1The 1.15 percent and 0.32 percent of the undercount rates are based on census counts that
include both the housing unit and group quarters populations.
July 26, 2001
Analysis Plan for Further ESCAP Deliberations Regarding the Adjustment
of Census 2000 Data for Future Uses
Background
On March 1, 2001, The Census Bureau issued the Executive Steering Committee for A.C.E. Policy
(ESCAP) recommendation that the Census 2000 Redistricting Data not be adjusted based on the
Accuracy and Coverage Evaluation (A.C.E.) program data. The ESCAP was unable to conclude,
based on information available at the time, that the adjusted Census 2000 data were more accurate for
redistricting.
By mid-October, the Census Bureau will recommend whether Census 2000 data should be adjusted
for future uses, such as the census long form data products, post-censal population estimates and
Census Bureau demographic survey controls. In order to inform this decision, further research will be
conducted generating data for ESCAP’s review. The analyses will focus on resolving the concerns that
ESCAP identified during its deliberations for the redistricting adjustment decision. This document
describes the research agenda and is organized by the topic areas of concern.
The broad, overarching concern was that the Demographic Analysis and the A.C.E. estimates of the
population were inconsistent. Even though alternative demographic estimates were produced by
varying the assumptions underlying the Demographic Analysis, the highest reasonable estimate indicated
that Census 2000 undercounted the population by 0.32 percent, while the A.C.E. produced a net
undercount estimate of 1.15 percent1. In previous censuses since 1960, the Demographic Analysis
estimates were used to evaluate decennial census coverage. The estimate derived through the 1990
coverage measurement survey was reasonably consistent with the 1990 Demographic Analysis estimate
of the total population. When the corresponding estimates for Census 2000 were found to reflect
substantial diff