From: Keri Monihan <kmonihan(a)ccmc.org>
September 25, 1998
Second Court Rules That Law Bars Sampling For Apportionment
Commerce Official Says Census Could Still Include Sample
Survey
To Adjust Counts for Redistricting and Federal Aid
A second federal district court panel ruled today, 3 - 0,
that the Census Act prohibits the use of sampling methods to
produce the population counts used to reapportion seats in
Congress. The opinion was issued in the case of Glavin v.
Clinton, filed last February by Matthew Glavin, president of
the Atlanta-based Southeastern Legal Foundation.
The plaintiffs, including Rep. Bob Barr (R-GA), also had
asked the court to rule that the Constitution does not
permit the use of sampling to conduct the census for
apportionment purposes. However, like the three-judge panel
in U.S. House of Representatives v. U.S. Department of
Commerce, the Glavin court declined to address that
question, finding instead that the statute governing the
census (Title 13, United States Code, section 195) prohibits
sampling for congressional apportionment. The Supreme Court
announced recently that it would hear the U.S. House of
Representatives case on November 30.
Rep. Dan Miller (R-FL), who heads the House census
subcommittee, said in a written statement that President
Clinton should "immediately instruct the Census Bureau to
abandon its plan for sampling in the 2000 Census." But
Commerce Under Secretary Robert Shapiro told members of the
2000 Census Advisory Committee earlier today that the
Administration fully expected to prevail at the Supreme
Court. And even if the Supreme Court upholds the lower
court rulings, Shapiro told the group of census
stakeholders, the 2000 census would still include a large
post-census survey to measure and correct for under- and
overcounts. The adjusted numbers could then be used, he
said, for the distribution of federal aid and by state
legislatures to draw political district lines. In that
event, Shapiro said, the Census Bureau would drop plans to
contact a sample of unresponsive households in order to meet
a Supreme Court mandate to produce census numbers without
sampling for apportionment, while preserving the
quality-check survey to derive a second set of counts that
the Bureau believes will be more accurate. (The Census 2000
Initiative will provide a more complete summary of the
Advisory Committee's proceedings in a future News Alert.)
The Glavin case was filed in the Federal District Court for
the Eastern District of Virginia on Feburary 12, 1998. The
court heard oral arguments on August 7. Congress provided
in this year's census funding bill that legal challenges to
the use of sampling in the census would be heard by a
three-judge panel, and that any appeal of the lower courts
decision would go directly to the Supreme Court. The
Eastern District of Virginia does not post decisions on the
Internet. Those who want to obtain a copy of the opinion
from a law library or other source may refer to Case Number
98-207.
Questions about the information contained in this News Alert
may be directed to TerriAnn Lowenthal at (202) 484-2270 or,
by e-mail at <terriann2k(a)aol.com>. Please direct all
requests to receive News Alerts, and all changes in
address/phone/fax/e-mail, to <census2000(a)ccmc.org> or
202/326-8728. Please feel free to circulate this
information to colleagues and other interested individuals.
September 22, 1998
From: Keri Monihan <kmonihan(a)ccmc.org>
Senate Committee Hears from Census Director Nominee
Bureau Operating under Temporary Funding Measure
As Congress Tries to Complete Work on FY99 Bills
The Senate committee with oversight responsibility for the
census held a hearing last week to consider President
Clinton's nominee for Census Bureau director. After an
introduction by Sen. Daniel Patrick Moynihan (D-NY), Dr.
Kenneth Prewitt received a cordial welcome from committee
Chairman Fred Thompson (R-TN) and ranking minority member
Sen. John Glenn (D-OH). Sen. Carl Levin (D-MI) also
listened to Dr. Prewitt's brief prepared statement and
joined in the questioning. The Committee on Governmental
Affairs has scheduled a business meeting for September 24
and may vote on the Prewitt nomination at that time.
Dr. Prewitt told the committee that he had not yet visited
the Census Bureau and could not comment specifically on
elements of the 2000 census plan. In written responses to
questions submitted earlier by the committee, the nominee
cited four primary responsibilities for the Bureau's
director: management, constituency relations, planning and
professional standard-setting. At the hearing, he said the
success of the census must be judged not only by its
numerical accuracy but by whether the public has confidence
in the process and results.
