about two-thirds of the facilities we visited, we found 
that in 26 of 78 visits enumerators did not attempt to enumerate 
individuals who told them they had already completed a questionnaire 
at another location. When individuals refuse to be enumerated, 
regardless of the reason, the Bureau's guidance instructs enumerators 
to ask the facility's contact person for information about the 
individual. If a contact person is not available, the enumerator 
should attempt to complete as much of the questionnaire as possible 
through observation. By not always following these procedures, 
enumerators may have missed individuals who should have been 
enumerated and the extent to which accuracy of the count was affected 
is unknown. 

Enumerators Did Not Always Fulfill Agreements: 

As mentioned previously, Bureau officials visited SBE facilities to 
make agreements with service providers on conducting the actual 
enumeration. Our observers noted that in 15 of 78 site visits, 
enumerators did not arrive as scheduled at shelter locations. One of 
these instances occurred in Washington, D.C., where the facility 
manager had instructed the clientèle who typically frequent that 
location to make an effort to be present when the enumerator arrived. 
According to the facility manager, the enumerator did not arrive at 
the scheduled time. In another instance, a facility manager at a 
Boston site told our observers that she was concerned that enumerators 
had arrived earlier than the agreed-upon time. She explained that her 
clientèle consisted of emotionally disturbed women, many of whom had 
fears of authority. Thus, she said she would have preferred more time 
to prepare the women for the impending visit. 

When enumerators do not fulfill commitments, the missed appointments 
and the need to reschedule could make the enumeration more burdensome 
to service providers and detract from the Bureau's reputation. 

Determining Appropriate Staffing Levels for SBE Sites Was Sometimes 
Problematic: 

The mobile nature of the SBE population and other factors make it 
difficult to precisely determine the number of enumerators that should 
be sent to a particular site, and sending either too many or too few 
enumerators each has its consequences. Although the Bureau has 
guidance on staffing ratios for enumerating different types of group 
quarters, including service-based facilities, it did not always result 
in optimal levels of staffing at shelters and TNSOLs. Overstaffing can 
lead to unnecessarily higher labor costs and poor productivity, while 
understaffing can affect the Bureau's ability to obtain a complete 
count at a particular site. 

Our observers and those in the Department of Commerce's Office of 
Inspector General both reported overstaffing as an issue at SBE 
locations. For example, at one of our SBE site visits, approximately 
30 enumerators reported to the same shelter in Atlanta to conduct the 
enumeration. Unsure of how to proceed, the census enumerators waited 
for over an hour before a crew leader instructed over half of the 
enumerators present to leave, at which point no work had taken place. 
Similarly, the Department of Commerce Inspector General's staff 
observed long periods of inactivity at sites and increased operational 
costs as a result.[Footnote 21] 

Also, while most LCOMs we surveyed were satisfied with SBE staffing 
levels, pockets of dissatisfaction existed at some locations. Of the 
LCOMs responding to our survey in April, 81 percent of 361 were 
generally or very satisfied with the number of enumerators hired to 
complete the SBE workload, 10 percent of managers said they were 
generally or very dissatisfied, and 9 percent of managers said they 
were neither satisfied nor dissatisfied. Of the responses from 
managers who elaborated on our question about their satisfaction level 
with the SBE operation, a key theme that emerged was overstaffing. One 
manager, elaborating on his response, said that he sent a detailed 
cost and benefit document to higher-level Bureau officials to 
demonstrate that the number of enumerators needed for the SBE 
operation in his local area should be reduced, but his request was 
denied. In another instance, a manager said he was required to train 
and hire at least 100 more enumerators than he felt were necessary. 

Given the Bureau's constitutional mandate to enumerate the country's 
entire population and the difficulty of enumerating the SBE 
population, it is not unreasonable for the Bureau to err on the side 
of over-rather than understaffing SBE to help ensure a complete count. 
Going forward, as part of the Bureau's plans to examine SBE costs, 
schedule, training, and staffing, it will be important for the Bureau 
to determine the factors that led to less-than-optimal staffing levels 
and use the information to help determine staffing levels for SBE in 
2020. 

