Catálogo de publicaciones - libros

Over the past 60 years, the overall accuracy of the U.S. Decennial Census has steadily improved. But some groups still experience higher net undercounts than other groups in the Census. The issue of differential Census undercounts is introduced in this Chapter along with some of the key concepts related to measuring the accuracy of Census counts, sometimes called Census coverage. Some of the key terminology is also discussed in this Chapter along with a description of the intended audience for this publication. The contents of the publication are described Chapter by Chapter.

This Chapter provides readers with many reasons why the Census count is so important, including the fact that Census data are the backbone of our democratic system of government. In addition, Census-related figures are used to distribute more than $800 billion in federal funding each year to states and localities. Countless decisions in the public and private sectors are based on Census data. Moreover, the impact of flaws in Census counts often last a decade because population estimates, projections, and survey weights, are derived from Census counts.

The two primary methods used to assess Census coverage in the U.S. are Demographic Analysis (DA) and Dual-Systems Estimates (DSE). These two methods are introduced in this Chapter along with some of their strengths and weaknesses.

The 2010 Census coverage error for the total population was very small by international and historic standards, but that masks some large coverage differences among groups. Basic differences in Census coverage by age, sex, race, Hispanic Origin, and tenure are explored in this Chapter. Key findings include, young children (age 0–4) have a higher net undercount than any other age group; males have a higher net undercount than females; Blacks, American Indians on reservations, and Hispanics have relatively high net undercounts; and renters have higher net undercount rates than homeowners. This Chapter is meant to provide an overview and foundation for much of the rest of the book.

People pass through different family situations and living arrangements as they age and many of these changes over a lifetime are related to changes in the likelihood of being missed in the Census. In this Chapter, some of the biggest differences in Census coverage by age are examined and some ideas about why people are missed or overcounted are explored. Young children age 0–4 had the highest net undercount rate and highest omissions rate of any age group in the 2010 Census. The college-age population (age 18–24) and elderly people (over age 60) had net overcounts.

Males and females often play different roles in society at different ages and these can impact family situations and living arrangements related to the likelihood of being missed in the Census. In this Chapter, examination of differences in Census coverage by sex show that males generally have Census net undercount rates while females have net overcounts. Since 1940, the net undercount rates of both males and females have improved a lot but the differential between males and females has not narrowed.

The net undercount for Hispanics in the 2010 Census was relatively high at 1.5% compared to a net overcount of 0.8% for the Non-Hispanic White Alone population. The omissions rate for Hispanics (7.7%) was about twice the rate for Non-Hispanic White Alone (3.8%). Hispanic men age 18–49 had net undercount rates over 5% and omissions rates over 10% in the 2010 Census.

In the 2010 Census, the Black population had the highest net undercount rate of any major race/Hispanic group. Based on the Demographic Analysis method there was a net undercount of 2.5% for the Black Alone population compared to a net overcount of 0.5% for Non-Blacks. Black males in their 20s, 30s, ands 40s had exceptionally high net undercount rates and high omissions rates. Historically, the Black population, and Black men in particular, experienced high net undercount rates in the Census. While the net undercount rates of Blacks have decreased over time, the differential net undercount between Blacks and Non-Blacks has improved little since 1940.

In the 2010 Census, the net undercount for Asians Alone or in Combination was so small it rounds to zero compared to a net overcount of 0.8% for the Non-Hispanic White Alone population. Asians also had a relatively low omissions rate in the 2010 Census. The omissions rate for Asians Alone or in Combination (5.3%) was slightly higher than the rate for Non-Hispanic White Alone (3.8%). The Asian age/sex group with the highest net undercount rate was Asian Alone or in Combination males age 18–29 who had a net undercount rate of 2.2% in 2010.

Overall, the net undercount of American Indians and Alaskan Natives Alone or in Combination is relatively low (0.2%) but some subgroups within this population have high net undercount and omissions rates. The omissions rate for American Indians and Alaskan Natives Alone or in Combination was 7.6% which is double the rate for Non-Hispanic White Alone (3.8%). Also, Census coverage for American Indians and Alaskan Natives living on reservations was much worse than for this population living elsewhere. The net undercount rate for American Indians Alone and Alaskan Natives or in Combination living on reservations was 4.9% in the 2010 Census.