Sen. Thompson emphasized the importance of "formidable
management skills and a vision for the future" for the next
director. The chairman did not press Dr. Prewitt for a firm
position on the use of sampling methods in the census but
instead sought a pledge that the nominee would speak openly
if he concluded that the Bureau's plan was technically
unsound or operationally unfeasible.
Census Bureau operating under temporary funding bill: Late
last week, Congress approved a continuing funding resolution
to keep government agencies running past the end of the
fiscal year on September 30 while legislators continue to
work out final agreements on most of the 13 regular
appropriations bills. While most agencies must operate at
current spending levels, the temporary funding measure,
which runs through October 9, allows the Bureau to spend at
a higher rate set for decennial activities in the
House-passed Commerce appropriations bill. The House
allocation of $952 million is $104 million more than the
Administration had requested for Census 2000 activities in
fiscal year 1999. The additional funds are for the Bureau
to prepare for a census without sampling methods.
The Commerce Department said the temporary spending
allowance was enough to keep decennial census preparations
running on schedule in October but cautioned that 2000
census preparations would require three times the amount
allotted in the temporary bill in November.
House panel continues to focus on sampling methods: The
House Subcommittee on the Census held a hearing on September
17 to review the Integrated Coverage Measurement (ICM)
component of the Census Bureau's 2000 census plan. The ICM
includes a quality-check sample survey of 750,000 households
designed to measure under- and overcounts in the initial
enumeration for various demographic subgroups and adjust the
numbers accordingly to produce a final count.
Majority (Republican) members of the panel invited five
statisticians to testify: Dr. Leo Breiman (University of
California at Berkeley); Dr. Lawrence Brown (University of
Pennsylvania); Dr. Robert Koyak (Naval Postgraduate School);
Dr. Martin Wells (Cornell University); and Dr. Donald
Ylvisaker (UCLA). In general, the group believed that a
post-census survey to gauge the accuracy of the initial
count could add more mistakes into the census because it
involved difficult matching and statistical procedures. Dr.
Brown concluded that the ICM procedure would worsen the
distribution of population among states and other areas,
which he said was more important than achieving more
accurate population totals. Dr. Breiman said that mistakes
in conducting the quality-check survey were magnified when
applied to the larger population. The five witnesses did
not discuss any specific alternative methods to reduce the
undercount of minorities and the poor.
The subcommittee's minority (Democratic) members were
allowed to choose three additional witnesses: Dr. Barbara
Everitt Bryant, Census Bureau director in the Bush
Administration; Dr. Eugene Ericksen (Temple University); and
Dr. Stephen Fienberg (Carnegie Mellon University). Dr.
Bryant said that unless the Supreme Court overturns the
recent federal court ruling that sampling cannot be used to
supplement a direct headcount, the prohibition "virtually
guarantees [an] undercount" in the 2000 census. She told
the panel that the 2000 census plan "[was] not a scheme
conceived by the present Administration," but was based on
evaluations of the 1990 count and research both within the
Bureau and by independent experts.
Dr. Fienberg said it was a "myth" that the 1990 census was
98.4 percent accurate because evaluations revealed as many
as 25 million counting mistakes, a ten percent gross error
rate. Dr. Ericksen disagreed with the earlier criticism of
the ICM process, saying that changes in the post-census
survey planned for 2000 should reduce matching and
estimation problems associated with the 1990 statistical
process.
Census Monitoring Board activities: The meeting of the
Census Monitoring Board originally scheduled for September
18 was postponed. The Board has not yet announced a new
date for the meeting.
Questions about the information contained in this News Alert
may be directed to TerriAnn Lowenthal at (202) 484-2270 or,
by e-mail at <terriann2k(a)aol.com>. Please direct all
requests to receive News Alerts, and all changes in
address/phone/fax/e-mail, to Census 2000 Initiative at
<census2000(a)ccmc.org> or 202/326-8700. Please feel free to
circulate this information to colleagues and other
interested individuals.
********** C E N S U S 2 0 0 0 B U L L E T I N
**********
Vol. 2 - No. 43 Sept. 11,
1998
In today's second report on his testimony before the U.S.
House of Representatives' Subcommittee on the Census
Wednesday (Sept. 9), Acting Census Bureau Director James F.
Holmes' focuses on "critical activities" that must occur in
Fiscal Year 1999 if Census 2000 is to be a success. Holmes
said in part:
"Mr. Chairman, before continuing with answers to the
specific questions in your letter of invitation, I want to
emphasize that many critical activities vital to the success
of Census 2000 must be conducted on schedule in FY1999.
