The American Community Survey:
Development, Implementation, and
Issues for Congress
Jennifer D. Williams
Specialist in American National Government
June 17, 2013
Congressional Research Service
7-5700
www.crs.gov
R41532
CRS Report for Congress
Pr
epared for Members and Committees of Congress

---

The American Community Survey: Development, Implementation, and Issues for Congress

Summary
The American Community Survey (ACS), implemented nationwide in 2005 and 2006, is the U.S.
Bureau of the Census’s (Census Bureau’s) replacement for the decennial census long form,
which, from 1940 to 2000, gathered detailed socioeconomic and housing data from a
representative population sample in conjunction with the once-a-decade count of all U.S.
residents. Unlike the long form, with its approximately 17% sample of U.S. housing units in
2000, the ACS is a “rolling sample” or “continuous measurement” survey of about 295,000
housing units a month, totaling about 3.54 million a year (an increase from the 2005 to 2011
sample size of about 250,000 housing units monthly, totaling about 3 million annually). The data
are aggregated to produce one-year, three-year, and five-year estimates. As were the long-form
data, ACS estimates are used in program formulas that determine the annual allocation of certain
federal funds, currently more than $450 billion, to states and localities.
The ACS has several other features in common with the long form: the topics covered are largely
the same; responses are mandatory; and the Bureau may follow up, by telephone or in-person
visits, with households that do not submit completed questionnaires. The ACS is conducted under
the authority of Title 13, United States Code, Sections 141 and 193; so was the long form. Title
44, Section 3501, the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, and its implementing regulations require
federal agencies to obtain Office of Management and Budget approval before collecting
information from the public. On the long form, the Bureau could gather only data that were
mandatory for particular programs, required by federal law or regulations, or needed for the
Bureau’s operations. Likewise, the ACS can collect only necessary information.
The limited ACS sample size makes longer cumulations of data necessary to generate reliable
estimates for less populous areas. Yearly averages have been available since 2006, but only for
geographic areas with 65,000 or more people. The first three-year period estimates were released
in 2008 for areas with at least 20,000 people. The first five-year averages became available in
2010 for areas from the most populous to those with fewer than 20,000 people. A concern noted
by some data users is that the ACS sample size results in less-detailed five-year data products for
smaller geographic areas—census tracts and block groups—than were available every 10 years
from the long form. A related issue is data quality, especially for small areas.
An ongoing concern for some Members of Congress and their constituents is that responses to the
ACS are required. The Bureau’s 2003 test of a voluntary versus mandatory ACS showed a 20.7-
percentage-point drop in the overall ACS response rate when answers were optional. The Bureau
estimated in 2003 and 2004 that if the survey became voluntary, maintaining data reliability
would necessitate increasing the planned annual sample size from about 3 million to 3.7 million
housing units, at an additional cost of $59.2 million per year in FY2005 dollars (re-estimated at
$66.5 million per year, as of FY2011). In the 113th Congress, companion bills H.R. 1078,
introduced on March 12, 2013, by Representative Ted Poe, and S. 530, introduced on the same
day by Senator Rand Paul, would make almost all ACS responses optional. H.R. 1638, introduced
on April 18, 2013, by Representative Jeff Duncan, would repeal the authority of the Department
of Commerce Secretary and the Census Bureau, a Commerce Department agency, to conduct the
ACS and any other surveys or censuses except the decennial census. This census would be
limited to counting the total population of every state. No action beyond committee referrals and
one subcommittee referral has occurred on the bills.

Congressional Research Service

---

The American Community Survey: Development, Implementation, and Issues for Congress

Contents
Introduction ...................................................................................................................................... 1
Reasons for Adopting the ACS ........................................................................................................ 2
Development and Launching of the ACS ........................................................................................ 3
Developing a Prototype ............................................................................................................. 4
Early Testing .............................................................................................................................. 4
The Demonstration Phase .......................................................................................................... 5
Full Implementation .................................................................................................................. 6
ACS Data Releases on the Web ....................................................................................................... 7
The Determination of Questionnaire Contents ................................................................................ 8
Issues Concerning the ACS.............................................................................................................. 9
Sample Size ............................................................................................................................. 10
Public Perception ..................................................................................................................... 11
Testing a Mandatory Versus Voluntary ACS .................................................................................. 14
Proposals in the 111th, 112th, and 113th Congresses for a Voluntary ACS or an End to the
ACS ............................................................................................................................................ 16
Possible ACS Options for Congress .............................................................................................. 19

Appendixes
Appendix. ACS Topics................................................................................................................... 21

Contacts
Author Contact Information........................................................................................................... 24

Congressional Research Service

---

The American Community Survey: Development, Implementation, and Issues for Congress

Introduction
In the mid-1990s, the U.S. Bureau of the Census (Census Bureau) began developing and testing a
new means of data collection called a “rolling sample” or “continuous measurement” survey1 that
became the American Community Survey (ACS). Implemented nationwide in 2005 and 2006, the
ACS currently collects data from a representative sample of about 295,000 housing units a month,
totaling about 3.54 million a year (an increase from the 2005 to 2011 sample size of
approximately 250,000 housing units monthly, totaling about 3 million annually). The data are
aggregated over time to produce large enough samples for reliable2 estimates, with longer
cumulations of data necessary in less populous areas. The Bureau issues one-year estimates for
the most populous areas, those with at least 65,000 people; three-year estimates for areas with
20,000 or more people; and five-year estimates for areas from the most populous to those having
fewer than 20,000 residents.
Although conducted separately from the once-a-decade count of the whole U.S. population, the
ACS is considered a part of the decennial census program3 because it replaced the census long
form, which covered a representative sample of housing units every 10 years from 1940 through
2000.4 In the 2000 census, a set of basic questions on a short form went to most housing units; a
sample of units—about 17% overall—received a long form containing the short-form questions
and additional questions that collected detailed data on socioeconomic and housing
characteristics. The data served myriad governmental, business, and research purposes and were
used in program formulas that determined the annual allocation of various federal funds to states
and localities. ACS data, which serve the same purposes but are much more current than the long-
form estimates were, are used to distribute more than $450 billion a year in funding.5 Thus, the
timeliness and quality of ACS data are important for many reasons, but especially to promote the
equitable allocation of scarce public resources.

1 The idea for a rolling sample survey originated with statistician Leslie Kish. When interviewed toward the end of his
life, Kish described the concept this way: “I want to call it rolling sample or rolling census because instead of taking the
sample or census all at once, as you go through successive periods, you roll the samples gradually over the whole
population. The name gives the idea.” Martin Frankel and Benjamin King, “A Conversation with Leslie Kish,”
Statistical Science, vol. 11, no. 1 (February 1996), p. 79. For further discussion, see Leslie Kish, “Population Counts
from Cumulated Samples,” pp. 5-50 in U.S. Congress, House Committee on Post Office and Civil Service,
Subcommittee on Census and Population, Using Cumulated Rolling Samples to Integrate Census and Survey
Operations of the Census Bureau: An Analysis, Review, and Response, committee print, 97th Cong., 1st sess., June 26,
1981, CP 97-2 (Washington: GPO, 1981).
The Census Bureau has explained the rolling sample concept as follows: “A rolling sample design jointly selects k
nonoverlapping probability samples, each of which constitutes 1/F of the entire population. One sample is interviewed
each time period until all of the sample has been interviewed after k periods.” U.S. Census Bureau, American
Community Survey, Design and Methodology (Washington: GPO, 2009), glossary, p. 13.
2 “An indicator is reliable if it consistently assigns the same numbers to some phenomenon.” Kenneth J. Meier and
Jeffrey L. Brunei, Applied Statistics for Public Administration (Belmont, CA: Wadsworth, Inc., 1987), p. 98.
3 U.S. Census Bureau, “Policy on New Content for the American Community Survey,” p. 1, at http://www.census.gov/
acs/www/Downloads/operations_admin/ACS_Content_Policy.pdf.
4 U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey, Design and Methodology (Washington: GPO, 2009), p. iii.
5 Testimony of then-Census Bureau Director Robert M. Groves in U.S. Congress, House Committee on Oversight and
Government Reform, Subcommittee on Health Care, District of Columbia, Census, and the National Archives, The
Pros and Cons of Making the Census Bureau’s American Community Survey Voluntary, hearing, 112th Cong., 2nd sess.,
March 6, 2012, at http://oversight.house.gov/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/3-6-12-Census-Groves.pdf. Dr. Groves left
the Bureau on August 10, 2012. Thomas L. Mesenbourg Jr. is the Bureau’s acting Director.
Congressional Research Service
1

---

The American Community Survey: Development, Implementation, and Issues for Congress

Discussing in 2001 how the ACS evolved, the late Charles H. Alexander of the Census Bureau
recalled that in the early 1990s
[t]here was renewed Congressional interest in intercensal characteristics data ... and a
“continuous measurement” alternative to the census long form was considered as part of the
research for Census 2000, starting in 1992. [The] rolling sample design was eventually
proposed for this purpose because it provided flexibility in making estimates, as well as the
potential for efficient data collection.... “Continuous Measurement” was later renamed the
“American Community Survey.... ”
The proposed ACS was not adopted for Census 2000, but after limited testing during 1996-
1998, the ACS methodology was implemented in 36 counties for the years 1999-2001, so
that ACS results could be compared to the 2000 census long form data. There was also a
large-scale test in 2000, for a state-representative annual sample ... called the Census 2000
Supplementary Survey, of collecting long-form data separately from the census, using the
ACS questionnaire.6
He explained that
[f]or the main ACS objective, to replace the census long form as a source of detailed
descriptive statistics, we plan to use 5-year ACS cumulations, for a data product similar to
traditional long form “summary files”. This is the shortest time period for which the ACS
sampling error is judged to be reasonably close to that of the census long form. All sizes and
types of geographic areas would be included on these 5-year data files....
For individual areas, the most prominently published data will be one-year averages for areas
greater than 65,000 population, and 3-year averages for areas greater than 20,000, in addition
to the 5-year averages for all areas.7
Reasons for Adopting the ACS
The Census Bureau had two main reasons for replacing the long form with the ACS. First was the
intention to increase public acceptance of, and response to, the decennial enumeration by
decoupling the count of the whole population from the sample-survey part of the census.8 The
Bureau strives, never entirely successfully, to achieve a complete count because it is a
constitutional requirement for apportioning seats in the U.S. House of Representatives, and
because the data serve many other important national, state, and local purposes.9 According to a