Be Counted/QAC Programs Were Implemented as Planned, but Visibility 
Issues Remain a Concern: 

For 2010, the Bureau developed plans that according to Bureau 
officials, were designed to address challenges that the Be Counted/QAC 
programs faced during the 2000 Census, such as (1) visibility of 
sites, (2) ability of the public to find where the Be Counted/QAC 
sites were located, and (3) monitoring of site activity. In 2000, for 
example, several sites we visited lacked signs publicizing the sites' 
existence, which greatly reduced visibility. In some sites, census 
questionnaires were in places where people might not look for them, 
such as the bottom of a shelf. We reported that the Bureau had 
problems with keeping site information current, and as a result, 
changes in the information about the program's site location or points 
of contact were not always available to the public.[Footnote 22] To 
address these issues, in 2010, the Bureau created banners for display 
in public areas of Be Counted/QAC sites, developed a Web page with 
locations and hours of the sites, and updated the guidance for site 
selection. Table 6 compares key aspects of the 2000 and 2010 Be 
Counted/QAC programs. 

Table 6: Comparison of 2000 and 2010 Be Counted/QAC Programs: 

Be Counted/QAC activities: Planning and site selection; 
2000 Census: Selected sites via a joint effort between partnership 
specialists and partner organizations. No role for local census office 
staff; 
2010 Census: Selected sites via joint effort between partnership 
specialists and local census office staff with input from partner 
organizations. 

Be Counted/QAC activities: Implementation; 
2000 Census: Had a goal to establish about 66,000 locations. Census 
data indicated that 28,632 were established; 
2010 Census: Had a goal to establish 40,000 Be Counted and QAC sites. 
Census preliminary data indicated that 38,827 sites were established. 

Be Counted/QAC activities: Implementation; 
2000 Census: Staffed sites with paid employees and volunteers, which 
led to inconsistent service; 
2010 Census: Staffed sites solely with paid employees to ensure 
consistent service. 

Be Counted/QAC activities: Implementation; 
2000 Census: Forms available in 6 languages--English, Spanish, 
Chinese, Korean, Vietnamese, and Tagalog. Language assistance guides 
available in 37 languages; 
2010 Census: Forms available in 6 languages--English, Spanish, 
Chinese, Vietnamese, Korean, and Russian. Language assistance guides 
available in 59 languages. 

Be Counted/QAC activities: Implementation; 
2000 Census: Did not provide Web page for public to locate Be Counted/ 
QAC locations; 
2010 Census: Established a Web page that helped the public locate Be 
Counted/QAC locations. 

Be Counted/QAC activities: Implementation; 
2000 Census: Did not issue official signage identifying Be Counted/QAC 
sites; 
2010 Census: Issued uniform signage for prominent display at sites. 

Be Counted/QAC activities: Monitoring; 
2000 Census: Attempted to monitor site performance, but the number of 
Be Counted/QAC sites was more than could be handled; 
2010 Census: Monitored sites by designating Be Counted clerks in local 
census offices to regularly visit sites and check staffing and 
adequacy of materials. 

Be Counted/QAC activities: Evaluation; 
2000 Census: Relied on cost and workload data; 
2010 Census: Same as 2000. 

Be Counted/QAC activities: Evaluation; 
2000 Census: Assessment included final workload volumes, costs, and 
quality assurance results. Used for future planning; 
2010 Census: Same as 2000. 

Source: GAO analysis of U.S. Census Bureau information. 

[End of table] 

The Bureau generally implemented the Be Counted/QAC program as 
planned. The Bureau opened around 38,000 sites, conducted the Be 
Counted/QAC program as scheduled from March 19 through April 19, 
[Footnote 23] and completed the Be Counted/QAC program under budget. 
The Bureau reported spending $38.7 million versus the $44.2 million 
budgeted. Bureau officials commented that the program came in under 
budget in part because the Bureau staffed the sites with one QAC 
representative for 15 hours a week, rather than with 1.5 
representatives, as originally budgeted. This allowed the Bureau to 
spend less on payroll and training, according to officials. 

Overall, the majority of the 51 sites we visited were staffed as 
planned and census materials and forms were available at most sites in 
multiple languages. Further, the Bureau's preliminary data on 2010 
show overall activity at Be Counted/QAC sites increased, with about 1 
million more forms picked up in 2010, compared to the approximately 
1.7 million forms in 2000--an increase of 62 percent. 