These activities, as I said earlier, apply both to a census
with sampling or without. A key activity is the continuing
development of an accurate Master Address File. In FY1999,
we will begin and complete work to verify the estimated 94
million addresses that use house number and street name,
commonly referred to as 'city-style addresses.' Also, we
will complete the locating and listing of an estimated 22
million non-city style addresses that do not use house
number and street name, known as 'rural address listing.' We
will also extend our efforts to validate the address list
with state, local, and tribal authorities, a program made
possible by the Census Address List Improvement Act of 1994
that authorized these governments to review and validate the
list.
"Other key Census 2000 activities in FY1999 include
beginning the process of opening local census offices in
every congressional district; purchasing and putting in
place the automation and telecommunication infrastructure to
support the nationwide network of facilities; completing
software development and testing; finalizing preparations
for data capture; and printing questionnaires, notification
letters, and other Census 2000 forms. Another critical
activity to be completed in FY1999 is an evaluation of this
year's full-scale Dress Rehearsal. We also will finalize
plans for enumerating people without a traditional home and
for making available telephone assistance to answer
respondents' questions about the census process and
questionnaire. And our expanded partnership program will
continue to work with state, local, and tribal governments,
as well as community-based organizations, local media, and
other public and private sector organizations to promote
public awareness of this nationwide mandate.
"These are all activities that will be necessary for a
successful census under either design and if any of them are
seriously delayed, the census will be put at risk.
"Moreover, our address listing operations will be put in a
state of failure by any delay in the FY1999 funding stream
in early October. We would have to release 1,800 supervisors
and crew leaders already trained and on the payroll. We
would have to tell 22,000 staff who list addresses not to
come to the planned training, as well as cancel all space
accommodations for the training. We would lose a significant
portion of the staff we released as well as the listers we
told not to come to training. This would mean starting the
entire recruiting process over again and would result in a
delay of at least one month in the second wave of listing.
We would not be able to recover from this and would not be
able to complete the second wave on time.
"Any delay of this magnitude will seriously impact
subsequent operations including the third wave of listing in
rural areas and block canvassing in areas with city-style
addresses. Each stage of the field work for all operations
must be completed on a timely basis so that we can meet the
absolutely critical July 1999 deadline for delivering to
contractors an address file for labeling the census
questionnaires. Field activities must be completed on time
if we are to meet this critical deadline necessary to ensure
the timely mailing of census questionnaires."
For further information about this bulletin, contact J. Paul
Wyatt of the Public Information Office on 301-457-3052 (fax:
301-457-3670; e-mail: pio(a)census.gov).
********** C E N S U S 2 0 0 0 B U L L E T I N
**********
Vol. 2 - No. 42 Sept. 10,
1998
Acting Census Bureau Director James F. Holmes testified
Wednesday (Sept. 9) before the U.S. House of
Representatives' Census Subcommittee about the status of
planning for a census in the year 2000 that does not use
sampling for purposes of apportionment.
In his prepared text, Holmes said the Census Bureau was
abiding by the agreement reached in the fall of 1997 to
pursue a "dual track" in planning for Census 2000. "While I
continue to believe that a census with sampling will be more
accurate and cost less," Holmes said, "we are on track to
conduct a census without sampling in the event that a
decision to do so is made by next March."
Today and Friday, this bulletin will carry excerpts from
Holmes' remarks. Today's excerpts focus on Census Bureau
activities related to a census without sampling:
".... Let me now address some activities related to planning
specific to a nonsampling census:
"First, we are conducting the Dress Rehearsal census in our
South Carolina site without the use of sampling and
estimation procedures and including enhancements to
nonsampling procedures. These enhancements included
increased advertising and partnership activities, increased
quality assurance, increased marketing and promotion
activities, as well as 100-percent follow-up of
nonresponding housing units and of all addresses for which
the U.S. Postal Service could not deliver a questionnaire
because the housing units were believed to be vacant. We
have completed all field work through nonresponse follow-up
in the South Carolina site.
"Second, in order to comply with the agreement to prepare
for a census that does not use sampling, it will be
necessary to open in early FY1999 130 temporary local census
offices to manage and control the activities necessary to
collect data from all households that do not mail back a
questionnaire in 2000. It is necessary to open these offices
a year earlier than planned in order to prepare for the
significantly increased work load associated with a census
that does not use sampling. These lease negotiations for
these 130 offices are nearly all completed and we will award
the contract for equipment for these offices in the near
future.