6 Charles H. Alexander, “Still Rolling: Leslie Kish’s ‘Rolling Samples’ and the American Community Survey,” Survey
Methodology, vol. 28, no. 1 (June 2002), p. 36; the article earlier was a paper presented at the Proceedings of Statistics
Canada Symposium 2001, Achieving Data Quality in a Statistical Agency: A Methodological Perspective.
7 Ibid., p. 38.
8 See, for example, testimony of then-Census Bureau Director Kenneth Prewitt in U.S. Congress, House Committee on
Government Reform, Subcommittee on the Census, The American Community Survey—A Replacement for the Census
Long Form?, hearing, 106th Cong., 2nd sess., July 20, 2000, no. 106-246 (Washington: GPO, 2001), p. 29: “The ACS
will revolutionize the way we take the decennial census and for the better. With good reason, the Congress has been
concerned that the long form is a drag on the decennial census, that it introduces a complication in carrying out the
basic constitutional purpose of the census. The best solution is to radically simplify the census by eliminating the long
form.”
9 Article I, Section 2, clause 3 of the Constitution, as modified by Section 2 of the Fourteenth Amendment, mandates a
count of the “whole number of persons in each State” every 10 years for House apportionment. Decennial census data
(continued...)
Congressional Research Service
2

---

The American Community Survey: Development, Implementation, and Issues for Congress

2008 Government Accountability Office (GAO) report on the projected mail response rate10 of
69% for the 2010 census, the Bureau calculated that eliminating the long form and moving to a
short-form-only census would add one percentage point to the 2000 census initial mail return rate
of 65%.11 The second reason for adopting the ACS was to produce more timely information,12
which was particularly needed in program formulas used to distribute certain federal funds to
states and localities. Detailed socioeconomic and housing data not only were collected just once a
decade on the long form, but also were up to three years old by the time the Bureau processed and
released them. In 1976, Congress authorized,13 but did not fund, a mid-decade census that would
have provided more current data.14 The ACS could be viewed as substituting for the never-
implemented mid-decade census as well as the long form.
Development and Launching of the ACS
Before the ACS became fully operational, in 2005 and 2006, it underwent extensive development
and testing, which began in the mid-1990s. The steps that led to full implementation are discussed
briefly below.

(...continued)
are used, too, for within-state redistricting and, like ACS data, as a component of certain program formulas that
determine the annual allocation of more than $450 billion in federal funds to states and localities. For background
information about the decennial census and a discussion of the 2010 census, see CRS Report R40551, The 2010
Decennial Census: Background and Issues, by Jennifer D. Williams.
10 The “mail response rate” is “the percentage of census forms completed and returned for all housing units that were
on the Bureau’s address file eligible to receive a census questionnaire delivered by mail or by a census enumerator. The
denominator used in calculating the response rate includes vacant housing units” and other addresses where
questionnaires were determined to be “undeliverable” or that were “deleted through other census operations.” U.S.
Government Accountability Office, 2010 Census: Census Bureau Needs Procedures for Estimating the Response Rate
and Selecting for Testing Methods to Increase Response Rate, GAO-08-1012, September 2008, p. 6. Another measure
of response is the “mail return rate,” the percentage of questionnaires completed and returned from “occupied housing
units with deliverable addresses.” Ibid., footnote 6, p. 6.
11 When the Bureau compared 2000 census short-form and long-form mail response rates, it found a nine-percentage-
point higher rate for the short form. Constance F. Citro, Daniel L. Cork, and Janet L. Norwood, eds., The 2000 Census:
Counting Under Adversity (Washington: National Academies Press, 2004), p. 100. Because the long form went to only
about 17% of housing units in 2000, however, its “overall effect on the response rate estimate was small.... ” U.S.
Government Accountability Office, 2010 Census: Census Bureau Needs Procedures for Estimating the Response Rate
and Selecting for Testing Methods to Increase Response Rate, GAO-08-1012, September 2008, pp. 12-13.
The Bureau’s projected mail response rate of 69% for the 2010 census was based on more than limiting the census to a
short form, for a one-percentage-point increase over the initial 65% response rate in 2000. The projection also assumed
a seven-percentage-point increase in 2010 from mailing replacement questionnaires to selected nonresponding
households and a four-percentage-point decrease because of generally declining public participation in surveys. Ibid.,
p. 12.
The National Academy of Sciences’ Committee on National Statistics, Panel to Review the 2000 Census, reported a
mail response rate of 67%, two percentage points higher than the earlier-reported 65% rate. Constance F. Citro, Daniel
L. Cork, and Janet L. Norwood, eds., The 2000 Census: Counting Under Adversity (Washington: National Academies
Press, 2004), p. 100.
12 U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey, Design and Methodology (Washington: GPO, 2009), p. 2-1.
13 An act to Amend Title 13, United States Code, to Provide for a Mid-Decade Census of Population, and for Other
Purposes, P.L. 94-521; 90 Stat. 2459; 13 U.S.C. 141(d).
14 U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey, Design and Methodology (Washington: GPO, 2009), p. 2-1.
Congressional Research Service
3

---

The American Community Survey: Development, Implementation, and Issues for Congress

Developing a Prototype
The Bureau’s ACS designers decided, while developing a prototype of the survey, that it would
have several features in common with the decennial census: survey questionnaires would be
mailed to housing units, and completed questionnaires would be returned by mail;15 responses
would be mandatory; and the Bureau would follow up, by telephone and, as necessary, in-person
visits, with households that did not fill out and return their questionnaires.16
Unlike the census, however, the ACS would collect data continuously from independent monthly
samples of the population and would aggregate the data over time to produce estimates17 that
would be controlled to population and housing estimates.18 The designers “initially suggested” an
ACS sample size of 500,000 housing units per month, but rejected it as prohibitively expensive
and “determined that a monthly sample size of 250,000 would generate an acceptable level of
reliability.”19
Early Testing
Limited testing of ACS operations began in 1995 in Rockland County, New York; Brevard
County, Florida; Multnomah County, Oregon; and Fulton County, Pennsylvania.20
In 1996, the Bureau extended testing to areas with varied geographic and demographic
characteristics, including Harris County, Texas; Fort Bend County, Texas; Douglas County,
Nebraska; Franklin County, Ohio; and Otero County, New Mexico. This testing led to further

15 The Internet response option for the ACS, which the Bureau introduced in January 2013, altered the mail-out, mail-
back feature of the survey. Now, the Bureau sends a letter notifying most households selected to participate in the ACS
that they can access and complete the survey online. Any household that does so within about two weeks of receiving
the notification letter does not receive a questionnaire by mail. Any household that does not respond online within this
time frame receives a mailed questionnaire with instructions to answer and return it by mail. U.S. Census Bureau,
“Census Bureau to Offer American Community Survey Internet Response,” press release CB12-247, December 17,
2012.
16 U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey, Design and Methodology (Washington: GPO, 2009), p. 2-1. The
Bureau attempts to reach all nonrespondents by telephone, but conducts personal visits with a subsample of the original
ACS sample who have not answered the survey.
17 Ibid., p. 2-2.
18 The Bureau has explained “controlled” estimates as follows: “During the ACS weighting process, the official county-
level population and housing unit estimates are used as controls. Weights are adjusted so that ACS estimates conform
to these controls. This is done to improve person and housing unit coverage and to reduce the variability of the ACS
estimates. Total population and total housing unit estimates are controlled for states and counties. Combinations of age,
sex, [race,] and Hispanic origin may also be controlled.” U.S. Census Bureau, “American FactFinder, Glossary,” at
http://factfinder2.census.gov/help/en/american_factfinder_help.htm#glossary/glossary.htm.
The Bureau’s population estimates program, which is separate from the ACS, produces the official annual estimates of
the resident population for the total United States, states and the District of Columbia, counties, incorporated places and
minor civil divisions, and metropolitan areas. Estimates by basic population characteristics—age, sex, race, and
Hispanic ethnicity—are available yearly for the nation, states and the District of Columbia, and counties. The estimates
are benchmarked to the most recent decennial census and rely mainly on administrative records, such as birth and death
records from the National Center for Health Statistics, Medicare enrollment data, and Internal Revenue Service tax
return data on addresses, to update the census numbers. U.S. Census Bureau, “Population Estimates,” at
http://www.census.gov/popest/estimates.html.
19 U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey, Design and Methodology (Washington: GPO, 2009), p. 2-1.
20 Ibid., p. 2-2.
Congressional Research Service
4