Visibility of Be Counted/QAC Sites Was Poor at Many Sites Visited: 

Visibility is key to the effectiveness of Be Counted/QAC sites because 
it is directly related to people's ability to find them. According to 
the Bureau's Be Counted job aid guidance, Be Counted clerks in local 
census offices were responsible for monitoring sites and ensuring that 
banners were displayed at Be Counted/QAC locations. In many locations 
we visited, the Bureau's efforts to raise the visibility of sites were 
evident to our observers. For example, 23 of the 51 Be Counted/QAC 
sites visited were displaying the banners the Bureau developed to 
advertise the existence of the Be Counted/QAC sites. More generally, 
however, there were areas for improvement. For example, our observers 
noted problems with "street-level" visibility in 26 of 51 Be Counted/ 
QAC sites visited. At one site in Atlanta, for instance, no signs were 
visible from the main road to publicize the existence of the Be 
Counted site. In addition, our observers visited two sites in Brooklyn 
that were not visible from the street. In some cases, the banners 
provided by the Bureau to advertise the location of a site were not 
used or displayed prominently upon entering a location that housed a 
site. At another site in Washington, D.C., our observers noted that 
the banner was rolled up and leaning against a file cabinet and 
consequently was not clearly visible to the public. 

In addition, Be Counted/QAC sites were sometimes in obscure locations 
within the buildings in which they were housed. For example, at sites 
located in the basement or rear of the building, we observed no 
signage directing people to the Be Counted/QAC site. Further, forms 
and materials available at Be Counted/QAC sites were not always 
clearly identified and thus could have been overlooked. Figure 2 is an 
example of a Be Counted site in Brooklyn that was prominently visible 
at a library. Importantly, the banner was clearly displayed to draw 
attention to the site, and the time that staff would be in attendance 
was also obvious. 

Figure 2: Be Counted Forms Prominently Displayed at Brooklyn Be 
Counted/QAC Site: 

[Refer to PDF for image: photograph] 

Notation on photograph: Be Counted forms are clearly displayed on the 
table. 

Source: GAO. 

[End of figure] 

In contrast, figure 3 shows a Be Counted site in Fresno, California, 
that was difficult to find in a barbershop. Note that the area had no 
signage to draw attention to the site and the forms were scattered 
about and difficult to find. 

Figure 3: Be Counted Forms Not Prominently Displayed at Fresno Be 
Counted/QAC Site: 

[Refer to PDF for image: photograph] 

Notation on photograph: Be Counted forms are stored under the shelf. 

Source: GAO. 

[End of figure] 

In those instances when the Be Counted/QAC sites were not clearly 
visible to the public, the Bureau may have missed one of the last 
opportunities to directly enumerate individuals. Moving forward, the 
Bureau should consider more effective ways to monitor site visibility 
at Be Counted/QAC sites. For example, the Bureau could include 
visibility as one of the areas to monitor when census staff conduct 
their regular monitoring of the Be Counted sites. 

Site Selection Guidance Does Not Consider Potential Activity Levels: 

Along with visibility, the procedures used to select Be Counted/QAC 
sites are also key to the effectiveness of the program because they 
affect the extent to which sites are easily accessible to targeted 
populations. To improve selection of Be Counted/QAC sites in 2010, the 
Bureau revised its guidance on Be Counted/QAC site criteria by 
emphasizing locating sites in HTC areas and specifying the types of 
local census office areas where sites should be located (e.g., urban/ 
HTC and urban/metropolitan). However, the guidance did not provide 
direction on identifying sites in locations with the likelihood of 
higher levels of activity, which would increase the potential for 
individuals to pick up Be Counted forms. Moreover, Bureau officials 
said they encouraged staff to take advantage of locations that were 
free of charge as well as locations with the likelihood of higher 
levels of activity. 