"Third, we have made substantial progress toward developing
a plan specifically addressing components of a census
without sampling.
"--We submitted to the Congress in April a 'Status Report on
Planning for a Decennial Census in Year 2000 Without the Use
of Scientific Sampling.'
"--We have reorganized our decennial management structure to
accommodate dual track planning successfully and we have
hired staff to accomplish this planning.
"--We have formed staff into some 20 chartered groups to
address a wide range of issues concerning programs and
operations that might be components of a census without
sampling. These groups are exploring such broad issues as
the use of administrative records, questionnaire development
and delivery strategy, coverage improvement programs, ways
to improve the nonresponse follow-up operation, and the
marketing and partnership programs. These groups are
preparing operational analyses of the components they are
examining, which will be completed from mid-September to
mid-October; these analyses will describe how an operation
should be conducted if it were part of the plan for
conducting a census without sampling. I will discuss these
groups in more detail later.
"--After integrating the groups' analyses, we plan to
complete development this November of a plan to conduct a
census without sampling, an associated master activities
schedule, and interim cost estimates for the potential
components of a plan. In February 1999, we will have a
detailed plan."
For further information about this bulletin, contact J. Paul
Wyatt of the Public Information Office on 301-457-3052 (fax:
301-457-3670; e-mail: pio(a)census.gov).
Supreme Court Sets Date for Oral Arguments
At Hearing, Rep. Miller Says Sampling OK for Federal Aid,
Not Apportionment; Rep. Maloney Presses Critics for
Undercount Remedies
Stakeholders Renew Call for Full Funding or Veto; Senate
Schedules Prewitt Nomination Hearing
The United States Supreme Court announced today that it
would hear oral arguments in the case of U.S. House of
Representatives v. U.S. Department of Commerce, on November
30. A special three-judge federal district court ruled in
the case last month that the Census Act barred the use of
sampling and statistical methods to derive the census counts
used for congressional apportionment. Congress provided for
a speedy review of census challenges and a direct appeal to
the Supreme Court. Both sides in the case had asked the high
court to review the case quickly.
At a hearing on Wednesday, the chairman of the House census
subcommittee called on the Census Bureau to abandon a census
plan that includes sampling to produce population counts for
congressional apportionment but suggested that scientific
methods could be used to produce data for distributing
federal aid. Rep. Dan Miller (R-FL) also said it would be
"unwise" to delay a final decision on the use of sampling
until the Supreme Court rules on the constitutionality and
legality of the methods. He said it is time "to put the
'issue' of sampling to bed."
Rep. Carolyn Maloney (D-NY), who supports the Bureau's
census plan, challenged the chairman "to propose a credible
alternative" that will reduce the undercount. The
subcommittee's senior Democrat chided panel Republicans for
suggesting counting options, such as administrative records,
without exposing the methods to a thorough review. She also
accused sampling critics of having a "political agenda,"
citing a fundraising letter for a court challenge against
sampling that included a Republican National Committee memo
about the potential loss of Republican legislative seats if
the Bureau's plan goes forward.
Reps. Miller and Maloney made their remarks at a hearing
yesterday to review the Census Bureau's effort to prepare
for a census without sampling methods. Under Secretary of
Commerce Robert Shapiro told the subcommittee that any lapse
in funding for census preparations would put the entire
census "at grave risk" by delaying completion of address
lists, questionnaire printing, and opening of local
offices. Mr. Shapiro noted that failure to reach agreement
on the Bureau's 1999 funding bill by October 1 (the start of
the fiscal year) could lead to a temporary funding measure
that only allows spending at current levels (known as a
Continuing Resolution). Without a steady increase in funds
leading up to the actual census, the Bureau would be forced
to lay off
22,000 address list employees immediately, he said.
Mr. Shapiro also warned that the $476 million allocated by
the House for 2000 census work through March 31, 1999 would
only last through January, resulting in delays of all census
preparations. Mr. Shapiro promised to present a full plan
for a traditional census in November but cautioned that the
Administration is likely to request additional funds in 1999
if it is required to proceed with that plan. Chairman
Miller pledged to help ensure that the Census Bureau would
be exempt from spending caps in a temporary funding measure
and that it would receive sufficient funds to continue
preparations on schedule through March 31.
