For the Census of 2000, the short form consisted of only seven questions, while the long form consisted of 52 questions and was used for a 17-percent sample of the population. For the first time, race questions were not limited to a single category; rather, respondents were able to check multiple boxes. A new question related to grandparents as caregivers was also mandated by legislation passed in 1996. Disability questions were expanded to including hearing and vision impairments, as well as learning, memory, and concentration disabilities. The 2000 Census also eliminated questions related to children born, water sources, sewage disposal, and condominium status. In addition, the 2000 Census was the first in which the Internet was used as the principal medium for the dissemination of census information. Summary Files were available for download immediately upon release and individual tables could be viewed via American FactFinder, the Census Bureau's online database. Files were also available for purchase on CD-Rom and DVD.

Due to declining questionnaire mail-back rates, the U.S. Census Bureau marketed a $167 million national and local print, television, and public advertising campaign in 17 different languages. The campaign successfully brought the mail-back rate up to 67 percent. Additionally, respondents receiving the short form were given the option of responding via the Internet. Telephone questionnaire assistance centers available in six languages also took responses via the phone. Statistical sampling techniques were utilized in two ways: first, to alter the traditional 100-percent personal visit of non-responding households during the non-response follow-up (NRFU) process instead by following up on a smaller sample basis; second, the sampling of 750,000 housing units matched to housing unit questionnaires obtained from mail and telephone responses, as well as from personal visits. The goal of the latter was to develop adjustment factors for individuals estimated to have been missed or duplicated and to correct the census counts to produce one set of numbers. This "one-number census" would correct for net coverage errors called Integrated Coverage Measurement (ICM). Both of these measures were taken in an attempt to avoid repetition of the litigation costs generated by the 1980 Census and the 1990 Census.

Despite these efforts, two lawsuits—one filed by the U.S. House of Representatives—were filed in February 1998 challenging the constitutionality and legality of the planned uses of sampling to produce apportionment counts. Both cases were decided in favor of the plaintiffs in federal district courts, but the U.S. Department of Commerce made appeals to the U.S. Supreme Court. Known as the  U.S. Department of Commerce v. the U.S. House of Representatives, the Court ruled that the Census Bureau's plans to use statistical sampling for purposes of congressional apportionments violated the Census Act. The bureau revised its plan, stating that it would produce statistically adjusted data for non-apportionment uses of census data information, such as redistricting. However, in March of 2001, the Census Bureau recommended against the use of adjusted census data for redistricting due to accuracy concerns; the Secretary of Commerce determined that the unadjusted data would be released as the bureau's official redistricting data. The Director of the Census Bureau also rejected to the use of adjusted data for non-redistricting purposes in October of that same year.]]>
U.S. Census Bureau]]> U.S. Census Bureau, 2000.]]> U.S. Department of Commerce]]> U.S. Census Bureau, 2000.]]> U.S. Census Collection, RICHES of Central Florida.]]> U.S. Census Bureau and published by the U.S. Department of Commerce.]]>
  • reproduce the work in print or digital form
  • create derivative works
  • perform the work publicly
  • display the work
  • distribute copies or digitally transfer the work to the public by sale or other transfer of ownership, or by rental, lease, or lending.
  • This resources is provided here by RICHES of Central Florida for educational purposes only. For more information on copyright, please refer to Section 5 of Copyright Law of the United States of America and Related Laws Contained in Title 17 of the United States Code.]]>

    In 1966, the U.S. Census Bureau sought suggestions from advisory committees and from the public, resulting in numerous proposals for additional inquiries related to the scope and structure of the census, as well as in public interest for the publication of additional census data. Researchers also concluded that the 1950 Census and the 1960 Census had undercounted certain segments of the population. Moreover, they noted a growing distrust of government activity and increased resistance to responding to the census. Simultaneously, both the public and private sectors expressed need for accurate information. The U.S. Census Bureau decreased its number of questions from 66 to 23 in an effort to simplify its products. A register for densely populated areas was also created to ensure that all housing units were accounted for. A Spanish-language questionnaire was also enclosed with census questionnaires in areas with a significant amount of Spanish-speaking households. Additionally, a question on Hispanic origins or descent was asked independently from race, but only on a five-percent sample. Only five questions were given to all individuals: relationship to household head, sex, race, age, and marital status. Additional questions were asked in smaller sample groups. This was also the first census in which respondents of urban areas were asked to mail their forms to the Census Bureau, rather than to hold questionnaires for enumerators.

    Address Coding Guides were used to assign census geographic codes to questionnaires. Counts, a series of computer tape files, was an additional innovation used to increase the accuracy of census data. Count 1 consisted of complete count data for block groups and/or enumeration districts. Count 2 contained census tracts and minor civil/census county divisions, while Count 3 consisted of census blocks. Counts 4-6 provided sample census data for geographic areas of various population sizes. The Census Bureau also produced six Public Use Microdata Sample files, each of which contained complete information for a sample of approximately two million people. Finally, the Census Bureau developed the Summary Tape Processing Center Program, which was a group of organizations, both public and private, that processed census data from computer tapes.]]>
    U.S. Census Bureau]]> U.S. Census Bureau, 1970.]]> U.S. Department of Commerce]]> U.S. Census Bureau, 1970.]]> U.S. Census Collection, RICHES of Central Florida.]]> U.S. Census Bureau and published by the U.S. Department of Commerce.]]>
  • reproduce the work in print or digital form;
  • create derivative works;
  • perform the work publicly;
  • display the work;
  • distribute copies or digitally transfer the work to the public by sale or other transfer of ownership, or by rental, lease, or lending.
  • This resources is provided here by RICHES of Central Florida for educational purposes only. For more information on copyright, please refer to Section 5 of Copyright Law of the United States of America and Related Laws Contained in Title 17 of the United States Code.]]>

    The act authorizing the 1930 Census was approved on June 18, 1929, allowing for censuses of population, agriculture, irrigation, draining, distribution, unemployment, and mining. For the first time, specific questions for inquiry were left to the discretion of the Director of the Census. The Census encompassed each state, as well as the District of Columbia, Alaska, Hawaii, and Puerto Rico. The Governors of Guam, American Samoa, the Virginia Islands, and the Panama Canal Zone were responsible for conducting censuses in their respective territories. Between the date that the census act was passed and Census Day (April 1st), the stock market crashed, plunging the entire country into the Great Depression. In response, there were public and academic requests for access to unemployment data collected in the 1930 Census; however, the U.S. Census Bureau was unable to meet this demand and the bureau was accused of presenting unreliable data. Congress required a special unemployment census for January 1931, which ultimately confirmed the severity of the economic crisis. Another unemployment census was conducted in 1937, as mandated by Congress. Because this special census was voluntary, it allowed the Census Bureau to experiment with statistical sampling. Only two percent of households received a special census questionnaire.]]>
    U.S. Census Bureau]]> U.S. Census Bureau, 1930.]]> U.S. Department of Commerce]]> U.S. Census Bureau, 1930.]]> U.S. Census Collection, RICHES of Central Florida.]]> U.S. Census Bureau and published by the U.S. Department of Commerce.]]>
  • reproduce the work in print or digital form;
  • create derivative works;
  • perform the work publicly;
  • display the work;
  • distribute copies or digitally transfer the work to the public by sale or other transfer of ownership, or by rental, lease, or lending.
  • This resources is provided here by RICHES of Central Florida for educational purposes only. For more information on copyright, please refer to Section 5 of Copyright Law of the United States of America and Related Laws Contained in Title 17 of the United States Code.]]>