Activity levels at the Be Counted/QAC sites varied based on 
information from Bureau staff and our observations. QAC 
representatives at 8 of 43 QAC-only sites visited told us that their 
sites had moderate to high levels of activity while 12 of 43 QAC 
representatives told us their sites had low levels of activity. 
[Footnote 24] For example, a QAC representative at one facility in 
Phoenix and another in Atlanta said they had to frequently restock Be 
Counted forms and that they provided many people with assistance. 
Another QAC representative in Dallas said that he assisted up to 30 
people in one day at the Be Counted/QAC site he staffed. Conversely, a 
QAC representative in Miami said that the LCOM was considering the 
site for closure because very few people visited the location and used 
the services. Similarly, a firefighter at a Dallas QAC site observed 
that the site was open for 11 days and no one visited the site during 
this time and the box containing materials accompanying the 
questionnaires (i.e., pens and language reference documents) was 
unopened. Additionally, during a June debriefing, where QAC 
representatives discussed their experiences with Bureau officials, the 
QAC representatives commented on the problem of low activity at some 
Be Counted/QAC sites, according to Bureau officials. 

Preliminary data on forms returned and checked in also revealed 
changes in activity levels at Be Counted/QAC sites for 2010. For 
example, an average of 20 forms were returned and checked in from each 
Be Counted/QAC site in 2010, down from an average of 28 in 2000. Given 
that the operation was conducted over a 30-day period, that translates 
to less than 1 form per day per site. While this difference might 
reflect the fact that the address list in 2010 was better than in 2000 
and that fewer households were missed, it also indicates that the 
operation was very resource intensive relative to the number of forms 
that were returned. 

According to Bureau planning guidance, both local census office staff 
and partnership specialists were jointly responsible for identifying 
Be Counted/QAC sites, and local census office staff were responsible 
for monitoring the sites. However, a number of LCOMs we surveyed in 
May expressed concern about assistance from partnership specialists in 
identifying Be Counted/QAC sites. While 32 percent of 369 LCOMs who 
responded to our survey were generally or very satisfied with the 
assistance they received from partnership specialists for identifying 
sites, 57 percent of managers responding indicated that they were 
generally or very dissatisfied. Among the responses of those LCOMs who 
elaborated on their satisfaction level with the partnership program, 
one key theme that emerged was dissatisfaction with the Be Counted/QAC 
sites identified. For example, one LCOM commented that many of the Be 
Counted/QAC sites were in poor locations and were not in areas with 
the highest need. To the extent that the Be Counted/QAC sites were 
established in locations with low activity, the result was lower 
productivity and higher costs to the Bureau in the form of wages paid 
to census employees to staff and monitor the sites. There were also 
opportunity costs in monitoring a site with low activity when a site 
in a different location could have produced better results. 

The Be Counted/QAC program, in concept, may be a reasonable effort to 
include people who might have otherwise been missed by the census. 
However, it was also a resource-intensive operation in which 
relatively few questionnaires, on average per site, were generated, 
once the cost and effort of identifying, stocking, staffing, 
monitoring, and maintaining the sites are considered. More will be 
known about the effectiveness of the Be Counted/QAC program when the 
Bureau determines how many Be Counted/QAC forms resulted in adding 
people and new addresses to the census. Similar to SBE, the Bureau 
plans to assess the Be Counted/QAC program by examining costs, 
schedule, training, and staffing. Moving forward, it will also be 
important for the Bureau to explore ways to maximize the Be 
Counted/QAC program's ability to increase the number of forms returned 
and checked in from the target population for the 2020 Census and, 
ultimately, determine whether fewer but more strategically placed 
sites could produce more cost-effective results. 

Conclusions: 

In 2010, the Bureau was better positioned to reach out to and 
enumerate HTC populations compared to 2000 in large part because its 
plans addressed a number of the challenges experienced in the previous 
decennial. For example, the Bureau focused more of its resources on 
targeting paid media efforts to HTC groups, employed partnership staff 
with a wider range of language capabilities, and developed a more 
comprehensive list of service-providing facilities that likely 
enhanced its capacity to enumerate people lacking conventional 
housing. Further, from an operational perspective, the Bureau 
generally implemented its HTC outreach and enumeration efforts 
consistent with its operational plans, completing them within schedule 
and budget. Overall, while the full impact of these efforts will not 
be known until after the Bureau completes various assessments, 
including an evaluation of the extent and nature of any under-and 
overcounts, the Bureau's rigorous effort to raise awareness, encourage 
participation, and enumerate HTC populations likely played a key role 
in holding mail participation rates steady in 2010 for the overall 
population, a significant achievement given the various factors that 
were acting against an acceptable mail response in 2010. 

