Susan A. Lavin serves as Director of the Denver Regional Census Center.

Following are the states located in the Denver Region and the Local Census Offices in those states reviewed by the Census Monitoring Board:

Arizona: Tucson (Urban) LCO; Window Rock LCO

Colorado: Denver LCO

Montana

Nebraska

Nevada

New Mexico

North Dakota

South Dakota

Utah

Wyoming: Cheyenne LCO

Highlights of the Region include:

• Approximately 8,530,971 Housing Units
• 905,222 Square Miles
• 10 States, 449 Counties
• 92 American Indian Reservations
• 5,458 Governmental Units
• 27 Members of the U.S. House of Representatives
• 20 U.S. Senators
• 38 Local Census Offices

Additional items of interest include:

• Most states of any region
• Stretches from the Canadian to Mexican borders
• Ranks second among all regions in number of American Indian reservations
• Contains all 10 of the largest American Indian reservations, which account for about half of all American Indians living on reservations
• Highest representation in the U.S. Senate
• Region has four of the top five growth states in the country

Overview

Dates of Visits:
March 22, 2000
May 9, 2000
June 19, 2000

Mailback Response Rate
66%

NRFU Workload
101,192 housing units

LCO Types
Type C Office (including mailout/mailback and update/leave enumeration areas)

Geographic Description
The Tucson LCO was located at 3003 South Country Club Road, Tucson, Arizona. According to the February 2000 Tract Action Plan, there were 103 tracts, of which 65 (63.11 percent) were HTE. According to the 1990 PDB, there were 254,499 housing units. The LCO was responsible for a small part of the cities of Tucson (non-reservation) and South Tucson, which was primarily Hispanic.

Pay Rates

Presidential Members' Summary

Summary
The Tucson LCO jurisdiction achieved a high mail response rate (66 percent) despite a concentration of minority groups that have been traditionally undercounted in the census. The high number of Hard-to-Enumerate tracts (63 of 103) made the response rate particularly remarkable.

Observations
The LCO maintained a strong organizational structure. Employees working in the LCO seemed to work diligently and understand their responsibilities clearly. The commitment and dedication of the LCOM enabled a seamless transition between operations.

The LCOM appreciated the attention the Dallas Regional Office gave to the LCO. Communication with the Regional Office was frequent, and the LCOM relied heavily on the advice of Regional officials who offered "institutional" knowledge of census operations. In addition, early support from the Phoenix LCO helped the Tucson office start operations. The General Services Administration was responsive to the LCO's needs throughout the operation.

By March 22, the LCO had already tested 9,500 people, resulting in 6,500 eligible applicants. The LCO eventually surpassed its recruiting goal by an impressive 20 percent. Managers thought the extra recruits would be useful because of high attrition but, in the final analysis, worker retention was normal.

According to the LCOM, 42 QACs, as well as several additional Be Counted sites, helped raise census awareness and participation. The LCOM noted that wide distribution of Census Bureau posters, such as the "No FBI, No CIA" poster, helped to advertise census integrity and allay fears among residents about the confidentiality of census information.

Since the office's higher mail response rate meant a lower NRFU workload, the LCO was able to dedicate significant resources to designated Hard-to-Enumerate areas during NRFU. The LCO completed its 101,000 housing unit workload ahead of the national deadline on June 24.

Throughout NRFU, the LCO kept to its original HTE plan, which called for blitz enumeration and paired enumeration in areas where high crime could endanger enumerators. Special efforts were made to ensure that bilingual enumerators were assigned to Spanish-speaking neighborhoods and households.

Moreover, the LCO worked closely with community-based organizations to motivate census participation and benefited from the active involvement of local elected officials.

Congressional Members' Summary

Summary
State and local efforts helped achieve effective outreach with very little money. The LCO's HTE plan seemed to tailor resources to specific challenges. However, when communication between the LCO and some local organizations broke down, the result was frustration and resentment.

Observations
Within the office's HTE tracts, the Bureau faced the challenge of the lack of trust within the Hispanic community. Based on guidance from the Denver RCC, the LCO management staff wrote an HTE plan to address its difficult tracts. For example, the paired enumeration strategy was utilized in the March 28 _ April 7 enumeration of recreational vehicle (RV) parks and the blitz enumeration strategy was used as necessary. Homeowners' and neighborhood associations were notified in advance to increase awareness and promote response.

