1 Electronic Reporting Does It Make Sense or Cents? This presentation is released to informed interested parties of ongoing research and to encourage discussion of work in progress. Any views on statistical, methodological, technical, or operational issues are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the U.S. Census Bureau. Presented by Thomas L. Mesenbourg Associate Director for Economic Programs June 2007

2 Presentation Outline History Objectives Electronic Reporting Strategies Electronic Reporting Rates Lessons Learned Is Electronic Reporting Cost Efficient

3 Electronic Reporting Objectives Transform to an E-Gov environment Provide value-added services to businesses Facilitate and accelerate reporting Improve data quality and reduce processing costs

4 Electronic Reporting Strategies Different solutions for different programs Generalized vs. Custom Systems Contracted vs. In-house Development Four development paths

5 Generalized Instrument Design Economic Census, Report of Organization, ASM Generalized, designs paper and electronic instruments, meta data driven Developed by private contractor Downloadable CSAQ, import and export capabilities Complex, long development time Expensive to develop and support Users require assistance and support Handles 550 different economic census forms, complex reporting, and authentication; provides import and export functionality Too costly and complicated for most surveys

6 Census Taker Six current surveys use web-based instruments Generalized, web-based, simple meta data Developed by IT Directorate Quick development, inexpensive, minimal support Easy to use, minimal user support required Can not easily handle surveys with large number of different forms or complex reporting arrangements No import and export capabilities

7 Automated Export System Electronic filing of export declaration Customized, contractor developed, no meta data Mainframe and web-based application Long development time, enhancements, slow to implement Very low development costs, but substantial fee-based charges and support services Cost effective, and mandatory electronic reporting Enhancements require multiple agency agreement

8 Government Division Surveys Six quarterly/annual surveys use web- based instrument Fast, inexpensive development, modest support High participation rates Not generalized, won’t easily support surveys with large number of forms No import, export capability

9 Electronic Filing Rates SurveyFrequency (latest) Report of Organization (GIDS)Annual8.0%14.0% Annual Survey of Manufacturers (GIDS)Annual7.1%11.3% Quarterly Financial Report (GIDS)Quarterly15.4%23.2% Manufacturers’ Shipments, Inventories, and Orders (Census Taker) Monthly17.4%19.7%24.0% Retail Trade Survey (Census Taker)Annual20.0% Wholesale Trade Survey (Census Taker)Annual27.0% Quarterly Services Survey (Census Taker)Quarterly36.0%42.3%45.9% Quarterly Financial Report (Census Taker)Quarterly53.6% Local Finance SurveyAnnual47.9%49.1% Annual Retirement SurveyAnnual25.2%30.9% Quarterly Retirement SurveyQuarterly76.5%74.6%81.7% Annual Employment SurveyAnnual43.3%50.2% Property Tax Collection SurveyQuarterly12.7%23.7%35.1% Sales & Income Tax Collection SurveyQuarterly20.6%32.9%71.6%

10 Lessons Learned Software must provide tangible benefits to respondents No single solution for every program –establishment-based surveys and surveys with a large number of different report forms –company based surveys generally much simpler Electronic reporting related research paying dividends Development and support costs generally substantial, especially for large complex programs Require business case analysis before undertaking project

11 Is Electronic Reporting Cost Efficient? Development and support costs are significant Automated Export System has demonstrated cost savings, improvements in quality, and reduction in burden Electronic reporting for Economic Census –not cost efficient if viewed in isolation –savings associated with design of paper instruments and data capture savings bring it close to break-even Census Taker is cost effective for company based surveys with relatively few report forms, but can not efficiently handle surveys with numerous forms Government’s electronic reporting is cost effective