Acting Census Bureau Director James Holmes noted in his
testimony that most of the Bureau's pre-census work and
funds were devoted to activities that were needed for a
census with or without sampling methods. He said the Bureau
had created 20 teams to explore options for a nonsampling
census, including the use of administrative records,
staffing needs for door-to-door visits to all unresponsive
households, and targeting replacement forms to historically
low-response communities.
Stakeholders Call for Full Funding: At a Washington press
conference on Tuesday, the Leadership Conference on Civil
Rights released a letter to Congress from Americans for a
Fair and Accurate Census, calling for full, uninterrupted
funding for 2000 census preparations. The coalition of
religious and civil rights groups, children's and women's
advocates, scientific associations, and local government
officials said it would ask the President to veto any
spending measure that limits funding to six months. Leaders
of the National Council of La Raza, the Council of Great
City Schools, and the Children's Defense Fund also spoke at
the press event. The latter organization released a new
analysis of how the undercount of children in 1990 affected
education in 195 cities and counties across the country.
According to the post-census survey conducted by the Census
Bureau in 1990, 52 percent of those missed in the census
were children.
At yesterday's congressional hearing, Chairman Miller
admonished the stakeholder groups for "blindly supporting an
Administration on the brink of ruin" and not working with
Congress to improve the census count without using
sampling. The chairman, extending a self-described "olive
branch," said he hoped stakeholders would help devise other
ways to reach hard-to-count communities.
Congressional hearings: The House Subcommittee on the Census
will hold another hearing to review the proposed use of
sampling in the 2000 census, focusing on the Integrated
Coverage Measurement program. The hearing is scheduled for
September 17, at 10:00 a.m., in 2154 Rayburn House Office
Building.
Census Bureau Director news: The Senate Committee on
Governmental Affairs, chaired by Sen. Fred Thompson (R-TN),
will hold a hearing on the nomination of Dr. Kenneth Prewitt
to be director of the Census Bureau. President Clinton
nominated Dr. Prewitt, who heads the Social Science Research
Council in New York City, in June. The hearing is scheduled
for September 17, at 10:00 a.m. in 342 Dirksen Senate Office
Building.
Census 2000 Initiative Web Site: The Census 2000 Initiative
is pleased to announce that its web site is up and running.
The site includes current and past News Alerts, fact sheets
on key census policy issues, links to web sites for census
stakeholder organizations, and a calendar of official
census-related meetings and hearings. We hope you will
visit our new site at <http://www.census2000.org>.
Questions about the information contained in this News Alert
may be directed to TerriAnn Lowenthal at (202) 484-2270 or,
by e-mail at <terriann2k(a)aol.com>. Please direct all
requests to receive News Alerts, and all changes in
address/phone/fax/e-mail, to Keri Monihan at
<kmonihan(a)ccmc.org> or 202/326-8728. Please feel free to
circulate this information to colleagues and other
interested individuals.
September 3, 1998
Justice Department Will Appeal Census Ruling To Supreme
Court Congress Presses Administration for "Nonsampling"
Census Plan
On August 25, the Justice Department notified a federal
court that it would appeal the court's order barring the
Census Bureau from using sampling or statistical methods to
produce the population counts used for congressional
apportionment to the U.S. Supreme Court. This year's
Commerce funding bill (Public Law 105-119) set up a direct
appeal to the high court in lawsuits challenging the
constitutionality and legality of sampling and called for an
expedited review by the court.
A special three-judge panel of the District Court for the
District of Columbia ruled on August 24 that the Census Act
(title 13, United States Code) prohibits the use of sampling
to count the population for purposes of apportionment.
Other federal courts, in cases dating back to the 1980 and
1990 censuses, reached the opposite conclusion. During the
1990 census, the Justice Department concluded that the
Census Act and the Constitution permitted the use of
sampling methods to improve a good-faith direct counting
effort, although it noted the difficulty in interpreting
seemingly conflicting provisions of the law. Then-Commerce
Secretary Robert Mosbacher decided against a statistical
correction of the undercount on other grounds. The court in
the current case did not address the constitutional question
(and therefore did not find that the Constitution requires a
physical headcount of the population, as the plaintiffs
argued).
The district court opinion in the case of U.S. House of
Representatives v. U.S. Department of Commerce, et al. is
available on the internet at www.dcd.uscourts.gov/
<http://www.dcd.uscourts.gov/>.
