[Federal Register: March 3, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 40)]
[Notices]
[Page 9214-9217]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr03mr09-25]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
Census Bureau
Proposed Information Collection; Comment Request; 2010 Census
Integrated Communication Program Evaluation
AGENCY: U.S. Census Bureau, Commerce.
ACTION: Notice.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce, as part of its continuing effort
to reduce paperwork and respondent burden, invites the general public
and other Federal agencies to take this opportunity to comment on
proposed and/or continuing information collections, as required by the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Public Law 104-13 (44 U.S.C.
3506(c)(2)(A)).
DATES: To ensure consideration, written comments must be submitted on
or before May 4, 2009.
ADDRESSES: Direct all written comments to Diana Hynek, Departmental
Paperwork Clearance Officer, Department of Commerce, Room 7845, 14th
and Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20230 (or via the Internet
at dHynek@doc.gov).
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Requests for additional information or
copies of the information collection instrument(s) and instructions
should be directed to Donna Souders, Bureau of the Census, HQ-3H470A,
Washington DC; (301) 763-1810 (or via the Internet at
Donna.M.Souders@census.gov).
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Abstract
The Census Bureau will conduct the 2010 Census Program for
Evaluations and Experiments (CPEX) to evaluate the current census and
to build a foundation on which to make early and informed decisions for
planning the next census in 2020. Program planners designed CPEX to
measure the effectiveness of the 2010 Census design (including
operations, systems, and processes), in addition to determining how the
design impacts data quality. The intent of this public notice is to
present the plan for and to invite comments on one CPEX project: The
2010 Census Integrated Communication Program (ICP) Evaluation.
In September 2007, the Census Bureau contracted the services of
Draftfcb, Inc., a marketing communications agency, to create, produce
and implement an integrated marketing and communications campaign in
support of the 2010
[[Page 9215]]
Census. The contract, known as the 2010 Census Integrated Communication
Campaign (ICC), was awarded as an Indefinite Delivery--Indefinite
Quantity (IDIQ), multiple-year contract (one 12-month base year and
three 12-month option years), with an estimated value of $207 million.
The 2010 Census ICC is the second time that the decennial census
has involved a paid advertising campaign. Evaluations of the Census
2000 paid advertising campaign indicated that the effort contributed to
increasing mail returns of census forms, thereby reducing costs of the
Non-Response Follow-Up operation. The 2010 Census ICC contract is a
major public expenditure and has great potential to affect the quality
and overall cost of the 2010 Census. For these reasons, a rigorous and
independent evaluation of the 2010 Census ICC is essential for
assessing the success of the 2010 Census and planning for the 2020
Census.
The 2010 Census ICC also includes partnerships, the Census in
Schools effort, and other related outreach programs and activities to
the public. The Census Bureau partnership campaign involves the Census
Bureau partnering with state and local organizations, including
churches and social organizations, to help U.S. residents learn about
the Census, and be encouraged to participate by people they trust
rather than the government collecting the data. The Census in Schools
campaign is an effort to reach families through their school-age
children.
In the fall of 2008, after an open competition, the Census Bureau
awarded a contract to the National Opinion Research Center (NORC) at
the University of Chicago to conduct an evaluation of the 2010 Census
ICC. NORC is tasked with conducting an independent evaluation of the
integrated marketing communication campaign to determine if the
campaign is achieving its goals. The purpose of the evaluation is to
assess the impact of the entire campaign in addition to determining the
contribution of each of its components: Paid media/advertising,
partnerships, the Census in Schools program, and related outreach to
the public. NORC has developed an evaluation strategy to determine if
the following three goals were achieved by the 2010 Census ICC.
(1) Increased mail response;
(2) Reduced differential undercount; and
(3) Improved cooperation with enumerators.
NORC's evaluation of the effectiveness of the overall campaign also
involves assessing the extent to which the campaign moves people toward
the goal of responding to the census. This may consist of measuring the
effectiveness of specific messages for target audiences, measuring
increases in awareness of the census and changes in attitudes toward
the census (survey research), and measuring changes in intention to
return the census form and actual return of the form (survey research;
modeling). These are general measures of effectiveness, and when used
together, provide a good indicator of how well a campaign does in
support of the overall objectives.
