American Community Survey: Group Quarters and Data Comparisons Susan Schechter Chief, American Community Survey Office SDC/BIDC and FSCPE Joint Session March 26, 2007

ACS GQ Data Collection Two levels of sampling/data collection: GQ facilities and individual residents Utilization of an automated instrument for facility data collection Utilization of paper questionnaires for person data collection Preliminary response rate for 2006: in high 90s at both levels

ACS GQ Collection of Person Data Person Data Collected from % of Total Sample Persons79% - Interviewed in person: 49% - Interviewed by telephone :6% - Self-Response:22% - Proxy interview in person:1% Administrative Records21% - Obtained via personal visit: 20% - Obtained via telephone: 1%

4 Reasons for Non-Interview in 2006 Type A – Unable to locate, refusal by GQ or residents, or other access problems –# of cases are included in response rate calculation Type C – GQ no longer exists, GQ converted to housing units, no residents in GQ during survey period, GQ out of scope, or unoccupied sample bed –# of cases are excluded from response rate calculation

5 Operational Lessons Learned Having a current, accurate address list is critical Reaching out to GQ administrators is necessary Communicating the mandatory nature of the data collection is essential

6 Challenges and Tools Challenges –Updating and maintaining current sample information –Gaining continuous GQ cooperation at both the facility and resident level Tools –Updating GQ database for sampling –Letters of support –Developing information packets

7 Plans for 2007 Release of 2006 ACS GQ Data Total population in tables when appropriate GQ profiles for selected characteristics for the nation and some states GQ profiles by 7 major GQ types nationally

8 Lessons Learned for Data Release Develop materials to ensure consistency among HQ staff Information easily accessible on web site Develop guidelines for item and table comparability

9 Contact Information U.S. Census Bureau