Still, certain aspects of the Bureau's outreach and enumeration of HTC 
populations need attention. Key focus areas for outreach efforts 
include (1) ensuring the Bureau is using paid media efficiently to 
improve response rates, (2) improving the coordination between 
partnership and local census office staff to leverage opportunities to 
achieve a more accurate and complete count, (3) improving the 
partnership database to enhance its use as a management tool, and (4) 
making promotional materials available to partnership staff when they 
begin their work to improve their ability to develop relationships 
with partner organizations. For enumeration activities, by determining 
the factors that lead to the SBE staffing issues at some locations and 
revising site selection guidance for Be Counted/QAC sites based on 
visitation and other applicable data, the Bureau may increase the 
overall value of special enumeration activities. 

More generally, the Bureau invested more resources in reaching out to 
and enumerating HTC groups in 2010 but achieved the same overall 
participation rate as in 2000. This trend is likely to continue as the 
nation's population gets larger, more diverse, and more difficult to 
count. As the Bureau looks toward the next national headcount, it 
plans to use the results of its evaluations for input into 2020 
planning. At the same time, it will be important for the Bureau to go 
beyond that and use 2010 evaluation results to gain a better 
understanding of the extent to which the various special enumeration 
activities aimed at HTC groups produced a more complete and accurate 
census. More specifically, better information on the value added by 
each special enumeration activity could help the Bureau allocate its 
resources more cost effectively. This may include changing existing 
programs to increase efficiency or undertaking new special enumeration 
efforts altogether. 

Recommendations for Executive Action: 

To help improve the effectiveness of the Bureau's outreach and 
enumeration efforts, especially for HTC populations, should they be 
used again in the 2020 Census, we recommend that the Secretary of 
Commerce require the Under Secretary for Economic Affairs as well as 
the Director of the U.S. Census Bureau to take the following seven 
actions: 

To improve the Bureau's marketing/outreach efforts: 

* Use evaluation results, response rate, and other data to develop a 
predictive model that would inform decisions on how much and how best 
to allocate paid media funds for 2020. 

* Develop mechanisms to increase coordination and communication 
between the partnership and local census office staff. Possible 
actions include offering more opportunities for joint training, 
establishing protocols for coordination, and more effectively 
leveraging the partnership contact database to better align 
partnership outreach activities with local needs. 

* Improve the user-friendliness of the partnership database to help 
ensure more timely updates of contact information and enhance its use 
as a management tool. 

* Ensure that promotional materials, including in-language materials 
for the partnership program, are available when partnership staff are 
first hired. 

To improve some of the Bureau's key efforts to enumerate HTC 
populations: 

* Assess visitation, response rate, and other applicable data on Be 
Counted/QAC locations and use that information to revise site 
selection guidance for 2020. 

* Determine the factors that led to the staffing issues observed 
during SBE and take corrective actions to ensure more efficient SBE 
staffing levels in 2020. 

* Evaluate the extent to which each special enumeration activity 
improved the count of traditionally hard-to-enumerate groups and use 
the results to help inform decision making on spending for these 
programs in 2020. 

Agency Comments and Our Evaluation: 

On December 8, 2010, the Secretary of Commerce provided written 
comments on the draft report, which are reprinted in appendix I. The 
Department of Commerce generally agreed with the overall findings and 
recommendations of the report. In addition, the department noted that 
its Economics and Statistics Administration (ESA) has management 
oversight responsibility for the Bureau and asked that we include ESA 
in our recommendation. We revised the report to reflect this comment. 

We are sending copies of this report to the Secretary of Commerce, the 
Director of the U.S. Census Bureau, the Under Secretary for Economic 
Affairs, and interested congressional committees. The report also is 
available at no charge on GAO's Web site at [hyperlink, 
http://www.gao.gov]. 

If you or your staff have any questions about this report, please 
contact me at (202) 512-2757 or goldenkoffr@gao.gov. Contact points 
for our Offices of Congressional Relations and Public Affairs may be 
found on the last page of this report. GAO staff who made major 
contributions to this report are listed in appendix II. 