---

The American Community Survey: Development, Implementation, and Issues for Congress

research into small-area estimation, estimation methods, nonresponse follow-up, weighting in
ACS tests, item nonresponse, response rates, and the quality of data for rural areas.21
In 1998, operational testing expanded to Kershaw County, South Carolina; Richland County,
South Carolina; and Broward County (which the Bureau substituted for Brevard County), Florida.
Adding the two South Carolina counties enabled the Bureau to compare ACS test data with
results from the 1998 dress rehearsal for the 2000 census, which included these counties.22
Testing was extended in 1999 to 36 counties in 26 states, “selected to represent different
combinations of county population size, difficulty of enumeration, and 1990-1995 population
growth,” as well as “racial and ethnic diversity, migrant or seasonal populations, American Indian
reservations, changing economic conditions, and predominant occupation or industry types.”23 In
addition, during 1999 and 2001, the 36 counties were test sites for enumerating residents of group
quarters (GQs), such as college residence halls, residential treatment centers, skilled nursing
facilities, group homes, military barracks, correctional facilities, and workers’ dormitories; and
facilities for homeless people.24 These tests, which concentrated on the methodology for visiting
group quarters, selecting samples of residents, and conducting interviews,25 “led to modification
of sampling techniques and revisions to data collection methods.”26
Although the primary objective of this testing phase “was to determine the viability of the
methodologies utilized, it also generated usable data.”27 Data were released in 1999 on
“demographic, social, economic, and housing topics.”28
The Demonstration Phase
In 2000, the Bureau undertook a larger-scale test, or demonstration, originally called the “Census
2000 Supplementary Survey,”29 to “assure Congress and other data users” that nationwide

21 Ibid.
22 Ibid.
23 Ibid.
24 The Bureau classifies living quarters as either housing units, by far the dominant type, or group quarters. A group-
quarters facility is “owned or managed by an entity or organization providing housing and/or services for the residents.
These services may include custodial or medical care, as well as other types of assistance, and residency is commonly
restricted to those receiving these services.” Ibid., p. 8-1.
The ACS does not include certain types of group quarters: “domestic violence shelters, soup kitchens, regularly
scheduled mobile food vans, targeted nonsheltered outdoor locations, crews of commercial maritime vessels, natural
disaster shelters, and dangerous encampments.” They are excluded due to “[c]oncerns about privacy and the
operational feasibility of repeated interviewing for a continuing survey, rather than once a decade for a census.... ”
“ACS estimates of the total population,” however, “are controlled to be consistent with the Population Estimates
Program estimate of the GQ resident population from all GQs, even those excluded from the ACS.” Ibid., p. 4-9.
25 ACS group-quarters data collection differs from the operation used for most housing units. Group-quarters data are
gathered by field representatives, who “may obtain the facility information by conducting either a personal visit or a
telephone interview with the GQ contact.” This interview determines whether the field representative “samples all,
some, or none of the residents at a sampled facility for person-level interviews.” Ibid., p. 8-1.
26 Ibid., p. 2-2.
27 Ibid., p. 2-3.
28 Ibid.
29 See Charles H. Alexander, “Still Rolling: Leslie Kish’s ‘Rolling Samples’ and the American Community Survey,”
Survey Methodology, vol. 28, no. 1 (June 2002), p. 36.
Congressional Research Service
5

---

The American Community Survey: Development, Implementation, and Issues for Congress

implementation of the ACS was feasible and that the rolling sample survey could produce
information comparable in quality and reliability to long-form data.30
The demonstration was conducted in 1,239 of the nation’s 3,141 counties, the 36 ACS test
counties and 1,203 newly added counties. The number of housing units sampled annually
increased from 165,000 in 1999 to 866,000 in 2000.
From 2001 through 2004, the Bureau issued 11 reports analyzing various aspects of the
demonstration phase.31 Overall, according to this analysis, the demonstration showed the ACS to
be a success and supported proceeding with it, but with certain refinements. The demonstration’s
“planned tasks were completed on time and within budget, and the data collected met basic
Census Bureau quality standards.”32 The ACS “was well-managed, was achieving the desired
response rates, and had functional quality control procedures.”33 The ACS and census 2000 long-
form estimates of economic characteristics were comparable. The same was true of social
characteristics, except for the estimates of disability and ancestry. The analysis recommended
further research concerning these discrepancies, and other research to reduce variance34 in ACS
estimates below the county level of geography.35 Moreover, the analysis found that although the
“ACS methodology was sound, its improvement needed to be an ongoing activity.”36
At congressional direction,37 part of the demonstration involved a test of voluntary versus
mandatory compliance with the ACS. The test and its results, which have implications for ACS
response rates, survey costs, and data reliability, are discussed later in this report.
Full Implementation
Full implementation of the housing unit component of the ACS occurred in January 2005, with
the survey’s expansion to all 3,141 U.S. counties38 and coverage of approximately 250,000
housing units per month, for a total of about 3 million a year.39 In January 2006, with an annual

30 U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey, Design and Methodology (Washington: GPO, 2009), p. 2-3.
31 The 11 reports are available on the Bureau’s website. See U.S. Census Bureau, Meeting 21st Century Demographic
Data Needs—Implementing the American Community Survey, at http://www.census.gov/acs/www/library/by_series/
implementing_the_acs/. The topics include assessments of ACS operational feasibility and survey quality and
comparisons of ACS with 2000 census demographic, social, economic, and housing characteristics.
32 U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey, Design and Methodology (Washington: GPO, 2009), p. 2-3.
33 Ibid.
34 “Sampling error,” as the Bureau has explained, “is the difference between an estimate based on a sample and the
corresponding value that would be obtained if the estimate were based on the entire population.... Measures of the
magnitude of sampling error, such as the variance and the standard error (the square root of the variance), reflect the
variation in the estimates over all possible samples that could have been selected from the population using the same
sampling methodology.” Ibid., p. 12-1.
35 Ibid., p. 2-4.
36 Ibid., p. 2-3.
37 U.S. Congress, Conference Committee, Making Further Continuing Appropriations for the Fiscal Year 2003, and for
Other Purposes (Consolidated Appropriations Resolution, 2003), conference report to accompany H.J.Res. 2, 108th
Cong., 1st sess., H.Rept. 108-10 (Washington: GPO, 2003), p. 689.
38 Also in 2005, the Puerto Rico Community Survey, the ACS-equivalent there, expanded to all 78 Puerto Rican
municipios. The present report discusses only the ACS in the 50 states and the District of Columbia.
39 As previously noted, the current ACS sample size is about 295,000 housing units per month, totaling about 3.54
million per year.
Congressional Research Service
6

---

The American Community Survey: Development, Implementation, and Issues for Congress

sample of approximately 20,000 group quarters, the Bureau fully implemented this part of the
ACS.40
ACS Data Releases on the Web
In mid-2006, the Bureau began releasing, on its American FactFinder website,41 annual ACS
population and housing unit profiles for geographic areas—including congressional districts—
with 65,000 or more people.42 An estimate released in any given year is a period estimate, an
average of data collected in every month during the previous year. Thus, for example, the data
issued in 2006 represent information gathered throughout 2005, not at a particular point in 2005.
The first three-year period estimates, for areas with at least 20,000 people, became available in
2008. They represent data collected in 2005, 2006, and 2007.43 The second three-year set,
released in 2009, covers 2006 through 2008.44 The latest three-year averages, for 2009 through
2011, were released on October 25, 2012.45
In areas with fewer than 20,000 people, generating an ACS sample large enough to provide
estimates similar in accuracy to long-form estimates requires, as noted at the beginning of this
report, data collection over a five-year period.46 The first five-year averages, of data gathered
from 2005 through 2009, were released on December 14, 2010,47 and five-year estimates are to be
made available in every subsequent year. Accordingly, on December 6, 2012, the Bureau posted
the most recent five-year averages, for 2007 through 2011.48
The many tables of ACS data shown in American FactFinder include, beside each estimate, the
margin of sampling error associated with it. As the Bureau has explained, “a margin of error is
the difference between an estimate and its upper or lower confidence bounds. Confidence bounds
can be created by adding the margin of error to the estimate (for an upper bound) and subtracting
the margin of error from the estimate (for a lower bound).”49 All published margins of error for
the ACS are based on a 90% confidence level. That is, the data user can be 90% certain that the
true value of an ACS estimate lies between its upper and lower confidence bounds.50 The Bureau

40 U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey, Design and Methodology (Washington: GPO, 2009), pp. 2-1 and
2-4.
41 U.S. Census Bureau, “American FactFinder,” at http://factfinder2.census.gov/faces/nav/jsf/pages/index.xhtml.
42 U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey, Design and Methodology (Washington: GPO, 2009), p. 2-4.
43 Ibid.
44 U.S. Census Bureau, “American Community Survey, 2008 Release Schedule,” at http://www.census.gov/acs/www/
data_documentation/2008_release_schedule/.
45 U.S. Census Bureau, “American FactFinder, News and Notes,” at http://factfinder2.census.gov/faces/nav/jsf/pages/
newsandnotes_listing.xhtml.
46 U.S. Census Bureau, A Compass for Understanding and Using American Community Survey Data: What Congress
Needs to Know (Washington: GPO, 2008), p. 5.
47 U.S. Census Bureau, “American Community Survey, 2005-2009 ACS 5-Year Estimates,” at http://www.census.gov/
acs/www/data_documentation/2009_release/.
48 U.S. Census Bureau, “American FactFinder, News and Notes,” at http://factfinder2.census.gov/faces/nav/jsf/pages/
newsandnotes_listing.xhtml.
49 U.S. Census Bureau, “Quick Guide to the American Community Survey (ACS) Products in American FactFinder,”
September 2010, pp. 12-13. Italics in original.
50 Ibid., p. 13. Nonsampling error, the other component of total survey error, includes “errors that occur during data
(continued...)
Congressional Research Service
7

