To:Census Field Group Meeting Attendees

From:Freedman Consulting, LLC

Date:December 2016

Re:Recap of October 17 Census Field Planning Meeting

This document provides a summary of the October, 17 Census Field Planning Meeting at the Bauman Foundation—a convening of stakeholders involved in carrying out the field operations related to census policy work. Please send any corrections or additions to Luke Freedman (). The memo is organized as follows, reflecting the structure of the meeting:

  1. Introduction and Overview
  1. Top Census Policy Issues
  1. Overview of the Plan for Field Action
  1. Building Tactical Responses from State Coalitions
  1. Brainstorming Ideas for Engaging Groups in Non-Target States
  1. Moving Forward: Areas of Agreement and Next Steps
  1. Final Comments
  1. Appendix: List of participants and agenda from the meeting

I. Introduction and Overview

Gary Bass of the Bauman Foundation and Ethan Frey of the Ford Foundation welcomed everyone to the meeting. The Democracy Funders Census Subgroup has developed a Plan of Action for ensuring a fair and accurate census count in 2020. The plan is divided into three major portions: policy work, funder and partner outreach and engagement, and Get Out the Count efforts.

Current efforts focus on the policy aspect of the work and making sure there is adequate federal funding and smart policy around the census. The plan proposes funding state-based census projects in four states (California, New York, North Carolina, Ohio) and overall field, organizing, and communications work in other states as well.

To guide this policy work, the group has developed a draft Policy Framework document that is divided into three phases: message and material development, engaging allies and outreach, and policy advocacy.Gary Bass ran through key elements of the Policy Framework and noted that much of the day’s discussion will flow from the Policy Framework. Based on the conversation, Gary noted that the Policy Framework would be updated and finalized.

II. Top Census Policy Issues

The morning session focused on an overview of the key census policy activities and issues that will lay the groundwork for the advocacy work.

Census and American Community Survey (ACS)Public Opinion Research

  • Phil Sparks of the Census Project described public opinion research, funded by the Carnegie Corporation of New York, that will help guide messaging strategies. The research is being conducted by Lake Research Partners.
  • Focus groups of African American likely voters and white likely voters were conducted in Richmond, VA on September 7, and a focus group of Latino likely voters was held on September 12 in Philadelphia. This will provide information for developing a survey of likely voters (with oversampling of African Americans and Latinos) after the November election.
  • The findings from this research will not be released to the news media. Instead, the findings are intended to help those who are working on census issues better prepare for talking about the subject.
  • Key findings from the focus groups include:
  • “It’s in the Constitution” was an effective messaging strategy, but no message is a complete home run.However, few know that the census is required by the U.S. Constitution.
  • African Americans and Latinos were more persuaded when the census was connected to the broader importance of fair representation and allocation of resources, particularly for schools.
  • Latino voters were also very worried about the prospect of a Trump presidency and indicated that they would be worried that by filling out the form the administration could use the data against them.
  • It makes sense to talk about the ACS and the census together. No one in the white or African American group had heard of the ACS, and very few in the Latino knew about the ACS.
  • Discussing “undercount” “overcounts” creates confusion.
  • Some participants thought it would be valuable to also oversample the Asian American Pacific Islander population for the survey. In the immediate aftermath of the meeting, the Census Project checked with Lake Research Partners and decided to do the AAPI oversample.

Race and ethnicity questions

  • Arturo Vargas of the NALEO Educational Fund provided an update on the Census Bureau’s redesign of the way they collect and use race and ethnicity data.
  • The Census Bureau has been experimenting with and testing several potential changes to the 2020 Census questions, including moving from two separate race and ethnicity questions to a combined questionand adding a new Middle East–North Africa (MENA) category.
  • At the end of September, the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) issued a notice for public comment (open through October 31, 2016) on its intent to consider limited revisions to the Standards for collecting and publishing federal race & ethnicity data. The scope of potential revisions reflect, in part, findings from the Census Bureau's National Content Test. The Census Bureau will release detailed findings from the NCT in early 2017. OMB will issue additional Federal Register notices with proposed revisions to the Standards in the coming months.
  • The civil rights community is concerned about OMB’s apparent interest in an accelerated process for revising the race and ethnicity Standards, with final action occurring before the Census Bureau releases complete results from a 2015 test of possible revisions to the census race and ethnicity questions.The complete findings from this National Content Test will not likely be available until Jan. 2017.A number of groups worry that the comment period for a second OMB Federal Register notice could be over before they have time to review the data from the National Content Test.
  • The Census Bureau will need to submit the topics to be covered on the census to Congress by April 1 of 2017. The final question wording for the census will need to be submitted to Congress by April 1, 2018.
  • Civil rights groups will be holding ameeting with the Census Bureau and also are likely to ask OMB for a delay in the second Federal Register notice. Update: Many groups filed comments expressing concern about the truncated timeline. It looks like stakeholders’ comments may be having an impact as OMB may be re-evaluating the timeline.