NORC's evaluation will objectively measure whether campaign
strategies and tactics were effective in raising awareness, changing
attitudes and/or beliefs, and influencing behavior. In assessing the
overall effectiveness of the campaign, NORC will also identify and
measure the impact of key phenomena pertaining to the 2010 Census, but
outside the scope of the official ICP. This includes acknowledgement
and measurement of breaking events.
Finally, NORC will compare the knowledge, attitudes, and beliefs
about the Census held by Americans before, during, and after the 2010
Census ICC implementation with those held at similar points in time
relative to the Census 2000.
Populations of Interest: The Census Bureau and Draftfcb have
identified two classifications of the U.S. population that undergird
much of the design and implementation of the 2010 Census ICC. These two
classifications figure prominently in the sample design and analysis
plan for the 2010 Census ICP Evaluation. First, the Census Bureau has
identified five race/ethnicity populations of particular priority in
census outreach efforts. These are: Black Africans and African-
Americans, Hispanics of any race, Native Hawaiians and other Pacific
Islanders, American Indians and Alaska Natives, and Asians. In
addition, Draftfcb and the Census Bureau have devised an audience
segmentation that classifies all census tracts in the United States
into one of eight segments that share similar socioeconomic and other
demographic characteristics as well as propensity to complete the
census form. The eight audience segments are: Advantaged Homeowners,
All Around Average I, All Around Average II, Economically
Disadvantaged, Ethnic Enclave I, Single Unattached Mobiles,
Economically Disadvantaged II, and Ethnic Enclave II. The audience
segments provide the basis for 2010 Census ICC decisions regarding
resources, media selection, and tailored messages.
Evaluation Design
NORC's proposed evaluation design involves the following key
elements: conduct surveys of the general public based on probability
methods that combine cross-sectional, time-series samples with
longitudinal samples to maximize the statistical power of cross-
sectional estimates and change over time and in response to 2010 Census
ICC efforts. NORC will conduct hybrid (cross-sectional/longitudinal)
surveys with probability samples of United States households,
oversampling minority populations and other target segments, at three
points in time--[Wave 1] during the earliest phases of partnership
activity, in mid-2009 to assess baseline levels of all measures of
public attention and intentions that will be the focus of the 2010
Census ICC; [Wave 2] during the expected peak of 2010 Census ICC
activity from January through May 2010; and [Wave 3] during the post
mailout period from May through August 2010.
Exposure to components of the 2010 Census ICC will be estimated
using several data sources in addition to survey data. These data
sources will permit exploration of relationships between intensity of
campaign activity and changes in awareness, attitudes, and intentions
among the general public and key population subgroups. Data sources
will include ratings and impressions data for the paid advertising
campaign, and the Census Bureau's Integrated Campaign Partnership
Database (ICPD) data for measuring partnership activity. NORC also
plans to merge actual data on household participation in the 2010
Census with the survey records of households in the 2010 Census ICP
Evaluation survey sample for a more detailed and accurate record of
households' census participation, including mailback status,
cooperation with enumerators, and other indicators of census actions
regarding these households' 2010 participation. Each of these
alternative data sources will be essential in corroborating,
triangulating with, or providing alternative measures of exposure to
the self-reported campaign exposure measures collected through surveys.
NORC will collaborate with Census Bureau staff to compile
aggregate-level data on the 2010 Census ICC effort and Census results
to analyze the relationships between measures of planned and actual
2010 Census ICC activity (by component) and aggregate Census
participation results (mail response, enumerator response, non-
response) in 1990, 2000, and 2010 to
[[Page 9216]]
identify trends over time in target segments and for hard-to-count
areas.
To improve the ability of the NORC design to detect a relationship
between campaign exposure and response, there will also be
`observational case-control studies.' In these studies, additional
cases will be added in geographical areas selected as matched pairs.
These pairs will be similar on socio-demographic and psychosocial
characteristics but may be likely to experience planned or unplanned
variations in the implementation of 2010 Census ICC components. The
pairs will be determined during the course of the 2010 Census ICP
Evaluation using evidence gathered from Draftfcb strategy and
implementation, Waves 1 and 2 data from this evaluation, as well as the
ancillary data mentioned above. The objective is to compare public
exposure to the persuasive messages delivered through 2010 Census ICC
components and to measure the resulting differential impact (if any),
improving the clarity of the evidence for 2010 Census ICC effects.