---

The American Community Survey: Development, Implementation, and Issues for Congress

gave the following illustration using a one-year estimate from 2007. The estimate for the
percentage of children under age 18 below the poverty level in Mississippi “is 29.3% and the
margin of error is +/- 1.2.” The data user can be 90% “certain that the true value is between
28.1% and 30.5%. This is calculated by first subtracting the margin of error (1.2%) from the
estimate (29.3%), giving the lower bound for the estimate (28.1%).” Then, to calculate the upper
bound, the data user adds “the margin of error (1.2%) to the estimate (29.3%), to get 30.5%.”51
The Determination of Questionnaire Contents
Those who access ACS data tables in American FactFinder will see that the survey covers a broad
array of topics, which are summarized in the Appendix to this report. The brief explanation or
description after each topic was adapted from the ACS questionnaire. Although—as the
Appendix indicates—the questionnaire is quite detailed, the items on it, like the predecessor
long-form items, underwent a precise selection process. A 2006 policy statement by the Bureau52
pointed out that Title 44, United States Code, Section 3501, the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
(PRA), and its implementing regulations53 require federal agencies to obtain Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) approval before collecting information from the public.
On the long form, the Bureau could ask only for data that were
• mandatory: “a current federal law ... explicitly called for the use of decennial
census data for a particular federal program”;
• required: “it was unequivocally clear that a federal law (or implementing
regulation) required the use of specific data and the decennial census was the
historical or only source of data”; or
• programmatic: “the data were necessary for Census Bureau operational needs.”54
“In accordance with the PRA,” the policy statement continued, “the OMB, in consultation with
the Census Bureau, is responsible for approving new content for the ACS.”55 Factors to be
considered include
frequency of data collection; the level of geography needed ... and whether any other source
of data would meet the requestor’s need in lieu of ... the ACS. The Census Bureau recognizes
and appreciates the interests of federal partners and stakeholders in the collection of data on
the ACS. The fact that respondents’ participation ... is mandatory requires that the OMB will
only approve, and the Census Bureau will only ask, necessary questions. On a periodic basis,

(...continued)
collection (for example, nonresponse error, response error, and interviewer error) or data capture.... ” U.S. Census
Bureau, American Community Survey, Design and Methodology (Washington: GPO, 2009), glossary, p. 11.
51 U.S. Census Bureau, “Quick Guide to the American Community Survey (ACS) Products in American FactFinder,”
September 2010, p. 13.
52 U.S. Census Bureau, “Policy on New Content for the American Community Survey,” p. 1, at http://www.census.gov/
acs/www/Downloads/operations_admin/ACS_Content_Policy.pdf.
53 5 C.F.R. part 1320.
54 U.S. Census Bureau, “Policy on New Content for the American Community Survey,” p. 2, at http://www.census.gov/
acs/www/Downloads/operations_admin/ACS_Content_Policy.pdf.
55 Ibid., p. 3.
Congressional Research Service
8

---

The American Community Survey: Development, Implementation, and Issues for Congress

the Census Bureau will reassess the questions contained on the ACS to ensure that this
survey remains the appropriate vehicle for collection of these data. The OMB’s
responsibility under the PRA requires that practical utility of the data be demonstrated and
that the respondent burden be kept to a minimum. As such, the Census Bureau will refer all
agency requests for new content to the OMB.56
The Bureau’s website57 reproduces each item from the ACS questionnaire and describes in
general terms how the resulting data are used, including, as mentioned at the beginning of this
report, in program formulas that determine the distribution of more than $450 billion a year in
certain federal funds to states and localities. Below are several examples of these program uses,
paraphrased from the Bureau’s descriptions.
• Various federal agencies use information about disability status to develop
programs and distribute funds, such as grants based on the number of elderly
people with physical and mental disabilities and funds for mass transit systems to
provide facilities for the handicapped.
• Income data are part of the federal allocation formulas for many programs.
Among other purposes, these data are used to allocate funds for home energy aid;
provide funds for housing assistance; identify localities eligible for grants to
promote economic recovery and conduct job-training programs; provide local
agencies with funds for food, health care, and legal services for the low-income
elderly; allocate funds for food, health care, and classes in meal planning to low-
income women with children; and distribute funds to counties and school
districts to improve the education of children from low-income households.
• Data on veteran status are used to distribute funds to states and localities for
veterans’ employment and job training programs.
• Data on language are the basis for allocating grants to school districts to benefit
children with limited English proficiency.
• Data about plumbing facilities are used as one variable in assessing the quality of
housing stock; an additional use is to allocate federal housing subsidies.
Issues Concerning the ACS
Tension is inherent between the amount, quality, timeliness, and geographic coverage of data that
the ACS provides, and the public cost—in both dollars and respondent burden—of gathering the
information. Larger samples can provide better data and better coverage across different levels of
geography, but they are more expensive and involve more respondents. Gathering a large amount

56 Ibid., p. 2.
A document that provides the statutory and regulatory authority for all ACS questions is available on OMB’s website at
http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/omb/inforeg/memos/statutory-and-regulatory-authority-for-questions-
asked-in-the-american-community-survey.pdf. An attached OMB memorandum, dated June 26, 2012, and addressed to
“The Heads of Selected Executive Departments and Agencies,” announces that they are to review and, if necessary,
revise this document. The results of this initiative have not been announced.
57 See U.S. Census Bureau, “Questions on the Form and Why We Ask,” at http://www.census.gov/acs/www/
about_the_survey/questions_and_why_we_ask/.
Congressional Research Service
9

---

The American Community Survey: Development, Implementation, and Issues for Congress

of data monthly and aggregating it over one-, three-, and five-year intervals yields detailed,
relatively current information, but also at considerable cost.
Sample Size
In a March 2009 Federal Register notice, the Bureau announced and sought public comments on
its plans for releasing 2005 through 2009 ACS data products.58 According to the notice, the
release was to “achieve a goal of the ACS to provide small area data similar to the data published
after Census 2000, based on the long-form sample,”59 but some who commented had a different
assessment. As one observed,60 with a “fixed sample size of three million households annually,
the ACS 5-year sample is considerably smaller than the 1-in-6 household sample of Census
2000.... The original ACS sample design was for three percent of households each year, a level
that would have produced 5-year data for small geographic areas near the reliability and
disclosure avoidance61 levels of Census 2000.” Because the Bureau “did not receive a budget for
a sample similar to that of the long form ... the 5-year data products cannot be as detailed for
smaller geographic areas as they were in 2000.” The correspondent called for the Bureau to
acknowledge “openly” that, “given the smaller sample size, some ACS 5-year products cannot
meet some user needs for detailed census tract62 and block group63 data.”
The issue of sample size, especially as it affects small-area data, is not new. It was discussed, for
example, in a 2007 publication by the National Academy of Sciences’ Committee on National
Statistics64 and a 2004 GAO report.65 Moreover, a fixed sample size of the ACS would mean that
as the U.S. population grew, with a corresponding increase in housing units, the proportion of
units surveyed would decrease. This decrease could affect the quality of ACS data for all

58 U.S. Department of Commerce, U.S. Census Bureau, “American Community Survey 5-Year Data Products,” 74
Federal Register 9785, March 6, 2009. See also U.S. Department of Commerce, U.S. Census Bureau, “American
Community Survey 5-Year Data Product Plans; Final Notice,” 75 Federal Register 57254, September 20, 2010.
59 U.S. Department of Commerce, U.S. Census Bureau, “American Community Survey 5-Year Data Products,” 74
Federal Register 9786, March 6, 2009.
60 See Andrew Reamer, Fellow, Brookings Institution Metropolitan Policy Program, “Re: Request for Comments on the
American Community Survey 5-Year Data Products,” April 20, 2009, in U.S. Census Bureau, “Comments to the
Census Bureau—American Community Survey 5-Year Data Products Plan,” at http://www.census.gov/acs/www/
about_the_survey/operations_and_administration/.
61 The Bureau defines “disclosure avoidance” as “statistical methods used in the tabulation of data prior to releasing
data products to ensure the confidentiality of responses.” U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey, Design
and Methodology (Washington: GPO, 2009), glossary, p. 6.
62 A “census tract” refers to “a small, relatively permanent statistical subdivision of a county delineated by a local
committee of census data users for the purpose of presenting data. Census tract boundaries normally follow visible
features, but may follow governmental unit boundaries and other nonvisible features; they always nest within counties.
Designed to be relatively homogeneous units with respect to population characteristics, economic status, and living
conditions at the time of establishment, census tracts average about 4,000 inhabitants.” Ibid., glossary, p. 4.
63 “A block group,” in Bureau terminology, “is a cluster of blocks having the same first digit of their four-digit
identifying number within a census tract.” A block “is the smallest geographic entity for which the Census Bureau
tabulates decennial census data. Many blocks correspond to individual city blocks bounded by streets, but blocks—
especially in rural areas—may include many square miles and may have some boundaries that are not streets.” Ibid.,
glossary, p. 3.
64 Constance F. Citro and Graham Kalton, eds., Using the American Community Survey: Benefits and Challenges
(Washington: National Academies Press, 2007), pp. 2, 4, and 5.
65 U.S. Government Accountability Office, American Community Survey: Key Unresolved Issues, GAO-05-82, October
2004, p. 21.
Congressional Research Service
10