Omnibus Appropriations

  • Terri Ann Lowenthal of the Census Project provided an update on census funding. The Census Bureau is under directive from Congress to keep costs the same or less for the 2020 Census as they were for the 2010 Census.
  • In September,Congress passed and President Obama signed a Continuing Resolution to keep the government funded through early December. The CR keeps most federal agencies funded at FY2016 levels, which is a de facto cut for the Census Bureau since funding for the census increases each year closer to 2020. The CR expires on Dec. 9, requiring Congress to address continued funding for this fiscal year during a lame duck session. It is likely that Congress will consider an omnibus appropriations bill that will fund the Census Bureau for the remainder of the fiscal year, but it also could do shorter-term bills (called minibuses). (Update: It now appears likely that, instead of an Omnibus, full year appropriations bill for FY2017, Congress will consider a second CR that runs through April 28, 2017, leaving the Census Bureau to continue operations at FY16 funding levels, unless Congress approves a “funding anomaly” to increase 2020 Census funding during that period.
  • The Census Project is advocating for funding in line with the president’s $1.634 billion budget request. The Census Project sent letters to Republican and Democratic leaders of the House and Senate Appropriations Committees and Commerce/Justice/Science Subcommittees – signed by about 50 stakeholder organizations – urging adequate funding. Terri Ann also suggested other organizations advocate for adequate funding as well, if they haven’t already.
  • Three major challenges related to the census budget:
  • Insufficient funding.
  • Potential raids on the Census Bureau budget to pay for other programs in the appropriations bill.
  • Policy riders that would undermine the census (for example, making the ACS voluntary or excluding undocumented residents from the count). This last threat is unlikely at this point though.
  • Terri Ann noted that this process will begin again once the president proposes his or her FY2018 budget in February or March. Voices from the field can greatly influence how Congress deals with the budget request from the president.

Internet Issues

  • Indivar Dutta-Gupta of the Georgetown Center on Poverty and Inequality provided a summary of internet issues related to the census. In order to reduce costs and conduct a more accurate count, the Census Bureau is planning to have a majority of responses submitted digitally in 2020.
  • The use of technology is certainly not bad per se, but it’s important that the Census Bureau is aware of the impact any changes will have on hard to count populations. Specific issues include making sure the bureau is still investing adequately on in-person follow-up, data privacy issues, guaranteeing that the internet option is flexible to the needs of different communities, cybersecurity concerns, and ensuring that the bureau has back up plans in the case of technological challenges.
  • The Leadership Conference is working with the Georgetown Center on Poverty and Inequality to put together a report with recommendations for the Census Bureau around the use of technology that will be available in early 2017.
  • As part of this work, The Leadership Conference will be conducting a diagnostic poll about public perceptions of using the internet to collect census data.The polling results and the project recommendations can be used by field groupsto get a better understanding about attitudes regarding the internet option, which we hope will be useful to 2020 Census planning.

Presidential Transition

  • Corrine Yu of The Leadership Conference highlighted the Leadership Conference’s work around the presidential transition.
  • The Leadership Conference is putting together a transition document with heavy involvement from their Census Task Force. They will seek to meet with the president’s transition team and also share a letter to the new Congress with legislative priorities.Recommendations will center around budget and appropriations and ensuring that key decisions related to the 2020 Census will result in the most accurate census possible.
  • One challenge is that Trump’s transition team may be difficult to engage if they win. However, stakeholders have strong relationships with past Republican Census Bureau directors.
  • A key question – and one the next administration needs to be aware of – is whether Census Bureau Director John Thompson wants to serve another term (or part of another term).His term expires at the end of this year. The nomination process could potentially turn into a controversial issue. The Census Bureau can operate without a director, but it will be greatly hobbled at a particularly sensitive time. This might a key topic for field action.