The HTE plan incorporated some suggestions from the city of South Tucson and U.S. Representative Ed Pastor (D-2^nd). However, staff with both indicated members of the community were frustrated about several points. Their main concern was that the city of South Tucson allegedly provided a list of constituents' names to the Bureau for employment, but "none" were contacted, either for enumerator positions, or for service as a cultural facilitator. As residents of other areas conducted the census in South Tucson, inter-government relations deteriorated.

Though the office had difficulty in hiring Asian enumerators due to low unemployment rates, recruiting managers reported little difficulty in the Hispanic community, attributing their success to Bureau advertising.

The State allocated approximately $15,000 towards outreach, much of which went for billboards in HTE areas. The Tucson CCC and the Pima County Association of Governments (PAG) worked in partnership with the Bureau to establish 42 QACs/"Be Counted!" sites, including a mobile unit. All together, those sites served approximately 1,200 people through April 17. Thirty additional "Be Counted!" sites were established.

Overview

Dates of Visits:
April 19, 2000
June 14, 2000
Mailback Response Rate
45%

U/E Workload
72,151 housing units

LCO Types
Type D Office (includes list/enumerate areas and may also include mailout/mailback, update/leave, and update/enumerate areas)

Geographic Description
The Window Rock LCO was located at the Navajo Tribal Fairgrounds, near the intersection of Arizona Route 264 and Indian Reservation Route 12, in Window Rock, Arizona. According to the February 2000 Tract Action Plan, there were 54 tracts in the LCO, of which 53 (98.15 percent) were HTE. According to the 1990 PDB, there were 35,288 housing units. The LCO covered the Navajo Nation, encompassing portions of Arizona, New Mexico and Utah and ranging over 25,000 square miles of land. Among the difficulties faced by this LCO were 95 percent unpaved roads, adverse weather and rugged terrain. The LCO's population was almost exclusively American Indian.

Pay Rates

Presidential Members' Summary

Summary
Census 2000 marked the first time a single LCO was responsible for the entire Navajo Nation. Management reported this significant location change allowed for localized and improved operations.

Observations
Enumeration was primarily update/enumerate. Adverse weather can make area roads—95 percent of which are unpaved—impassable. Houses are often more than two miles apart on isolated tracts of land. Horseback is the only way to reach remote outposts where there are no roads. The manager told us that the maps for the reservation were printed at a smaller scale than necessary for housing units that are located so far apart. This observation was mentioned in other rural LCOs visited such as Greenville, Mississippi and Altoona, Pennsylvania.

Most people on the reservation do not have telephones. Indeed, not long ago President Clinton was in the Navajo Nation to announce an initiative to extend telecommunications access to tribal lands. Consequently, enumerators were told to personally visit each household up to six times rather than three personal visits and three phone calls.

In an area where upwards of one in two adults are unemployed, the census provided a rare opportunity to work within the community on an important issue. Recruiting efforts yielded over 8,000 applicants. Due to the recruiting success, the manager's request for a pay increase was denied.

Because the LCO was located on the Navajo reservation, most employees knew the area well and spoke both English and Navajo. One day of training was devoted to cultural sensitivity and translation of the census questionnaire into Navajo. This proved essential since the older generation speaks only Navajo and the younger generations speak little Navajo. During the Board staff observation of update/enumerate field follow-up, enumerators used both the English and Navajo languages.

A century old land dispute between the Hopi and Navajo tribes exists just east of the LCO's jurisdiction. The area is called Hopi/Navajo partition land. Navajos live in some areas governed by Hopis, and vice versa. To adjust to this situation, the Window Rock and the Flagstaff LCOs sent paired enumerators _ one Hopi and one Navajo to each housing unit. The two tribes were able to work together on this historic occasion to improve the census count.

The Navajo Nation took seriously the efforts to get its citizens counted in the 2000 Census. The President and Speaker of the Assembly worked together to appropriate over $25,000 for a public awareness campaign. The CCC met monthly. All 110 chapters of the Navajo Nation passed resolutions supporting the census. Additionally, both sides of the Monitoring Board spoke at a tribal leaders census conference in Gallup, New Mexico in November 1999, to encourage local efforts to promote Census 2000 participation.

Congressional Members' Summary

Summary
The Window Rock LCO faced the challenge of counting an area that is 98 percent HTE. The LCO was strongly supported by the Navajo Nation and the Denver RCC and was empowered to develop its own targeted outreach campaign for the Navajo Nation.

