June 18, 1998 | Read Time: 5 minutes
It is still two years until anybody will start collecting data for the next U.S. census, but federal officials are now making critical decisions about the decennial count that will greatly influence the non- profit world for years to come.
Census figures are closely linked with issues that foundations grapple with every day, such as the fair distribution of political power and the struggle for social justice. The numbers are used to apportion political power at every level of government, from Congress to local school boards, and those same data are used to allocate more than $170-billion in federal funds each year. Without complete and accurate census data, political power would be apportioned unfairly and public funds would be misdirected.
Perhaps even more important, flawed data from the census produce a distorted picture of our society, particularly in neighborhoods where the needs are greatest but the quality of census reporting is weakest. The census supplies the only comparable neighborhood-level information on such matters as poverty and income, educational attainment, occupational mobility, and home ownership.
The most critical issue yet to be decided is the method to be used to conduct the census. In the past, the Bureau of the Census has tried to track down every individual and count him or her by household. That has proved to be difficult, especially in poorer neighborhoods. It has also become increasingly inaccurate, as well as more expensive.
Based on inflation-adjusted 1990 dollars, the cost of counting each household rose from $11 in 1970 to $25 in 1990, according to a report by the National Academy of Sciences. Meanwhile, the rate of undercounting rose from 1.2 per cent in 1980 to 1.8 per cent in 1990. That represented some five million people who weren’t counted. And minorities, especially blacks, were missed at several times the rate of whites.
An alternative method, recommended by a panel of experts assembled by the National Academy of Sciences, is to augment the head count with a scientific sample to represent the whole population. While the Census Bureau, backed by the White House, is pushing to use that method in the next census, the issue is far from settled.
Powerful members of Congress oppose sampling, arguing that it is not the enumeration called for in the Constitution. Congressional opponents also feel that the new methods proposed by the Census Bureau have not been tested adequately and do not insure that more-accurate data will result.
There are also clear partisan political overtones to the controversy. Most of the people who have been missed in past censuses have been members of minority groups in large cities — typically a strong Democratic constituen cy.
But the concern should be accuracy and fairness. According to the academy’s study, if poor neighborhoods were counted as accurately as middle-class neighborhoods, millions of additional dollars in federal aid would flow there over the course of a decade. And when undercounted communities do not get their fair share of political power, or public benefits, our democratic system of government is undermined.
Another way in which the census data are critically important to grant makers is that foundations and their grantees often rely on it for an objective assessment of the needs of a group or a community. Inaccurate information could easily result in misperceptions about community needs and unwise grant-making decisions.
Foundations could play a more active role in four areas:
As organizations concerned with the public interest, foundations have the right — and perhaps even the responsibility — to become familiar with and to voice their opinions on the debate over how the census will be conducted, and how the data will be reported. Foundations can keep abreast of census issues through the Census Bureau, the House census-oversight subcommittee, and informational campaigns like the Census 2000 project of the Communications Consortium Media Center.
Grant makers should promote the census and mobilize citizens to be counted. The Census Bureau is trying to alert communities about the importance of widespread participation, but it could use some help. For example, the bureau provides free promotional material, but it cannot provide funds that local groups often need to distribute or disseminate the material effectively. Foundations can fill that gap.
Beyond money, foundations and their grantees can also lend credibility to census promotions. The Census Bureau is often seen as simply another government agency that should not be trusted. Endorsements by local grant makers and charities can encourage more people to respond to census-takers.
Foundations can help the Census Bureau meet its operational needs. By 2000, the bureau will have to interview more than two million people to find 300,000 to do the actual counting, and it will have to open more than 400 local offices. Local organizations like foundations and their grantees can help find the people the bureau needs to conduct a complete and accurate census.
Once the census data have been collected and tabulated, foundations can help insure that they are widely disseminated. Foundations historically have helped groups that have been left out of the mainstream gain access to census data and use them to participate more effectively in the political redistricting process. In addition, since most of the data from the 2000 census will only be available electronically, on the Internet or computer tapes, foundation support may be critical to insuring that the information truly is available to all.
The 2000 census is arguably the most controversial and most contentious in history. Foundations need to do their part to insure that it is also the most accurate.
William P. O’Hare is coordinator of the “Kids Count” program at the Annie E. Casey Foundation, in Baltimore.