Administrative and Commercial Records

  • Corrine Yu then described that the Census Bureau’s plans to use administrative records collected by federal and state agenciesthrough various programs such as TANF, WIC, and SNAP. It appears that the bureau’s plan has been changing since it first announced use of administrative and commercial records.
  • The bureau has been conducting research into this work, but the effect that reliance on this data will have on the accuracy of the count (particularly in hard to count communities) remains unclear.
  • To consider these issues further (and make sure the Census Bureau is taking these concerns seriously) The Leadership Conference, the Urban Institute, and the Georgetown Center on Poverty and Inequality will be holding a convening in November that bringstogethergovernmental (including key Census Bureau staff) and non-governmental experts in the use of administrative and commercial records.
  • The discussion and ideas arising from this convening will be compiled in a report that will be released in early 2017. Depending on the direction taken by the Census Bureau, this could become a key issue for field action.

Prison Gerrymandering

  • Terry Ao Minnis of Asian Americans Advancing Justice | AAJC explained that the Census Bureau had asked in 2015 for comments on their 2010 policy of counting prisoners where they are incarcerated rather than at their home place of residence. 96% of comments advocated for counting them at their home place of residence for the 2020 Census.
  • The Census Bureau issued proposed residency rules in the summer of 2016 that did not change the criteria for counting incarcerated individuals. The bureau received78,000 comments representing about 100,000 individuals(including a letter from 13 Senators and one from 35 foundations, including Census Subgroup members).
  • It seems likely that the Census Bureau wasn’t fully cognizant of how short the average prison stay is and the fact that prisoners often move from facility to facility.
  • While the comment period has closed, advocates can continue to argue for the need to change in policy (this could include letters or op-eds).There is no required deadline for the Census Bureau to release their final decision, but it is expected before the end of the year or very early next year.

Undercount

  • Bill O’Hare of O’Hare Data and Demographics and a consultant to the Annie E. Casey Foundation provided an overview of undercounted populations and how to address these challenges.
  • The net undercount refers to the net total of those who are undercounted combined with those who are counted twice. The key problem is the differential undercount, the fact that not all groups and places are undercounted at the same rate.
  • Children under the age of five are one the groups at the greatest risk of being undercounted (in 2010 there was a net undercount of one million among this population). One potential reason is that heads of the household may not always realize that young children should be included.
  • Other groups with high differential undercount rates include communities of color, low income urban and rural households, and renters.
  • Five-point plan for reducing undercount of children:
  • Continue conducting research.
  • Implement policy changes (and make sure the Census Bureau is aware of these challenges).
  • Set clear expectations for the contractor who carries out the advertising and promotion for the census.
  • Engage advocates and trusted voices from outside of government.
  • Evaluate the Census Bureau’s efforts carefully.
  • Ensuring that the Census Bureau has updated record of addressees (i.e.,the Local Update of Census Addresses Program or LUCA program) was also identified as a priority.
  • There was discussion about the planned undercount project that The Leadership Conference, Bill O’Hare, Coalition on Human Needs, the Children’s Leadership Council and others will be undertaking. It is quite possible that the project will need field support.

Census and Geographic Distribution of Federal Funds

  • Andrew Reamer of George Washington University has received a planning grant from the Democracy Funders Census Subgroup to explore how to conduct research on the distribution of funding based on the 2020 Census.
  • Andrew Reamer did similar research for the 2010 Census while at the Brookings Institution. Meeting participants familiar with the 2010 effort commented on how valuable the statistics were in highlighting the costs of an undercount.
  • An advisory group of funders and stakeholder groups has been assembled to help guide the research. As a next step, Andrew Reamer is putting together a survey on what stakeholders would like to get out of the research, how they plan to use information on the distribution of funding, and which format is most helpful to stakeholders. That survey will be distributed to stakeholders shortly and one representative of each organization should fill it out.
  • Once fully defined, funded, and implemented, the data will be available to field groups to highlight the impact of undercounts on allocations of federal funds in their states/localities.

Mapping “Hard to Count” Populations

  • In the previous census cycle Steven Romalewski of the City University of New York Graduate Center – with funding from Hagedorn Foundation – created an interactive digitalmapping service highlighting personal and housing characteristics by region that are closely tied with low census response rates.
  • Steve Romalewski is looking to do an expanded version of this mapping again in 2020. In 2010 the work was done at the last minute, this time around there is the opportunity to do a much more strategic mapping that will be useful to stakeholders (such as for policy work) earlier in the cycle.
  • New features could include showing hard to count populations over timeand formulating it so that’s useful for redistricting as well. This version would be an interactive, searchable map.

III. Overview of the Plan for Field Action