---

The American Community Survey: Development, Implementation, and Issues for Congress

purposes, particularly for the equitable distribution of various federal funds to states and
localities. In 2003, the Bureau reported that the fully implemented ACS would sample about 3
million of approximately 120 million housing units annually,66 or about 2.5% of all units. By
2010, when that year’s census showed the number of housing units to be 131.7 million,67 3
million units represented about 2.3% of the total.
Of the Obama Administration’s $1.267 billion appropriations request for the Bureau in FY2011,
$44 million was to go toward enlarging the annual ACS sample size to about 3.54 million housing
units, almost 2.7% of all units, “to improve the reliability of the ACS estimates at the tract level.”
The funds also were to “allow the Census Bureau to enhance field and telephone center data
collection, conduct a 100 percent nonresponse follow-up operation in Remote Alaska and small
American Indian, Alaska Native, and Native Hawaiian Homeland areas, and provide additional
resources for the full review of the 3-year and 5-year data.”68 In July 18, 2012, congressional
testimony, then-Bureau Director Robert M. Groves confirmed that the ACS sample size had
increased to about 3.54 million housing units a year.69
Public Perception
The ACS has encountered some public resistance, as did its long-form predecessor. One
indication of the reaction to a mailed questionnaire from the Bureau is whether the recipients fill
it out and mail it back before nonresponse follow-up begins. Long-form responses by mail tended
to decrease over time, and the same has occurred with the ACS since 2000. A 2004 report by the
National Academy of Sciences’ Committee on National Statistics, Panel to Review the 2000
Census,70 cited a two-percentage-point difference between short-form and long-form mail return
rates71 in 1980 (82% versus 80%), which widened to five percentage points in 1990 (76% versus
71%) and nine percentage points in 2000 (80% versus 71%).72 The 71% mail return rate for the
long form in 1990 and 2000 represented a nine-percentage-point decrease from the 1980 rate of

66 U.S. Census Bureau, Meeting 21st Century Demographic Data Needs—Implementing the American Community
Survey; Report 3, Testing the Use of Voluntary Methods, December 2003, Appendix 4, at http://www.census.gov/acs/
www/library/by_series/implementing_the_acs/.
67 U.S. Census Bureau, Housing Characteristics: 2010, p. 1, at http://www.census.gov/prod/cen2010/briefs/c2010br-
07.pdf.
68 U.S. Office of Management and Budget, Budget of the U.S. Government, Appendix, Fiscal Year 2011 (Washington:
GPO, 2010), p. 210. See also CRS Report R41161, Commerce, Justice, Science, and Related Agencies: FY2011
Appropriations, coordinated by Nathan James, Oscar R. Gonzales, and Jennifer D. Williams. The Census Bureau, as a
Commerce Department agency, receives its funding through CJS appropriations.
69 Testimony of then-Census Bureau Director Robert M. Groves in U.S. Congress, Senate Committee on Homeland
Security and Governmental Affairs, Subcommittee on Federal Financial Management, Government Information,
Federal Services, and International Security, Census: Planning Ahead for 2020, hearing, 112th Cong., 2nd sess., July 18,
2012, at http://www.hsgac.senate.gov/subcommittees/federal-financial-management/hearings/census-planning-ahead-
for-2020.
70 Constance F. Citro, Daniel L. Cork, and Janet L. Norwood, eds., The 2000 Census: Counting Under Adversity
(Washington: National Academies Press, 2004).
71 As previously noted, the “mail return rate” is the percentage of questionnaires completed and returned from
“occupied housing units with deliverable addresses.” U.S. Government Accountability Office, 2010 Census: Census
Bureau Needs Procedures for Estimating the Response Rate and Selecting for Testing Methods to Increase Response
Rate, GAO-08-1012, September 2008, footnote 6, p. 6.
72 Constance F. Citro, Daniel L. Cork, and Janet L. Norwood, eds., The 2000 Census: Counting Under Adversity
(Washington: National Academies Press, 2004), p. 100.
Congressional Research Service
11

---

The American Community Survey: Development, Implementation, and Issues for Congress

80%. A 2009 evaluation73 by the Bureau found that ACS mail response rates74 dropped 5.8
percentage points over eight years (from 40.6% in 2000 to 34.8% in 2008).75 These rates,
however, excluded questionnaires returned more than 25 days after being mailed out. When all
the questionnaires were included, response rates were higher and the decrease over eight years
was less (3.1 percentage points, from 59.7% in 2000 to 56.6% in 2008).76
Press reports,77 a poll,78 and a House subcommittee oversight hearing on the 2000 census
reflected a degree of dissatisfaction with the 2000 census long form. In opening remarks at the
hearing, the subcommittee chairman stated,
Clearly the biggest controversy surrounding the census has been the perceived intrusiveness
and the invasion of privacy of the long form....
While the long form has always been less popular than the short form, the attitudes toward
the 2000 long form seem to be particularly intense despite the fact that it ... only differs by
one new question from 1990. During the 1998 dress rehearsals, the long form response rate
was between 10 and 15 percentage points lower than the short form....
From the first day that the forms were being received at millions of homes around the
Nation, Members of Congress were receiving phone calls from constituents who were very
upset about the long form.
Every major newspaper in the Nation has written about the long form and the privacy issue.
Electronic media from talk radio to television have weighed in....
The reason why there is a long form controversy is because millions of Americans aren’t
comfortable answering the questions.... The News Hour on PBS had an entire segment on the

73 U.S. Census Bureau, “2008 American Community Survey Sampling Memorandum Series ACS08-S-28,” September
14, 2009.
74 GAO has pointed out that the mail response rates in the ACS analysis “are comparable to the Bureau’s definition of
mail return rates for the decennial census in that vacant and nonexistent housing units are excluded from the
denominator in the calculation.” U.S. Government Accountability Office, 2010 Census: Census Bureau Needs
Procedures for Estimating the Response Rate and Selecting for Testing Methods to Increase Response Rate, GAO-08-
1012, September 2008, p. 14.
75 U.S. Census Bureau, “2008 American Community Survey Sampling Memorandum Series ACS08-S-28,” September
14, 2009, p. 6.
76 Ibid.
The Bureau eventually closes much of the gap between questionnaires sent out and those mailed back. For example, the
estimated total ACS response rate in 2008, after nonresponse follow-up, was 98%. Ibid., p. 5. In the 2000 census, to
cite another example, the Bureau received 98.5% of the long forms it expected to receive from households and retained
93.2% of forms received. Constance F. Citro, Daniel L. Cork, and Janet L. Norwood, eds., The 2000 Census: Counting
Under Adversity (Washington: National Academies Press, 2004), pp. 291-292.
77 See, as examples, August Gribbin, “Census Bureau offers to find long-form alternative by ’03,” Washington Times,
April 6, 2000, p. A8; D’Vera Cohn, “Census Complaints Hit Home,” Washington Post, May 4, 2000, p. A9; August
Gribbin, “Criticism of census form sparks bureau to re-look,” Washington Times, April 11, 2000, p. A4; and Steven A.
Holmes, “Low Response to Long Form Causes Worry About Census,” New York Times, April 7, 2000, p. A18.
78 According to a nationwide survey of 1,933 people during the week of April 2, 2000, by InterSurvey of Menlo Park,
CA, 47% of respondents who received the long form viewed the questions as “too intrusive; census should not ask.”
The highest proportions of respondents, 53% and 32%, respectively, viewed the income and disability questions as “too
personal.” The margin of error was plus or minus three percentage points. The poll results were cited in D’Vera Cohn,
“Census Complaints Hit Home,” Washington Post, May 4, 2000, p. A9.
Congressional Research Service
12

---

The American Community Survey: Development, Implementation, and Issues for Congress

privacy issue and the long form almost 2 weeks ago.79 On 60 Minutes, one of the most
popular news shows on television with almost 13 million viewers weekly, commentator
Andy Rooney voiced to the Nation two Sundays ago his criticism of the long form.80 He
concluded ... by saying, “I am not going to fill out the long form.”81
Whereas the long form could attract criticism once a decade, however, the monthly survey can
generate some negative attention more frequently.82 Among the comments reported by the media
are that the ACS asks for too much detail and that certain questions—such as those about income,
disability, and home plumbing facilities—invade respondents’ privacy.83 Reluctant respondents
may ask whether, and why, they must answer these and other questions.84
As noted previously, the ACS can ask only “necessary questions,”85 and responses are mandatory.
The decennial census is conducted under the authority of Title 13, United States Code, Sections
141 and 193. Section 141 authorizes a census of population every 10 years for House
apportionment and within-state redistricting. This section also authorizes the Department of
Commerce86 Secretary “to obtain such other census information as necessary.” Section 193
provides that “[i]n advance of, in conjunction with, or after the taking of each census ... the
Secretary may make surveys and collect such preliminary and supplementary statistics related to
the main topic of the census as are necessary to the initiation, taking, or completion thereof.” The
Census Bureau considered long-form responses to be mandatory and has conducted the ACS as
mandatory “since its inception” in the mid-1990s.87 Title 13, Section 221, provides for a fine of
not more than $100 for refusal or neglect to answer questions; pursuant to Title 18, Sections 3559