Observations
The Window Rock LCO is responsible for the Navajo Nation in the tri-state region of Arizona, New Mexico and Utah. Ninety-eight percent of the LCOs tracts meet the definition of hard-to-enumerate. In the HTE tracts, the LCO was challenged by linguistic isolation, high rates of illiteracy, seasonal migration and a high percentage of working single parent homes. To address these challenges, the LCO management staff wrote an HTE Action Plan, a copy of the summary was provide to the Monitoring Board. In the summary, the LCO management staff predicted some reasons for the lack of cooperation with the census would be "a mistrust of federal government, confidentiality concerns, misleading information, lack of awareness and the `door step' approach to enumeration." Changes were made to the methods by which enumerators went door-to-door (normal procedure is for the enumerator not to enter a home, but here enumerators were encouraged to enter the household and receive the residents' hospitality).

The Denver RCC had arranged for cultural classes in order to advise the enumerators of what to expect when visiting Native American homes (though the office was staffed entirely by Navajo residents). Although these classes were helpful in teaching customs and protocol, the LCOM suggested the Bureau needed to recognize all different Native American peoples and respect their differences. The LCO managers noted the Bureau's public relations campaign placed all Native Americans under one umbrella. However, the Denver RCC did empower the LCO by permitting it to create its own targeted campaign for the Navajo Nation. The Navajo Nation spent approximately $25,000 to accomplish this specific project and outreach in general. The LCO staff worked with one CCC, which was comprised of five Council Delegates and five at-large members from the Navajo Nation.

There was little difficulty in recruiting employees, given the area's high unemployment rate and the tribal government's strong support, but the office's results were not reported on national recruiting reports. The final April 21 report notes this LCO was "not included due to it's small NRFU workload. Primarily U/E. Data would have been skewed for the report."

The LCO staff was challenged by the quality of maps provided to the office. According to managers, the Denver RCC-provided maps did not always reflect requested changes and were incorrectly scaled. In an area like Window Rock, the LCO management staff considers the inclusion of more landmarks more efficient in locating homes because of the distance between homes and villages. Denver RCC noted an unrelated problem with the timeliness of various other supplies, due to distance and rough terrain that characterize the LCO's area.

We believe the entire LCO staff showed great inventiveness by creating materials and a cultural awareness program particular to the Navajo Nation. This initiative, coupled with teamwork between the tribal and federal governments, will play a large part in ensuring the census will not fail this area's residents again.

The Window Rock LCO successfully showed how strong support from Native American tribes, like the Navajo Nation, and dedicated efforts by the Bureau, including the Denver RCC, can prevent failure in traditionally HTE communities and ensure more accurate enumeration.

Overview

Dates of Visits:
March 23, 2000
May 10, 2000
June 7, 2000

Mailback Response Rate
67%

NRFU Workload
86,200 housing units

LCO Type
Type C Office (includes mailout/mailback and update/leave enumeration areas)

Geographic Description
The Denver LCO was located at 999 18th Street, Denver, Colorado. According to the February 2000 Tract Action Plan, there were 141 tracts, of which approximately one-third were HTE. According to the 1990 PDB, there were 239,636 housing units. The LCO was responsible for the Denver metropolitan area and the county of Denver. The area experienced rapid growth since the last census. Approximately one in four residents are Hispanic and one in eight are African-American.

Pay Rates

Presidential Members' Summary

Summary
Denver achieved a high response rate (67 percent) despite a number of challenges presented by significant population growth in the metro Denver area and population diversity throughout the jurisdiction.

Observations
The LCO's enumeration strategy targeted traditionally Hard-to-Enumerate populations: the homeless, college students and the elderly, as well as minority groups such as Latinos, African Americans, Asian Americans and Native Americans. A high overall mail response rate enabled the LCO to intensify efforts in its Hard-to-Enumerate tracts where traditionally undercounted minority populations reside.

LCO management went to great lengths to ensure that census workers were recruited from the Hard-to-Enumerate areas. For example, the LCO organized a "Recruitment Day" as part of a broad effort to attract employees who lived in, and were knowledgeable of, targeted neighborhoods, particularly in the predominantly Spanish-speaking areas and in the recently revitalized historic section of the city. As of March 23, more than forty enumerator test sessions were conducted in hard to enumerate communities. Moreover, as of May 10, the availability of Spanish language tests, as well as competitive hourly wages, helped draw upwards of 6,000 applicants. Practice sessions enabled a high pass rate for aptitude tests, approximately 90 percent.

