Robert Lussier, COPAFS Representative, Government Statistics Section

COPAFS is the Council of Professional Associations on Federal Statistics and acts as an advocate for the development and dissemination of high-quality federal statistics. Member organizations include professional associations, businesses, research institutes, and others interested in federal statistics. Through COPAFS, members have an opportunity to review and affect issues such as timeliness, quality, confidentiality, and the relevance of data. COPAFS holds quarterly meetings, the last one being on December 2, 2011. Detailed minutes, together with copies of the overheads used by the presenters, can be found on the COPAFS website.

COPAFS chair Felice Levine announced that Ed Spar will be stepping down as COPAFS executive director at the end of 2012. Anybody interested in the executive director position should contact the board.

All current eligible board members agreed to serve for the coming year, including the following:

Chair—Felice Levine
Past Chair—Judie Mopsik
Vice Chair—Maurine Haver
Secretary—Ken Hodges
Treasurer—Seth Grimes
Members at Large—Ralph Rector, Linda Jacobsen, Bob Parker, and Chet Bowie

A motion to approve the 2012 board was made and seconded, and the 2012 board was approved.

As part of his executive director’s report, Ed Spar talked about budgets. Nearly all agencies are looking at numbers that are worse than the previous year. Especially hard-hit agencies include the U.S. Census Bureau, Bureau of Economic Analysis, and Bureau of Justice Statistics.

A Review of Plans for the National Center for Education Statistics

Marilyn Seastrom of the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) described her organization as collecting, reporting, analyzing, and disseminating statistics on the condition and progress of education at the preschool, elementary, secondary, postsecondary, and adult levels in the United States and other nations.

The NCES budget has been just under $240 million in recent years. The NCES major divisions are devoted to assessment, early childhood international and crosscutting studies, elementary/secondary and libraries studies, and postsecondary studies.

Seastrom presented a list of NCES programs and surveys. The National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) is an ongoing nationwide assessment of what American students know and can do in various subject areas. 2011 had notable projects, including a 2009 science report card; 2009 high-school transcript study; and 2010 report cards on civics, history, geography, reading, and mathematics. A state mapping report is using NAEP as a yardstick to compare proficiency standards across states. The report finds wide variation among state proficiency standards.

Other programs include a geomapping application that currently reports data at the school district level, but is being enhanced to produce boundaries for specific public schools, the Schools and Staffing Survey, the College Affordability and Transparency Center (providing information about tuition and net prices at postsecondary institutions), a Baccalaureate and Beyond study, a program for the international assessment of adult competencies, and the National Household Education Surveys (NHES). Seastrom described improvements being applied to the various surveys.

An Overview of American Demographic History

Census Bureau retiree Campbell Gibson described the website he and some colleagues are putting together that is devoted to the demographic history of the United States as shown by data from the census. The census is a great source of historical data and trends, much of it going back to the first census in 1790. Gibson acknowledged Historical Statistics of the United States: Millennial Edition as the source of many data points.

Gibson proceeded with a series of charts illustrating interesting historical facts and patterns. He concluded by suggesting that census data can make valuable contributions to the teaching of American history and expressed hope that the website might encourage greater use of census data in the history classroom.

Rural Statistical Areas: A Rural-Centric Approach to Defining Geographic Areas

Michael Ratcliffe of the U.S. Census Bureau described the Rural Statistical Area (RSA) as a proposed concept in response to dissatisfaction with the way urban and metropolitan definitions treat rural and nonmetropolitan as residuals, combined with frustration with the limited geographic detail for which one-year ACS data are reported. A state could have rural area with a population of 400,000, but no way to subdivide to smaller areas meeting the 65,000 population threshold for the reporting of one-year ACS data.

The RSA concept was developed as part of a three-year joint research project between the Census Bureau and State Data Centers (SDCs). The goal was to use rural counties (and potentially county subdivisions and/or census tracts) as building blocks to create rural or predominantly rural sub-state areas of 65,000 or more people to enhance the analysis of one-year ACS data. “Urban” would be the residual in this scheme.

The RSA delineation process started with the classification of counties based on the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Urban Influence (UI) codes, which distinguish non-metro counties according to factors such as adjacency to metro areas and presence of an urban core. Counties of 65,000 or more population were designated as “standalone” RSAs and are, in effect, the residual urban areas. The next step was to aggregate counties in a meaningful way. The approach used established initial groupings based on the UI codes and highway networks. Non-standalone counties were combined until the population threshold of 65,000 was reached. The initial groupings were later modified in an interactive process with the SDCs.

Looking to next steps, Ratcliffe explained that the SDC Steering Committee asked the Census Bureau to adopt RSAs as a standard tabulation geography. The Census Bureau is agreeable, but wants to review the concept further and issue a Federal Register notice seeking comments.

Research on Measuring Same-Sex Couples

Nancy Bates of the U.S. Census Bureau presented on measurement error in relationship and marital status questions. The bureau faces challenges because societal and legal definitions of marriage have changed and new terms—such as same-sex husbands/wives, domestic partnerships, and civil unions—have become widespread. Complicating matters are state-to-state variations in the recognition of same-sex marriage and the lack of any federal-level recognition.

An interagency workgroup on measuring relationships in federal household surveys has conducted focus groups and found that respondents have interpreted questions in a manner consistent with legal status. However, the groups identified the need for response options reflecting new legal unions. New versions of the relationship and marital status questions were developed. Cognitive interviews were conducted. The next step calls for further testing of the recommended version of these questions.

Martin O’Connell of the U.S. Census Bureau described data on same-sex couple households. The totals fluctuate, with the 2000 census at about 250,000 same-sex married couples and the ACS just under 400,000 through 2007, then dropping to under 150,000 due to forms and processing changes. The 2010 census count jumped up to 350,000, a total known to be unrealistically high. A revised version of the 2010 census count brings the number down to about 130,000.

One might expect that the excess of same-sex married couples would trace to same-sex couples reporting as married when that status is not legally recognized. However, the Census Bureau noticed the excess in the original 2010 number was most pronounced in areas with high levels of nonresponse follow-up (NRFU). The NRFU form used had a presentation of the male/female response option that was prone to misreporting. In other words, accidental errors in the reporting of sex seem to have created much of the excess same-sex couples. The NRFU form also was used in the 2000 census. The problem existed with the 2000 census, but it was not recognized.

When the excess of same-sex couples was noticed, the bureau investigated the effect of sex misreporting by comparing reported sex with the likelihood of the name being of that sex. Almost one-third of same-sex couples were found to be probably opposite sex. With these households reclassified, the same-sex totals dropped to levels consistent with recent ACS estimates and are reported in the “preferred” version.

The next COPAFS meeting will take place on March 16.