Combining and interpreting results from multiple analytical
approaches will improve the capacity of the design to answer the key
evaluation questions concerning the impact of the 2010 Census ICC and
its components, and the return on investment of 2010 Census ICC
resources with respect to the three primary outcomes of interest. As
needed, qualitative data collection may further inform or illuminate
puzzles within the analysis activity.
Sample Selection
The 2010 Census ICP Evaluation data collection plan calls for 3,000
cases each in Waves 1 and 2, and 4,200 cases in Wave 3. Approximately
1,500 cases in each of Waves 2 and 3 will come from a longitudinal
panel of Wave 1 cases, while the remaining cases in the Wave will be
selected for the first time.
In Waves 1 and 2, equal numbers of cases will come from each of the
five race/ethnicity populations and the remaining non-targeted group.
The sample size of 500 per race/ethnicity group used in the 2000
Partnership and Marketing Program Evaluation (PMPE), the analogous
evaluation from the 2000 Census, resulted in design effects around 2.0
and standard errors of 3.2 percent (on a binary proportion of 50
percent). The same sample sizes are planned for the 2010 Census ICP
Evaluation. For Wave 3, the sample size will grow to 900 for each of
the three largest race/ethnicity groups (non-targeted, non-Hispanic
Black African and African-American, Hispanic of any race). This will
not only decrease the standard errors for this wave, but will also
permit selection of additional respondents into the sample to support
the observational study design described above.
The three largest race/ethnicity groups will be fielded together as
a core sample from a nationally representative sample of households
selected using NORC's 2000 National Frame. The three additional samples
are of sufficiently rare populations that they must be selected
separately.
Three Supplemental Samples
For the remaining three race/ethnicity populations, manipulating
the tracts and segments selected will not be sufficient to meet the
target sample sizes. Therefore, NORC will have to field independent
samples. Asian and Native Hawaiian samples can be drawn from addresses
in NORC's National Frame, but American Indian/Alaska Native reservation
samples will require fresh listing.
American Indians/Alaska Native (AIAN)
According to the 2000 Census, there were 3,420,171 persons living
in the United States that were non-Hispanic and AIAN (alone or in
combination with another race), and 998,199 living on the 651 U.S.
reservations (29.3 percent of the AIAN population). For cost-
efficiency, NORC will select Waves 1, 2, and 3 samples from 20
reservations out of the 283 reservations with at least 250 AIANs.
Asians
According to the 2000 Census, there were 11,266,934 persons in the
United States that were non-Hispanic and Asian (alone or in combination
with another race). Of these, 17.0 percent live in the five U.S. cities
with the largest Asian populations, and 29.3 percent live in the 40
cities with the largest Asian populations that also satisfy a density
of 10 percent. NORC will select Waves 1, 2, and 3 samples from 40
cities within its National Frame (some, like Fremont, CA, are not the
central city for a metropolitan statistical area).
Native Hawaiian and Pacific Islander (NHOPI)
According to the 2000 Census, there were 860,965 persons living in
the United States who were non-Hispanic and NHOPI (alone or in
combination with another race). Of these persons, 32.8 percent live in
the state of Hawaii, and 23.32 percent of Hawaii residents are NHOPI;
less than 1 percent of residents are NHOPI in all other states. The
state with the largest NHOPI population outside of Hawaii is
California, which contains 25.4 percent of U.S. NHOPIs, but only 0.64
percent of California residents are NHOPI. The state with the next
largest NHOPI population is Washington, which has 4.8 percent of U.S.
NHOPIs, but only 0.70 percent of Washington residents are NHOPI. NORC
will select Waves 1, 2, and 3 samples from all five counties in Hawaii.
The Census Bureau is discussing the sampling strategies for these
three supplemental samples with NORC and may propose an alternative
approach.
Analysis
The 2010 Census ICP Evaluation questionnaires will cover such
topics as: Demographics; general media use and other activities that
might lead to exposure to the 2010 Census ICC; knowledge, attitudes,
and beliefs about the Census; intent to participate; actions taken upon
receipt of the Census form or interactions with Census enumerators
(depending on the timing of the wave); and self-reported exposure to
2010 Census ICC activities, including unaided and aided awareness and
confirmed recall questions.
Analyses will include cross-sectional examinations of each wave's
data independently, as well as repeated cross-section and longitudinal
analyses across waves. By incorporating various other data sources,
NORC will be able to estimate campaign evaluation-style models for
assessing the impact of various components of the 2010 Census ICC.