Signed by: 

Robert Goldenkoff: 
Director Strategic Issues: 

[End of section] 

Appendix I: Comments from the Department of Commerce: 

United States Department Of Commerce: 
The Secretary of Commerce: 
Washington, D.C. 20230: 
	
December 8, 2010: 

Mr. Robert Goldenkoff: 
Director: 
Strategic Issues: 
United States Government Accountability Office: 
Washington, DC 20548: 

Dear Mr. Goldenkoff: 

The Department of Commerce appreciates the opportunity to comment on 
the United States Government Accountability Office (GAO) draft report 
titled "2010 Census: Key Efforts to Include Hard-to-Count Populations 
Went Generally as Planned; Improvements Could Make the Efforts More 
Effective for Next Census" (GAO 11-45). Our comments on this report 
are enclosed. 

Sincerely: 

Gary Locke: 

Enclosures: 

[End of letter] 

Department of Commerce: 
Comments on the United States Government Accountability Office Draft 
Report Titled "2010 Census: Key Efforts to Include Hard-to-Count 
Populations Went Generally as Planned; Improvements Could Make the 
Efforts More Effective for Next Census" (GAO 11-45); December 2010: 

The Department of Commerce thanks the GAO for their extensive efforts 
in examining these 2010 Census activities and for their ongoing 
efforts to help us develop a successful plan for the 2020 Census.
The Census Bureau generally agrees with the overall findings in this 
report and with the recommendations regarding matters we should study 
for the 2020 Census. Our comments follow. 

* Page 44, first paragraph: "...we recommend that the Secretary of 
Commerce require the Director of the U.S. Census Bureau to take the 
following seven actions:..." 

Response: The Secretary of Commerce should require the Under Secretary 
for Economic Affairs as well as the Census Director. The Under 
Secretary heads the Economics and Statistics Administration (ESA), 
which has management oversight responsibility for the Census Bureau 
and has been actively engaged in planning for the 2020 Census. 

Page 45, second paragraph from bottom of page: "We are sending copies 
of this report to the Secretary of Commerce, the Director of the U.S. 
Census Bureau, and interested congressional committees." 

Response: Please also send a copy of the report to the Under Secretary 
for Economic Affairs. 

[End of section] 

Appendix II: GAO Contact and Staff Acknowledgments: 

GAO Contact: 

Robert Goldenkoff, (202) 512-2757 or goldenkoffr@gao.gov: 

Staff Acknowledgments: 

In addition to the contact named above, Signora May, Assistant 
Director; Peter Beck; David R. Bobruff; Benjamin C. Crawford; 
Shaunessye Curry; Kathleen Drennan; Elizabeth Fan; Robert Gebhart; 
Guillermo Gonzalez; Thomas Han; Paul Hobart; Brian James; Paul Kinney; 
Elke Kolodinski; Kirsten B. Lauber; Veronica Mayhand; Karine McClosky; 
Catherine Myrick; Keith O'Brien; Michael Pahr; Melanie Papasian; 
Rudolfo Payan; Stacy Spence; Barbara Steel-Lowney; Travis Thomson; 
Cheri Y. Truett; Timothy Wexler; Monique B. Williams; Carla Willis; 
and Katherine Wulff made key contributions to this report. 

[End of section] 

Related GAO Products: 

2010 Census: Data Collection Operations Were Generally Completed as 
Planned, but Long-standing Challenges Suggest Need for Fundamental 
Reforms. GAO-11-193. Washington, D.C.: December 14, 2010. 

2010 Census: Follow-up Should Reduce Coverage Errors, but Effects on 
Demographic Groups Need to Be Determined. GAO-11-154. Washington, 
D.C.: December 14, 2010. 

2010 Census: Cooperation with Enumerators Is Critical to Successful 
Headcount. GAO-10-665T. Washington, D.C.: April 30, 2010. 

2010 Census: Plans for Census Coverage Measurement Are on Track, but 
Additional Steps Will Improve Its Usefulness. GAO-10-324. Washington, 
D.C.: April 23, 2010. 

2010 Census: Data Collection Is Under Way, but Reliability of Key 
Information Technology Systems Remains a Risk. GAO-10-567T. 
Washington, D.C.: March 25, 2010. 