79 PBS broadcast the “Nosy Census” segment on March 30, 2000.
80 CBS broadcast the Andy Rooney commentary on March 26, 2000.
81 Opening remarks of Subcommittee Chairman Dan Miller in U.S. Congress, House Committee on Government
Reform, Subcommittee on the Census, Oversight of the 2000 Census: Mail-Back Response Rates and Status of Key
Operations, hearing, 106th Cong., 2nd sess., April 5, 2000, no. 106-186 (Washington: GPO, 2001), pp. 2-3.
82 As the Bureau Director at the time observed during an ACS congressional hearing, “Long form questions” are
neither “less, nor more, intrusive because they are asked in the ACS rather than the decennial environment, but the
environments are wholly different. It matters whether 20 million housing units are asked long form questions in one
intense timeframe or whether those questions are asked in a series of monthly surveys.” Testimony of then-Census
Bureau Director Kenneth Prewitt in U.S. Congress, House Committee on Government Reform, Subcommittee on the
Census, The American Community Survey—A Replacement for the Census Long Form?, hearing, 106th Cong., 2nd sess.,
July 20, 2000, no. 106-246 (Washington: GPO, 2001), p. 31.
83 For examples of media reports, see Jon Rutter, “Census Survey a Little Too Intrusive for Some,” Lancaster, PA,
Online.com News, November 15, 2010; Mark Davis, “Census Wants to Know More, Way Too Much More, Critics of
Survey Say,” Atlanta Journal-Constitution, September 5, 2010, p. 1B; John Derbyshire, “Count Me Out,” National
Review, vol. 57, no. 2 (February 2005), p. 56; Kathleen Hennessey, “GOP Takes on Census Critics,” Los Angeles
Times, April 14, 2010, p. A11; “Questions on Census Survey ‘Exceptionally Intrusive’,” ABC 27 News, WHTM,
Harrisburg, York, Lancaster, and Lebanon, PA, November 5, 2010; and William M. Dowd, “What? Why Me?” Times
Union, June 14, 2009, p. B1.
84 Ibid. See also testimony of Rep. Ted Poe in U.S. Congress, House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform,
Subcommittee on Health Care, District of Columbia, Census, and the National Archives, The Pros and Cons of Making
the Census Bureau’s American Community Survey Voluntary, hearing, 112th Cong., 2nd sess., March 6, 2012, at
http://oversight.house.gov/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/3-6-12-Census-Poe.pdf.
85 U.S. Census Bureau, “Policy on New Content for the American Community Survey,” p. 2, at http://www.census.gov/
acs/www/Downloads/operations_admin/ACS_Content_Policy.pdf.
86 As previously noted, Commerce is the Bureau’s parent department.
87 U.S. Census Bureau, Meeting 21st Century Demographic Data Needs—Implementing the American Community
Survey; Report 3, Testing the Use of Voluntary Methods, December 2003, p. 1, at http://www.census.gov/acs/www/
library/by_series/implementing_the_acs/.
Congressional Research Service
13

---

The American Community Survey: Development, Implementation, and Issues for Congress

and 3571, the Sentencing Reform Act of 1984, the possible fine has been adjusted to not more
than $5,000.
In addition, current and former Bureau employees are required to maintain the confidentiality of
census data about individuals. Under Title 13, Section 214, the wrongful disclosure of
information is punishable by a fine of not more than $5,000, or not more than five years’
imprisonment, or both. Pursuant to Title 18, Sections 3559 and 3571, the possible fine has been
adjusted to not more than $250,000.
Testing a Mandatory Versus Voluntary ACS
By late 2002, public complaints about the long form and congressional concern about the ACS
had prompted some in Congress to inquire about the advisability of making responses to the latter
survey voluntary.88 Shortly thereafter, the conferees on H.J.Res. 2, P.L. 108-7, the Consolidated
Appropriations Resolution, 2003,89 included $1 million for the Bureau “to test the response rates
of both a voluntary and a mandatory” ACS because “sufficient information is not available to
[weigh] the benefits” of each approach.90 The conferees directed the Commerce Secretary to
report to the Appropriations Committees as soon as the test results were available.
Two reports about the test and its findings appear on the Bureau’s website.91 The first one, issued
in December 2003, “was prepared on an expedited basis to meet Congressional needs.”92 A year
later, the second report presented additional test results, with “greater detail for some of the
measures included in the initial report.”93 The discussion below focuses on the 2003 report.
As the ACS is, the test of a voluntary ACS (hereinafter called the “ACS test”) was a mail-out,
mail-back operation in which interviewers followed up with nonresponding households by
telephone and, when necessary, personal visits.94
The ACS test studied four experimental treatments of mailed questionnaires, two instructing
recipients that responses were mandatory and two treating responses as voluntary. The 2003
report highlighted two main treatments, one mandatory and the other voluntary: the benchmark

88 Ibid., pp. v and 1.
89 117 Stat. 11.
90 U.S. Congress, Conference Committee, Making Further Continuing Appropriations for the Fiscal Year 2003, and for
Other Purposes (Consolidated Appropriations Resolution, 2003), conference report to accompany H.J.Res. 2, 108th
Cong., 1st sess., H.Rept. 108-10 (Washington: GPO, 2003), p. 689.
91 U.S. Census Bureau, Meeting 21st Century Demographic Data Needs—Implementing the American Community
Survey; Report 3, Testing the Use of Voluntary Methods, December 2003, and Report 11, Testing Voluntary Methods—
Additional Results, December 2004, at http://www.census.gov/acs/www/library/by_series/implementing_the_acs/.
92 U.S. Census Bureau, Meeting 21st Century Demographic Data Needs—Implementing the American Community
Survey; Report 3, Testing the Use of Voluntary Methods, December 2003, p. 1, at http://www.census.gov/acs/www/
library/by_series/implementing_the_acs/.
93 U.S. Census Bureau, Meeting 21st Century Demographic Data Needs—Implementing the American Community
Survey; Report 11, Testing Voluntary Methods—Additional Results, December 2004, p. v, at http://www.census.gov/
acs/www/library/by_series/implementing_the_acs/.
94 U.S. Census Bureau, Meeting 21st Century Demographic Data Needs—Implementing the American Community
Survey; Report 3, Testing the Use of Voluntary Methods, December 2003, p. 2, at http://www.census.gov/acs/www/
library/by_series/implementing_the_acs/.
Congressional Research Service
14

---

The American Community Survey: Development, Implementation, and Issues for Congress

“2002 Current Mandatory approach” was “identical to the mail treatment used in prior years and
provided a control to previous years”;95 the “Standard Voluntary treatment” used “a standard
survey approach” to explain that responses were not required.96
The Bureau’s sample design for the test divided the universe of approximately 140,000 housing
units97 into two strata, high-response areas (HRAs) and low-response areas (LRAs), which were
designated on the basis of “tract-level long form mail return rates from Census 2000.”98 Data
from the 2001 ACS indicated that people in the LRAs were younger, more likely to be Hispanic,
more likely to be non-White, less likely to be college educated, and more likely to be renters than
in the HRAs. The LRA stratum had more households with lower incomes, more that included
“other relatives”99 or “nonrelatives,” and more where languages “other than English” were spoken
at home.100
The ACS test was conducted in March and April 2003. The tables in the report issued later that
year compared the results from the Standard Voluntary treatment of test questionnaires
(hereinafter, the “2003 voluntary survey”) with those from the mandatory ACS for March and
April 2002 (hereinafter, the “2002 mandatory ACS”), as discussed below.101
Key test results pertained to the mail cooperation rate.102 It was 20.7 percentage points lower
overall for the 2003 voluntary survey than for the 2002 mandatory ACS (38.8% compared with
59.5%, a 34.8% decrease). In the HRAs, the decrease was 22.2 percentage points (42.4% versus
64.6%, a 34.4% drop). In the LRAs, the percentage-point decrease was less, 15.9 points, but the
already low 2002 mail cooperation rate of 43.6% dropped to 27.7% in 2003 (a 36.5%
decrease).103
Lower mail cooperation in the 2003 voluntary survey meant a heavier workload of nonresponse
follow-up by telephone. Moreover, cooperation with telephone interviewers was lower when it
was optional (66.5% overall in 2003 versus 80.7% in 2002, a 14.2 percentage-point or 17.6%
decrease). Although the 2003 rates of telephone cooperation were almost identical in the HRAs
and LRAs, cooperation decreased more from 2002 to 2003 in the HRAs (by 15.6 percentage
points or 19%, from 82.1% to 66.5%) than in the LRAs (by 10.2 percentage points or 13.4%,
from 76.4% to 66.2%).104

95 The other mandatory treatment tested mail-out material that the Bureau had revised to clarify the nature and purpose
of the survey. Ibid., p. 2.
96 The other voluntary treatment “explained more directly that the survey was voluntary.” Ibid., pp. 2-3.
97 Ibid., p. 2.
98 Ibid., p. 3.
99 The Bureau defines “other relatives” as household members “related to the householder by birth, marriage, or
adoption, but not specifically included in any other relationship category. Can include grandchildren, parents, in-laws,
cousins, etc.” U.S. Census Bureau, “American FactFinder, Glossary,” at http://factfinder2.census.gov/help/en/
american_factfinder_help.htm#glossary/glossary.htm.
100 U.S. Census Bureau, Meeting 21st Century Demographic Data Needs—Implementing the American Community
Survey; Report 3, Testing the Use of Voluntary Methods, December 2003, p. 3, at http://www.census.gov/acs/www/
library/by_series/implementing_the_acs/.
101 Ibid., pp. 1 and 3.
102 This rate refers to the percentage of questionnaires returned from all occupied housing units included in the mail-out
phase. Ibid., p. 6.
103 Ibid.
104 Ibid., p. 7.
Congressional Research Service
15

---

The American Community Survey: Development, Implementation, and Issues for Congress

