Officials Optimistic That 2000 CENSUS Is Better Than Ever - better undercount of african americans than 1990 Census

Black Issues in Higher Education, Oct 12, 2000 by Ronald Roach

But scholars warn against celebrating too soon, citing a serious undercount in 1990. While no one thinks this year's count will be as inaccurate, there are still concerns.

WASHINGTON

Last month, federal officials announced that the response rates for Census 2000 exceeded those of the 1990 U.S. Census by 2 percentage points, from 65 percent to 67 percent. The 2000 Census response rate also exceeded the U.S. Census Bureau's projected rate, which was 61 percent.

"Thanks to the public's help, Census 2000 is a good census," according to an official statement released by U.S. Census officials.

Although Census officials have pronounced the data collection portion of Census 2000 a success, the experience of Black scholars and officials is one that would caution them to wait and see what the actual numbers are. But instead of expecting a high undercount of the Black population, a few scholars are optimistic that the actual number count will be a considerable improvement over past censuses. The major census reports will be generated before the Clinton administration is concluded.

"In general, it does seem to be a better mail-back response rate," says Dr. Robert Hill, vice-chair of the Census Advisory Committee on the African American Population. "We do believe there'll be a smaller undercount this year than in 1990. We think the advertising campaign and the partnership program did help."

Hill, who was formerly the executive director of the Institute for Urban Research at Morgan State University in Baltimore, says higher mail-back rates in major cities with high minority populations suggests that the statistics for Blacks and other minorities will be more accurate than in 1990, when the Black undercount was the highest ever when compared to the White undercount.

"The Black undercount was 5 percent in 1990. This year, we believe it will be less than 5 percent," notes Hill, who is basing his estimate on preliminary examinations of Census 2000 returns.

The 1990 minority undercount proved to shortchange cities millions of dollars in federal funding for social services. Overcrowded urban school districts lost out on federal funding and community groups had difficulty utilizing faulty data for applying for grants, according to experts.

"The [U.S.] Census is the single leading source for demographic information. Problems with the Census impair official decision-making, scholarly inquiry, and simply give us a distorted understanding of the world," says Frank Wu, professor of law at the Howard University Law School in Washington.

The 1990 undercount also proved frustrating for scholars who use demographic data to conduct their research. "For [scholars] interested in poverty and related issues, the undercount is problematic in studying social safety-net issues and disadvantaged populations. This [problem] was widely acknowledged among researchers," says Dr. Margaret C. Simms, vice president for research at the Joint Center for Political and Economic Studies in Washington.

Simms agrees there is evidence that data from Census 2000 will prove more reliable than that from the 1990 Census. "The problem of the census undercount is viewed as a problem more broadly than one of race ... But there's more of an interest by African Americans and others because [minority scholars] tend to conduct research related to the minority community," Simms adds.

A BETTER JOB

Census officials had resolved to do a better job in counting minorities at the outset of the 1990 Census, according to observers.

"They understood certainly that with the census they had to increase outreach to certain portions of the population to try to boost the response. They formed alliances and made a better effort to get a variety of organizations involved. And they switched advertising campaigns," says Simms of the Joint Center.

Census Bureau officials enlisted the aid of such organizations as the Joint Center, churches and Black fraternities and sororities. A highly visible media campaign organized by minority-owned advertising firms also contributed to public awareness.

"The Joint Center had an outreach program. We collaborated with other groups and looked at the issue in terms of the undercount," Simms says.

Hill, a research scientist who has been serving in an advisory capacity to the Census Bureau, believes the partnerships and advertising campaign have helped to make a critical difference in reducing the minority undercount. He says it was unfortunate that the U.S. Supreme Court banned the use of statistical sampling as a way to present corrected data for the purpose of congressional redistricting.

Using statistical sampling to provide a corrected estimate of the U.S. population would produce results minimizing the undercount far better than the traditional enumeration method of going door to-door in an effort to track hard-to-find people, according to Hill.

"We believe the Bureau should have been able to sample the last 10 percent of those hardest to count. Instead, the enumerators had to go door-to-door," Hill says.