2010 Census: Operational Changes Made for 2010 Position the U.S. 
Census Bureau to More Accurately Classify and Identify Group Quarters. 
GAO-10-452T. Washington, D.C.: February 22, 2010. 

2010 Census: Efforts to Build an Accurate Address List Are Making 
Progress, but Face Software and Other Challenges. GAO-10-140T. 
Washington, D.C.: October 21, 2009. 

2010 Census: Census Bureau Continues to Make Progress in Mitigating 
Risks to a Successful Enumeration, but Still Faces Various Challenges. 
GAO-10-132T. Washington, D.C.: October 7, 2009. 

2010 Census: Communications Campaign Has Potential to Boost 
Participation. GAO-09-525T. Washington, D.C.: March 23, 2009. 

2010 Census: Fundamental Building Blocks of a Successful Enumeration 
Face Challenges. GAO-09-430T. Washington, D.C.: March 5, 2009. 

2010 Census: Census Bureau Needs Procedures for Estimating the 
Response Rate and Selecting for Testing Methods to Increase Response 
Rate. GAO-08-1012. Washington, D.C.: September 30, 2008. 

2010 Census: The Bureau's Plans for Reducing the Undercount Show 
Promise, but Key Uncertainties Remain. GAO-08-1167T. Washington, D.C.: 
September 23, 2008. 

[End of section] 

Footnotes: 

[1] The differential undercount describes subpopulations that are 
undercounted at a different rate than the total population. 

[2] The 2000 mail participation rate was 74 percent for the short-form 
only. In 2000, the census included a long-form that asked for 
information that was not included on the short-form. The 2000 mail 
participation rate when including both the long-form and the short-
form was 69 percent. The 2010 census did not use a long-form. 

[3] GAO, 2010 Census: Data Collection Operations Were Generally 
Completed as Planned, but Long-standing Challenges Suggest Need for 
Fundamental Reforms, GAO-11-193 (Washington, D.C.: Dec. 14, 2010). 
GAO, 2010 Census: Follow-up Should Reduce Coverage Errors, but Effects 
on Demographic Groups Need to be Determined, GAO-11-154 (Washington, 
D.C.: Dec. 14, 2010). For additional products, see the Related GAO 
Products section at the end of this report. 

[4] The other approximately 5 percent of the communications campaign 
budget was targeted to public relations, at about 3.9 percent 
($25,610,360), and the Census in Schools Program, at about 1.7 percent 
($11,320,000). 

[5] Additionally, we visited local census offices in Atlanta, 
Baltimore, Brooklyn, Fresno, Miami, Phoenix, San Francisco and 
Washington, D.C. The Bureau had 494 local census offices nationwide. 
Local census offices recruited and trained enumerators and checked in 
completed questionnaires, among other tasks. 

[6] The Integrated Partnership Contact Database tracks and monitors 
activities of partner organizations. Available in January 2009, the 
database contains real-time information on the number of partner 
organizations, populations served, demographics, value-added 
contributions, and constituent reach. 

[7] Pub. L. No. 111-5, div. A, tit. II, 123 Stat. 115, 127. The Bureau 
received $1 billion from the Recovery Act. In the conference report 
accompanying the Act, the conferees stated that "of the amounts 
provided, up to $250,000,000 shall be for partnership and outreach 
efforts to minority communities and hard-to-reach populations." H.R. 
Conf. Rep. No. 116-16 at 417 (2009). According to the Bureau, it 
planned to use $220 million for expanding the communications campaign, 
out of this amount, $120 million was to enhance the partnership 
program. The Bureau planned to use $30 million for expanding its 
coverage follow-up operation, where census workers follow up to 
resolve conflicting information provided on census forms. 

[8] Cases where the respondents indicated that they had no usual 
address will be assigned to higher-level geographic units, such as 
state and county, and are allocated to census counts accordingly. 

[9] GAO, 2000 Census: Review of Partnership Program Highlights Best 
Practices for Future Operations, GAO-01-579 (Washington, D.C.: Aug. 
20, 2001). 

[10] Partnership assistants were responsible for assisting partnership 
specialists in scheduling and conducting outreach activities. 

[11] The staffing level was substantially higher than the Bureau 
originally planned for 2010 because of additional funds used to 
enhance the partnership program from the Recovery Act. See footnote 7. 