Personal visits for nonresponse follow-up closed “some, but not all”105 of the gap in mail and
telephone cooperation between 2002 and 2003. As with telephone nonresponse follow-up, the
workload of personal visits increased in 2003; responses decreased when they were optional; and
the percentage-point decline in cooperation was greater in the HRAs than in the LRAs,
suggesting that the voluntary approach had a greater negative effect on compliance in areas that
usually tended to be cooperative. Overall response to personal visits was 89% in 2003, down
from 95.6% a year earlier (a 6.6 percentage-point or 6.9% decline). In the HRAs, the 2003
response rate was 88.2% versus 95.7% in 2002 (a 7.5 percentage-point or 7.8% drop). The
comparable figures for the LRAs were 90.7% versus 95.6% (a 4.9 percentage-point or 5.1%
decrease).106
The Bureau observed that when ACS responses were voluntary instead of required, respondents
tended to shift “from participating by mail to participating by telephone or personal visit follow-
up.”107 Because personal interviews are about 10 times more expensive than data collection by
mail or telephone,108 survey costs rise as mail and telephone cooperation fall. Further, since the
Bureau selects a subsample of ACS nonrespondents—not all nonrespondents—for personal visits,
reliability of the data is a concern. A decrease in the percentage of responses by mail and
telephone means “fewer total interviews and thus, a reduction in reliability.”109 If the survey
became voluntary, the Bureau concluded, maintaining the same data reliability as under the 2002
mandatory ACS would necessitate increasing the planned annual sample size from about 3
million to an estimated 3.7 million housing units,110 at an additional cost of at least $59.2 million
per year in FY2005 dollars.111 The latter estimate reflected “direct data collection costs only”; it
did not include the expense of hiring and training more ACS staff, and purchasing additional
equipment.112 The Bureau subsequently, as of FY2011, re-estimated the annual cost of a voluntary
ACS at $66.5 million.113
Proposals in the 111th, 112th, and 113th Congresses for
a Voluntary ACS or an End to the ACS
Two bills introduced in the 111th Congress sought to make almost all ACS responses optional.
They received no action beyond committee and subcommittee referrals.
• H.R. 3131, to Make Participation in the American Community Survey Voluntary,
except with Respect to Certain Basic Questions, was introduced on July 8, 2009,
by Representative Ted Poe. The bill would have prohibited applying any criminal

105 Ibid., p. 8.
106 Ibid.
107 Ibid.
108 Ibid., p. v.
109 Ibid., p. 9.
110 Ibid., p. 16. As previously noted, the current ACS sample size is about 295,000 housing units per month, totaling
about 3.54 million per year.
111 Ibid., pp. 16-17.
112 Ibid., p. 17.
113 U.S. Census Bureau, “2011 American Community Survey Research and Evaluation Report Memorandum Series
#ACS11-RER-01,” June 23, 2011, p. 5.
Congressional Research Service
16

---

The American Community Survey: Development, Implementation, and Issues for Congress

penalty to people who refused or willfully neglected to answer ACS inquiries,
except those about the respondent’s name and contact information, the date of the
response, and the number of residents at the respondent’s address.
• H.R. 5046, the Census Clarification and Privacy Act, was introduced on April 15,
2010, by Representative Todd Akin. The measure called for a statement, on the
front of the decennial census and ACS questionnaires, that the respondent was
constitutionally required only to provide the number of people living at the
residence, and that all other answers were optional. The bill also would have
made penalties applicable only for refusing or willfully neglecting to answer this
question on any census or survey conducted under Title 13, United States Code,
Sections 141 or 193, or for falsely answering any question on any census or
survey conducted under these sections.
In the 112th Congress, two bills would have made almost all ACS responses optional. A third,
appropriations, bill passed the House with two amendments pertinent to the ACS. One would
have prohibited funds from being used to enforce a penalty for ACS nonresponse; the other would
have defunded the survey.
• H.R. 931, to Make Participation in the American Community Survey Voluntary,
except with Respect to Certain Basic Questions, was introduced on March 3,
2011, by Representative Poe. The bill, which was the same as H.R. 3131 from the
111th Congress, was referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary,
Subcommittee on the Constitution, and Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, and
Homeland Security; and to the House Committee on Oversight and Government
Reform, Subcommittee on Health Care, District of Columbia, Census, and the
National Archives. This subcommittee held a hearing on March 6, 2012, about
the pros and cons of a voluntary ACS.114 No further action occurred on H.R. 931.
• S. 3079, companion legislation to H.R. 931, was introduced by Senator Rand
Paul on May 10, 2012, and referred to the Senate Committee on Homeland
Security and Governmental Affairs, where no further action occurred.
• Before the House passed H.R. 5326, the Commerce, Justice, Science, and
Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2013,115 on May 10, 2012, it adopted two
amendments that would have affected the ACS. The Poe amendment, which was
similar to H.R. 931, would have prohibited the use of funds to enforce a penalty
for refusing or willfully neglecting to answer the questions on the ACS. An
amendment offered by Representative Daniel Webster would have prohibited the
use of funds to conduct the survey. The Senate did not take up H.R. 5326 or S.
2323, its FY2013 CJS appropriations bill, which had no provisions similar to the
Poe and Webster amendments.


114 U.S. Congress, House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, Subcommittee on Health Care, District of
Columbia, Census, and the National Archives, The Pros and Cons of Making the Census Bureau’s American
Community Survey Voluntary, hearing, 112th Cong., 2nd sess., March 6, 2012, at http://oversight.house.gov/hearing/the-
pros-and-cons-of-making-the-census-bureaus-american-community-survey-voluntary/.
115 See CRS Report R42440, Commerce, Justice, Science, and Related Agencies: FY2013 Appropriations, coordinated
by Nathan James, Jennifer D. Williams, and John F. Sargent Jr.
Congressional Research Service
17

---

The American Community Survey: Development, Implementation, and Issues for Congress

H.J.Res. 117, P.L. 112-175,116 the Continuing Appropriations Resolution, 2013,
became law on September 28, 2012, without reference to the ACS. It provided
funding for CJS entities until the March 26, 2013, enactment of H.R. 933, P.L.
113-6,117 the Consolidated and Further Continuing Appropriations Act, 2013,
which funds CJS entities for the remainder of FY2013. Although P.L. 113-6 does
not mention the ACS, the Senate explanatory statement notes that language in the
two House amendments to H.R. 5326, from the 112th Congress, “prohibiting
funding for the ACS or prohibiting penalties for non-compliance with the ACS is
not adopted.” The Census Bureau, however, “is directed to provide a report to the
Committees on Appropriations no later than 120 days after enactment of this Act
on ... the steps being taken to ensure that the ACS is conducted as efficiently and
unobtrusively as possible.” The Department of Commerce “is directed to acquire
an independent analysis of the costs and benefits of making compliance with the
ACS voluntary. The results of this analysis shall be provided ... to the
Committees on Appropriations no later than 180 days after enactment of this
Act.”118
Three bills that would affect the ACS have been introduced in the 113th Congress. Two
companion proposals that resemble H.R. 3131 and H.R. 5046 from the 111th Congress and H.R.
931, S. 3079, and the Poe amendment to H.R. 5326 in the 112th Congress would make all but a
few ACS responses optional. A third bill would prohibit the Commerce Secretary and the Census
Bureau from conducting any surveys, including the ACS, and almost all censuses. No action
beyond committee referrals and one subcommittee referral has occurred on the bills.
• H.R. 1078, to Make Participation in the American Community Survey Voluntary,
except with Respect to Certain Basic Questions, and for Other Purposes, was
introduced on March 12, 2013, by Representative Poe, and referred to the House
Committee on Oversight and Government Reform. The legislation would make
optional most responses to “any survey authorized under” Title 13, United States
Code, Section 193. The ACS, as previously mentioned, is conducted under this
section and Section 141. H.R. 1078 would require responses only to inquiries
about the respondent’s name and contact information, the date of the response,
and the “number of people living or staying at the same address.” The bill further
specifies that except for having to provide this information, “no person may be
fined or otherwise compelled to answer questions in connection with the survey
... which is commonly referred to as the ‘American Community Survey’.”
• S. 530, the same as H.R. 1078, was introduced on the same day by Senator Paul
and referred to the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental
Affairs.
• H.R. 1638, the Census Reform Act of 2013, was introduced on April 18, 2013, by
Representative Jeff Duncan. It was referred on that date to the House Committees
on Oversight and Government Reform, Agriculture, and Appropriations. On May
3, 2013, the bill was referred to the Agriculture Committee’s Subcommittee on

116 126 Stat. 1313.
117 127 Stat. 198.
118 “Consolidated and Further Continuing Appropriations Act,” Senate explanatory statement, Congressional Record,
daily edition, vol. 159 (March 11, 2013), p. S1300.