The development of strong internal procedures and enthusiasm among LCO management carried down to field workers, thereby favorably impacting NRFU operations. A program calling for the assignment of bilingual enumerators to districts in which Spanish is commonly spoken, "paired" enumeration in high crime areas, and deployment of community facilitators helped make NRFU operations successful. LCO staff and the office's strategic plan put the office on target to complete NRFU by June 24, 2000.

A field observation in a historic section of downtown Denver provided an opportunity to review the work of an enumerator and to assess competence levels. The enumerator worked efficiently and professionally, exceeding the national goal of 1.4 cases per hour. In a few instances, neighbors helped the enumerator bridge language gaps between the enumerator (English-speaking) and respondents (Spanish-speaking only).

The LCOM worked on the 1990 Census, thus providing him invaluable experience in meeting challenges in the 2000 Census. He credited the Bureau's Partnership Program and involvement by an active CCC, comprised of elected officials and local community organizations, for enhancing public awareness of and participation in the census. The LCO participated in numerous joint events with the CCC over the course of the office's existence.

Congressional Members' Summary

Summary
The Denver office showed how individuals with previous decennial census experience and municipal government knowledge can improve recruiting, partnership and planning efforts by working in cooperation with elected officials and community groups, thus ensuring a full and accurate enumeration.

Observations
Within the office's HTE tracts, the Bureau faced pockets of language isolation as well as traditional challenges enumerating public housing projects and single-person households. To the Bureau's credit, the LCO management wrote an HTE Action Plan that addressed the difficult tracts and incorporated suggestions from members of the Denver City Council. The plan was followed closely, but was also modified as needed. For example, the paired enumeration strategy was added in some places with low response rates and the blitz enumeration strategy was added for several apartment complexes not originally included in the plan. During the course of the March 23 Monitoring Board visit, we were given the opportunity to review one (of 141) tract's blueprint. Unfortunately, the entire plan was not provided by the Denver RCC until September 8, 2000, thus it could not be fully evaluated.

In addition, we are concerned with the 10,000 forms returned to the LCO as UAA, as reported during the March 23 visit.

Despite the region's low unemployment rate, the office met its overall hiring goal and successfully recruited over 300 bilingual enumerators to improve enumeration in the Hispanic communities. Competitive wages, partnership efforts and efficient use of part-timers (about 70 percent of the enumerator workforce) permitted the LCO to operate at about 96 percent of its projected staffing requirements.

The Denver CCC established an excellent working relationship with the Bureau. Of note, the City Council of Denver had allocated approximately $80,000 towards outreach, including yard signs, Spanish-language materials and PSAs. These partnership efforts helped lead to higher-than-expected return rates of census forms by mail (67 percent versus 1990's 63 percent). Organizations such as the Denver Public Housing Authority, Denver school district, GANAS (Greater Area Neighborhood Affiliated for Service) and Servicios de la Raza were instrumental in establishing 35 QACs and 11 "Be Counted!" sites that served approximately 1,600 people.

Results from the Denver office demonstrate how valuable the work of local elected officials, like city council members, is to ensuring a successful census. Although other cities have expressed frustration over inter-government relations, it seemed like this LCO regularly provided the city with essential information, including the status of operations and even frequent neighborhood progress reports.

Overview

Dates of Visits:
May 22, 2000
June 29, 2000

Mailback Response Rate
64%

NRFU Workload
33,029 housing units

LCO Type
Type D Office (includes list/enumerate areas and may also include mailout/mailback, update/leave, and update/enumerate areas)

Geographic Description
The Cheyenne LCO was located on the first floor of the U.S. Postal Service facility at 2120 Capitol Avenue, Cheyenne, Wyoming. According to the February 2000 Tract Action Plan, there were 86 tracts in the LCO, of which 24 (27.91 percent) were HTE. According to the 1990 PDB, there were 99,818 housing units. The LCO encompassed 11 counties in the southeastern half of the state, a predominantly rural area that is racially and linguistically homogenous.

Pay Rates

Presidential Members' Summary

Summary
The LCO garnered a higher than expected mail-response rate of 64 percent, representing an increase over 1990. This increase allowed the LCO to complete NRFU operations nearly one month ahead of the national deadline.