Analyses will focus on the general public, the five hard-to-enumerate
groups, and the eight audience segments. For each of these sub-
populations, NORC will discuss the various research questions described
above.
II. Method of Collection
Pre-Testing of Survey Instruments
At least 75 percent of the questionnaire items for all three waves'
instruments have previously been administered in national surveys
cleared by Office of Management and Budget (OMB). Chiefly, the source
instruments are from the 2000 PMPE and the Census Barriers, Attitudes,
and Motivations Survey (fielded in 2008, by Macro International Inc.
for DraftFCB). Additional pre-testing of the proposed instruments will
be conducted under the generic OMB clearance provided to the Census
Bureau for CPEX data collection. All three draft questionnaires will be
pre-tested using cognitive interviewing techniques and then for
accuracy of timing estimates. Convenience sample respondents will
[[Page 9217]]
be recruited from the general public, the five hard-to-enumerate
populations identified as priorities by the Census Bureau, and the
eight `audience segments' defined at the census-tract level.
A key tool for improved quality of self-reported media exposure
data is the use of confirmed recall items in which respondents are not
only asked to report on ad viewing, but also on the details of the ad
content. This question type will be of great value in the Waves 2 and 3
questionnaires, when the paid advertising campaign will be in full
swing. Final advertisements will not be developed, however, until
closer to the time of campaign implementation. Specific questionnaire
items will be developed and pre-tested after final advertisements are
available for review. Templates of these question formats will be
submitted with the original OMB package, but specific questions will be
submitted to OMB for review after the formal clearance process has been
completed.
Survey Schedule
Three surveys are proposed:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sample size and
Wave [dates] composition Comments
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1 [Summer/Fall 2009].......... 3,000 evenly
distributed
across 6 race/
ethnic groups.
2 [January 10-May 15, 2010]... 3,000 evenly 1,500 cases (evenly
distributed distributed across
across 6 race/ race/ethnic groups)
ethnic groups. who completed Wave 1
as well.
3 [May 15-August 31, 2010].... 4,200, of which + 1,500 cases (evenly
3,000 evenly distributed across
distributed race/ethnic groups)
across 6 race/ who completed Wave 1
ethnic groups. (and possibly Wave
2) as well.
+ 1,200 cases in
selected sites for
`observational case
control'.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mixed-Mode Data Collection
NORC will employ an address-based sampling design that marries the
comprehensive coverage of address lists with the cost effectiveness of
telephone data collection. Through telephone number matching services
and advance letter requests to sampled addresses, NORC will begin the
data collection effort by telephone, expecting to obtain phone numbers
for approximately 60 percent of the selected sample. Cases will then
also be solicited for web completion, or completion by mail and by
paper-and-pencil Self-Administered Questionnaire. A sub-sample of all
cases not completed will be fielded in-person. Telephone interviewing
will make use of Computer-Assisted Telephone Interviewing technologies,
while in-person data collection will make use of paper and pencil
questionnaires. Telephone and in-person data collection will be
conducted in the languages of the 2010 census form: English, Spanish,
Chinese, Korean, Vietnamese and Russian.
III. Data
OMB Control Number: None.
Form Number: To be determined.
Type of Review: Regular submission.
Affected Public: Households.
Estimated Number of Respondents: 7,200.
Estimated Time per Response: 30 minutes.
Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours: 5,100.
2009: 1,500 hours (Wave 1).
2010: 3,600 hours (Waves 2 and 3).
Estimated Total Annual Cost: $0.
Respondent's Obligation: Voluntary.
Legal Authority: Title 13 U.S.C. 141 and 193.
IV. Request for Comments
Comments are invited on: (a) Whether the proposed collection of
information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of
the agency, including whether the information shall have practical
utility; (b) the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden
(including hours and cost) of the proposed collection of information;
(c) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the
information to be collected; and (d) ways to minimize the burden of the
collection of information on respondents, including through the use of
automated collection techniques or other forms of information
technology.
Comments submitted in response to this notice will be summarized
and/or included in the request for OMB approval of this information
collection; they also will become a matter of public record.
Dated: February 25, 2009.
Gwellnar Banks,
Management Analyst, Office of the Chief Information Officer.
[FR Doc. E9-4380 Filed 3-2-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-07-P