Congressional Research Service
18

---

The American Community Survey: Development, Implementation, and Issues for Congress

Department Operations, Oversight, and Nutrition. H.R. 1638 would repeal the
authority of the Commerce Secretary and the Census Bureau to conduct the ACS
and any other surveys or censuses except the decennial census. This census
would be limited to collecting “only ... information necessary for the tabulation
of total population by States.” The censuses that would end if H.R. 1638 were
enacted include the censuses of agriculture119 and governments as well as the
economic census.
Possible ACS Options for Congress
Noted below are several possible approaches for Congress regarding the ACS, given that the
survey, fully implemented since 2005 and 2006, supplanted the long form in the 2010 census.
Congress could support the status quo, providing oversight and funding of the ACS into the
future. Oversight issues might include ACS methodology and any advisable improvements in it.
Three other related issues are how large the ACS sample should be to ensure reliability of the
data, particularly for small areas, as the U.S. population continues to grow; what funding levels
would be necessary to achieve and maintain such a sample size; and what funding levels would
be feasible, in view of federal budgetary constraints that could continue indefinitely.
Two bills from the 111th Congress and three from the 112th Congress would have made
completing the ACS questionnaire optional for respondents, as would two proposals in the 113th
Congress. Another congressional approach—because the test results discussed previously indicate
that a voluntary survey might well lower response rates and raise costs—might involve inquiring
into the extent and sources of public dissatisfaction with the ACS and exploring remedies short of
voluntary responses. Possible questions to consider are how to explain more effectively why ACS
data are collected and how best to engage the public in nonresponse follow-up. Congress could
assess with the Bureau whether an advertising campaign, perhaps modeled on that for the 2010
census,120 might heighten awareness of the survey and its value to states and localities. A related
consideration is whether the Bureau might enhance the appeal of the ACS by identifying on its
website every federal program whose formula for distributing funds uses ACS data and what the
data are, together with estimates of the funds provided each year to specific states and localities
on the basis of the program formulas.
Various Members of Congress from time to time have advised the Bureau to use the Internet as
one means of collecting decennial census-related data.121 In July 18, 2012, congressional
testimony, then-Bureau Director Robert M. Groves announced the Bureau’s intention to offer an

119 The census of agriculture currently is conducted under Title 7, United States Code. “In 1997,” according to the
Bureau, “Congress transferred budgetary responsibility for the census of agriculture” to the U.S. Department of
Agriculture (USDA). “ Despite the shift in funding, the Census Bureau continues to design the questionnaires, mail
questionnaires, manage returns, and process the data ...” for the USDA. U.S. Census Bureau, “Census of Agriculture,”
at https://www.census.gov/history/www/programs/agriculture/census_of_agriculture.html.
120 See CRS Report R40551, The 2010 Decennial Census: Background and Issues, by Jennifer D. Williams.
121 See, for example, opening statement of Sen. Thomas Carper in U.S. Congress, Senate Committee on Homeland
Security and Governmental Affairs, Subcommittee on Federal Financial Management, Government Information,
Federal Services, and International Security, Census: Planning Ahead for 2020, hearing, 112th Cong., 2nd sess., July 18,
2012, at http://www.hsgac.senate.gov/subcommittees/federal-financial-management/hearings/census-planning-ahead-
for-2020.
Congressional Research Service
19

---

The American Community Survey: Development, Implementation, and Issues for Congress

Internet response option for the 2020 census and, beginning in January 2013, for the ACS.122
Accordingly, as noted earlier in this report, the Bureau now sends a letter notifying most
households selected to receive the ACS that they can access and complete the survey online.123
Congress could review with the Bureau the effects of this option on ACS response rates, survey
costs, and public perception of the ACS.
Congress could examine alternatives to the ACS. If the past is an accurate predictor, returning to
an approximately 17% sample of U.S. housing units via the long form would depress decennial
census response rates somewhat and complicate the count; this reprise also would generate less
timely data than does the ACS. Congress could set as a priority research into whether
administrative records might substitute for the ACS. Possible points to consider would be the
operational feasibility of this approach, its expense, the quality and completeness of
administrative records, privacy concerns, and acceptability to the public.
The ACS is arguably an efficient means of gathering data for many purposes. Congress could
direct that the Bureau and other federal statistical agencies expedite research into whether the
ACS could replace certain other surveys. This research might involve identifying duplicative data
collections, if any; estimating what savings, in both money and respondent burden, might occur
from having the ACS substitute for these collections; and assessing any disadvantages of
replacing them.

122 Testimony of then-Census Bureau Director Robert M. Groves in U.S. Congress, Senate Committee on Homeland
Security and Governmental Affairs, Subcommittee on Federal Financial Management, Government Information,
Federal Services, and International Security, Census: Planning Ahead for 2020, hearing, 112th Cong., 2nd sess., July 18,
2012, at http://www.hsgac.senate.gov/subcommittees/federal-financial-management/hearings/census-planning-ahead-
for-2020.
123 U.S. Census Bureau, “Census Bureau to Offer American Community Survey Internet Response,” press release
CB12-247, December 17, 2012.
Congressional Research Service
20

---

The American Community Survey: Development, Implementation, and Issues for Congress

Appendix. ACS Topics
The topics covered by the ACS are summarized below. Following each topic is a brief
explanation or description of it, adapted from the ACS questionnaire.124
Demographic Characteristics
• Age: each person’s age and date of birth
• Sex: male or female
• Hispanic origin: whether a person considers himself or herself to be of Hispanic
ethnicity; if so, whether the person is Mexican, Puerto Rican, Cuban,
Argentinean, Colombian, Salvadoran, etc.
• Race: a person’s self-classification as White; Black or African American;
American Indian or Alaska Native, with the tribal name specified; Asian or
Pacific Islander, with the specific group, such as Chinese or Samoan, named;
belonging to more than one of these groups; or belonging to some other race,
with the name specified
• Relationship: the relationship of each person listed on the ACS form to the
person filling out the form; examples are husband or wife, roomer or boarder, and
foster child
Social Characteristics
• Ancestry: a self-classification based on the country from which each person, or
the person’s parents or ancestors, came; examples of ancestries include Jamaican,
Korean, and Ukrainian
• Citizenship status: whether a person is a U.S. citizen, either by birth or by
naturalization
• Disability status: whether a person has various physical or mental impairments,
such as serious difficulty hearing, seeing, walking, dressing, bathing,
concentrating, or remembering
• Educational attainment: the highest degree or level of schooling that a person has
completed
• Fertility: whether a woman gave birth to any children in the past 12 months
• Field of degree: the major field of study for a bachelor’s degree
• Grandparents as caregivers: whether a person has any grandchildren under age 18
living with him or her; if so, whether the person is responsible for their needs,
and how long the person has had this responsibility

124 U.S. Census Bureau, “American Community Survey, Subjects Included in the American Community Survey,” at
http://www.census.gov/acs/www/guidance_for_data_users/subjects/.
Congressional Research Service
21

---

The American Community Survey: Development, Implementation, and Issues for Congress

• Language: whether a person speaks a language other than English at home; if so,
what the other language is and how well the person speaks English
• Marital status and marital history: whether a person currently is married,
divorced, widowed, etc.; whether the person was married, divorced, or widowed
within the past 12 months; how many times the person has been married; and the
year when he or she last married
• Place of birth: either the U.S. state or the place outside the 50 states
• School enrollment: whether a person attended public or private school or college
in the last three months; if so, the grade or level
• Residence one year ago and migration: whether a person moved from one
residence to another in the past year; if so, what his or her previous address was
• Veterans: whether and when a person served on active duty in the U.S. military,
whether the person has a service-connected disability rating; if so, what it is
• Year of entry: the year when a person born outside the United States came to live
in this country
Economic Characteristics
• Class of worker: whether a person employed during the past 12 months worked
for a private for-profit company, a private nonprofit organization, or federal,
state, or local government; was self-employed; or was an unpaid worker for a
family business or farm
• Employment status: whether a person worked for pay during the past week or
was on layoff from a job, whether the person was actively looking for work in the
past four weeks, and when the person last worked
• Health insurance coverage: whether a person currently is covered by any health
insurance plan, such as through a current or former employer, Medicaid, or
Medicare
• Income: income in the past 12 months from various sources, including wages and
salary, interest and dividends, and Social Security
• Industry: the type of activity that occurred where a person was employed during
the past 12 months, such as manufacturing, retail trade, or construction
• Journey to work: the location where a person worked in the past week; what
mode of transportation the person used to commute to work; whether the person
commuted with other people in an automobile, a truck, or a van; and how much
time the commute took
• Occupation: the kind of work a person did during the past 12 months, such as
nursing, personnel management, or accounting
• Poverty: determined from income data
• Work status: the number of weeks a person worked during the past year, and the
number of hours he or she usually worked each week
Congressional Research Service
22

---

The American Community Survey: Development, Implementation, and Issues for Congress

Housing Characteristics
• House heating fuel: the fuel that is used most for heating the house, apartment, or
mobile home
• Kitchen facilities: whether the housing unit has a sink with a faucet, a stove or
range, and a refrigerator
• Owner statistics: the owner’s mortgage payments; condominium fees; real estate
taxes; payments for utilities; and payments for fire, hazard, or flood insurance
• Ownership and use of computers and use of the Internet by household members
• Plumbing facilities: whether the housing unit has hot and cold running water, a
flush toilet, and a bathtub or shower
• Renter statistics: the renter’s payments for rent and utilities
• Rooms and bedrooms: the number of rooms in the housing unit, excluding
bathrooms
• Sales of agricultural products from the property in the past 12 months
• Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP, formerly the Food Stamp
program): whether, in the past 12 months, anyone in the household received
benefits from the program
• Telephone service available: whether the housing unit has telephone, including
cell-phone, service
• Tenure: whether the housing unit is rented or owned, with or without a mortgage,
by someone in the household
• Units in structure: whether the housing structure is a mobile home, a single-
family detached house, a building with two apartments, etc.
• Value of home: the estimated dollar value of the home, the number of acres on
which it is located, and whether the property includes a business or medical
office
• Vehicles available: the number of motor vehicles kept at the home for household
members’ use
• Year householder moved into unit: the year the person in whose name the
housing unit is rented or owned moved into the unit
• Year structure built: the year the housing structure was built


Congressional Research Service
23

---

The American Community Survey: Development, Implementation, and Issues for Congress

Author Contact Information
Jennifer D. Williams

Specialist in American National Government
jwilliams@crs.loc.gov, 7-8640


Congressional Research Service
24

---