Observations
The LCO employed three different types of enumeration methods: mail-out/mail-back (MO/MB), update/leave (U/L,) and list-enumerate (L/E). Overlapping operations schedules (U/L operations took place in March; L/E started on March 20 and ended on April 22; and MO/MB followed the standard, nationwide timetable) led to some public confusion and presented a staffing management challenge, but neither proved insurmountable.

The office reached 93 percent of its recruiting goal of 4,800 people. The office was short-handed at the beginning of U/L but was fully staffed for every other operation. The "Census Jobs" postcards, augmented by local radio, proved to be the most effective tools in attracting applicants. Training proceeded without difficulty, aside from several materials arriving shortly after training began. The LCOM described training as very effective; only a small percentage of people needed additional on-the-job training.

The LCO made extensive use of the Bureau's Planning Database. The database enabled managers to foresee which areas would require special enumeration methods such as the use of Spanish/English bilingual enumerators.

The office completed its NRFU workload of over 33,000 housing units on June 5, well ahead of the national schedule. However, the transition from rural route to city-style addresses did present some challenges. For example, a number of listing/delivery problems cropped-up in both Converse and Goshen counties, even though both participated in LUCA. Address changes in the period between the end of LUCA and the start of field operations contributed to these problems.

Cheyenne received numerous long-form complaints. The LCOM noted that well-publicized statements by certain national political leaders and media personalities contributed to the long-form backlash. The LCOM said, "people would quote them when my people knocked on the door." A significant number of residents told NRFU field staff that they had already answered all the questions they deemed necessary.

The Governor's Census 2000 Taskforce proved to be invaluable to the LCO's efforts. Wyoming held over 25 meetings across the state promoting census awareness and participation. The State was particularly proud of its improvement with the Wind River Indian Reservation.

During NRFU, Board staff accompanied an enumerator in north-central Cheyenne. The enumerator conducted her responsibilities in a professional manner.

Congressional Members' Summary

Summary
Several issues created concern about LCO operations in Cheyenne. Many residents in MO/MB areas were missed because of Post Office Box non-delivery. The level of proxy data seems to be unusually high. The staff of the LCO had little preparation, or training, for the quality control procedure known as Reinterview. The Bureau did not provide enough Partnership Specialists' attention to this area. State and local governments were confused and frustrated with the lack of up to date information after the Census was underway.

However, the state put together a very effective outreach program with very little money.

Observations
Due to the Bureau's Post Office Box non-delivery policy, the town of Reliance (Sweetwater County), among others, was completely overlooked. This left the LCO staff to deal with these residents as NRFU cases.

A substantial amount of proxy data was gathered by the Cheyenne LCO. Specifically, about one-third of the L/E cases requiring follow-up in certain areas and one-third to one-fourth of NRFU cases in some MO/MB communities were completed via proxy.

During the June 29 Monitoring Board visit, the LCO staff reported doubts about the effectiveness of Reinterview. There was little or no formal training for Reinterview and knowledge was gained by self-study. To compound problems, receipt of the self-study training materials was delayed, computer problems also affected Reinterview and there were "no Denver RCC resources were available to assist them." In fact, a Regional Technician from the Denver RCC attended the AMFO's training course.

However, the Bureau's Partnership program appeared to be stretched thin as there was only one Government Partnership Specialist assigned for the states of Wyoming, Colorado and Nebraska; one Community Partnership Specialist for Wyoming, Colorado and Nevada; and one Media Partnership Specialist for both Colorado and Wyoming.

The Wyoming Task Force Census 2000 was well organized and represented a wide variety of constituencies who met throughout the state. It showed that a state could mount an effective promotional campaign in certain parts of the county for very little money (under $1000 state appropriations). It had an extremely good working relationship with Governor Jim Gehringer and could serve as a model for other rural states.

One of the task force's concerns, however, was the lack of real time census data. The task force wanted more current data than what the Bureau was providing via their website, which stopped being updated on April 11, however, when governor's liaison called the Bureau for more recent figures, he was denied and referred to the outdated website. Because of limited information, much-needed assistance could not be provided to counties and towns with low response rates, nor could media reports be clarified. In particular, a June 5 Wyoming Tribune-Eagle article that said the census was "complete" was compared to a June 28 article from the same paper that said the census was "almost complete."

Additionally, the Wyoming Governor's liaison said he was contacted only twice by the Denver RCC and would have liked more communication.