Congressional hearing: The House Subcommittee on the Census
will hold a hearing on Wednesday, September 9, to review the
status of census preparations. Secretary of Commerce
William Daley and Acting Census Bureau Director James Holmes
have been invited to testify. The discussion is likely to
focus on plans for conducting a census without sampling and
statistical methods in light of the district court ruling.
The hearing will begin at 1:00 p.m. in room 2203 Rayburn
House Office Building.
Appropriations update: Before leaving town for its August
break, the Senate appointed members who will serve on a
conference committee that must iron out differences between
the House and Senate versions of the Commerce funding bill
for fiscal year 1999.
The conferees, all members of the Senate Appropriations
Committee, are:
Republicans: Judd Gregg (NH), Ted Stevens (AK), Pete V.
Domenici (NM), Mitch McConnell (KY), Kay Bailey Hutchison
(TX), Ben Nighthorse Campbell (CO), Thad Cochran (MS).
Democrats: Ernest Hollings (SC), Daniel Inouye (HI), Dale
Bumpers (AR), Frank Lautenberg (NJ), Barbara Mikulski (MD),
Robert Byrd (WV).
The House will appoint its conferees when it reconvenes
after Labor Day.
Census Monitoring Board activities: The Board has scheduled
a meeting for September 18 in Washington, DC (Exact location
and time to be announced). The Board has moved into its new
offices at Census Bureau headquarters in Suitland, MD. The
presidentially-appointed Board members (led by co-chair Tony
Coelho) and their staff can be reached at 301/457-9900. The
members appointed by the congressional Republican leadership
(led by co-chair Kenneth Blackwell) and their staff can be
reached at 301/457-5080.
Media Watch: Increasingly, press accounts of the controversy
over census methods have described the population subgroups
most likely to be missed as people "who tend to vote
Democratic." Editorials both supporting and opposing the
use of scientific methods in the 2000 census, as well as
many news articles, have relied on this description to
explain why the disagreement has been largely along partisan
lines.
It's important to remember that the census doesn't count
voters, and people who are counted in the census don't
necessarily vote. About half of those not counted in 1990
were children and immigrants who can't vote. Others who the
census is likely to miss are alienated from or mistrustful
of government, and are therefore less likely to vote, as
well. So the next time you read in your local paper about
the census counting voters, consider dashing off a letter to
the editor to set the record straight!
Stakeholder activities: The 2000 Census Advisory Committee
will hold its quarterly meeting on September 24 and 25 at
the Embassy Suites Hotel in Washington, D.C. The meeting is
open to the public.
Census Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ's): From time to time
the Census 2000 Initiative will address frequently asked
questions about census policy issues and operations.
Question: Under its 2000 census plan, what will the Census
Bureau do if more than 90 percent of households in a given
census tract mail back their census forms?
Answer: Every census form that is returned by mail will be
counted, even if the mail-back rate exceeds 90 percent in a
census tract. Here's how it will work: All (100%) known
households will get a census form in the mail. A certain
percentage will mail back the form. Next, census takers
will visit enough of the unresponsive households to ensure
direct contact (mail, telephone, and personal visits) with
at least 90 percent in every tract. For example, if the
mail-back rate in tract "A" is 60 percent, census takers
will visit three of every four unresponsive households.
Finally, the Bureau will estimate characteristics for the
remaining 10 percent based on the characteristics of the
other unresponsive homes in tract "A" (60% + 30% + 10% =
100%).
For all census tracts with mail-back rates of 85 percent or
above, census takers will visit one of every three
unresponsive households. In 1990, there were no census
tracts with mail-back rates over 90 percent. Nevertheless,
in 2000, no census forms will be discarded, no matter how
high the mail-back rate in a census tract.
Consider a hypothetical census tract where 94 percent of the
households send back their forms. All of those
questionnaires will be counted. Then census takers will
visit one in three of the remaining six percent (or two
percent of the total number of households in the tract). The
final four percent will be estimated based on information
gathered from the nonresponsive households that were visited
in person (94% mail response + 2% visited + 4% estimated =
100%).
Questions about the information contained in this News Alert
may be directed to TerriAnn Lowenthal at (202) 484-2270 or,
by e-mail at <terriann2k(a)aol.com>. Please direct all
requests to receive News Alerts, and all changes in
address/phone/fax/e-mail, to Keri Monihan at
<kmonihan(a)ccmc.org> or 202/326-8728. Please feel free to
circulate this information to colleagues and other
interested individuals.