[12] GAO-01-579. 

[13] From October 1997 through September 2000, the Bureau spent about 
$182 million on its partnership program in constant 2010 dollars. 

[14] GAO-01-579. 

[15] The number of managers who responded to individual survey 
questions varied by question. 

[16] Nonresponse follow-up is the largest and most costly field 
operation, where census workers follow up in person with households 
that did not respond to the census forms that were mailed to them. 

[17] At the time of our work, the Bureau had not yet produced a final 
number of facilities actually enumerated. 

[18] In 2000, the budget for SBE, in constant 2010 dollars, was $52.2 
million, and the expended amount, in constant 2010 dollars, was $12.1 
million. Budgeted and actual dollars spent for 2000 and 2010 were 
rounded. 

[19] GAO, 2010 Census: Efforts to Build an Accurate Address List Are 
Making Progress, but Face Software and Other Challenges, GAO-10-140T 
(Washington, D.C.: Oct. 21, 2009), and 2010 Census: Census Bureau 
Should Take Action to Improve the Credibility and Accuracy of Its Cost 
Estimate for the Decennial Census, GAO-08-554 (Washington, D.C.: June 
16, 2008). 

[20] The Bureau has procedures in place to remove duplications at a 
later date. 

[21] Department of Commerce, Office of Inspector General, 2010 Census: 
Quarterly Report to Congress, Final Report No. OIG-197914 (May 2010). 

[22] GAO, 2000 Census: Actions Taken to Improve the Be Counted and 
Questionnaire Assistance Center Programs, GAO/GGD-00-47 (Washington, 
D.C.: Feb. 25, 2000). 

[23] The Bureau opened Be Counted sites on February 26, 2010, in areas 
where Bureau staff were hand delivering questionnaires to housing 
units with mostly rural route and PO Box addresses. 

[24] QAC representatives at 23 of 43 sites did not comment on the 
level of activity at their sites. Of the 51 Be Counted/QAC sites 
visited, 43 were QAC-only sites and 8 were Be Counted-only sites. 

[End of section] 

GAO's Mission: 

The Government Accountability Office, the audit, evaluation and 
investigative arm of Congress, exists to support Congress in meeting 
its constitutional responsibilities and to help improve the performance 
and accountability of the federal government for the American people. 
GAO examines the use of public funds; evaluates federal programs and 
policies; and provides analyses, recommendations, and other assistance 
to help Congress make informed oversight, policy, and funding 
decisions. GAO's commitment to good government is reflected in its core 
values of accountability, integrity, and reliability. 

Obtaining Copies of GAO Reports and Testimony: 

The fastest and easiest way to obtain copies of GAO documents at no 
cost is through GAO's Web site [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov]. Each 
weekday, GAO posts newly released reports, testimony, and 
correspondence on its Web site. To have GAO e-mail you a list of newly 
posted products every afternoon, go to [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov] 
and select "E-mail Updates." 

Order by Phone: 

The price of each GAO publication reflects GAO’s actual cost of
production and distribution and depends on the number of pages in the
publication and whether the publication is printed in color or black and
white. Pricing and ordering information is posted on GAO’s Web site, 
[hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/ordering.htm]. 

Place orders by calling (202) 512-6000, toll free (866) 801-7077, or
TDD (202) 512-2537. 

Orders may be paid for using American Express, Discover Card,
MasterCard, Visa, check, or money order. Call for additional 
information. 

To Report Fraud, Waste, and Abuse in Federal Programs: 

Contact: 

Web site: [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/fraudnet/fraudnet.htm]: 
E-mail: fraudnet@gao.gov: 
Automated answering system: (800) 424-5454 or (202) 512-7470: 

Congressional Relations: 

Ralph Dawn, Managing Director, dawnr@gao.gov: 
(202) 512-4400: 
U.S. Government Accountability Office: 
441 G Street NW, Room 7125: 
Washington, D.C. 20548: 

Public Affairs: 

Chuck Young, Managing Director, youngc1@gao.gov: 
(202) 512-4800: 
U.S. Government Accountability Office: 
441 G Street NW, Room 7149: 
Washington, D.C. 20548: