Dwight P. Dean serves as Director of the Detroit Regional Census Center.

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

Michigan: Battle Creek LCO; Detroit West LCO

Ohio: Cincinnati LCO; Cleveland LCO

West Virginia

Highlights of the Region include:

• Approximately 10,211,411 Housing Units
• 165,764 Square Miles
• 3 States, 226 Counties
• 9 American Indian Reservations
• 4,499 Governmental Units
• 38 Members of the U.S. House of Representatives
• 6 U.S. Senators
• 42 Local Census Offices

Additional items of interest include:

• Largest number of single-parent housing units (nationally vs. Detroit, Cleveland, Columbus and Flint)
• Largest Arabic community in the entire country
• Over 80 percent minority population in Detroit
• Third-largest number of governmental units
• 50 cities with populations greater than 50,000

Overview

Dates of Visits:
April 12, 2000
May 17, 2000
June 20, 2000
Mailback Response Rate
66%

NRFU Workload
91,246 housing units

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

Geographic Description
The Battle Creek LCO was located in the Old Kent Bank Building, at 67 West Michigan Avenue, Battle Creek, Michigan. According to the February 2000 Tract Action Plan, there were 147 tracts, of which 19 (12.93 percent) were HTE. According to the 1990 PDB, there were 232,584 housing units. The LCO was responsible for a seven-county area in the southwest area of Michigan, with Battle Creek and Jackson as its only urban areas.

Pay Rates

Presidential Members' Summary

Summary
The Census Bureau achieved a high initial response rate (66 percent) in the Battle Creek LCO jurisdiction despite inherent challenges. The LCO jurisdiction is predominantly agrarian and rural outside of the City of Battle Creek. The mail back result is more impressive considering other challenges to enumeration such as the large number of apartment dwellers who tend to move frequently. Low local unemployment created additional difficulties in recruiting personnel. Another obstacle was the presence of a highly vocal anti-government group known as the "Michigan Militia" who view the census as intrusive.

Observations
The LCOM relied on the Detroit Regional Office for support, speaking daily with the Regional Manager assigned to Battle Creek and neighboring LCOs. According to the LCOM, the Regional Office was responsive to all requests.

The LCOM praised the Bureau's national advertising campaign and credits the Bureau for providing needed support that enabled the operation to run smoothly. In particular, the LCOM emphasized that the quality and scope of the Bureau's Partnership Program contributed to the success of the office. The office developed a strong organizational plan that included a quick-response UAA program and NRFU agenda.

The Complete Count Committees in Battle Creek and Jackson were especially helpful in supplementing the LCO's efforts to mobilize census participation. In addition, QACs and Be Counted sites fostered wide dissemination of census information that managers said contributed to the high response mail response rate.

Much of the LCO's success can be attributed to the dedication and hard work of staff. Despite low local unemployment, the LCO was able to employ a competent workforce in all areas of the jurisdiction. During enumeration, special attention was paid to adhering to the LCO's Hard-to-Enumerate plan. Households in HTE areas often received more than the Bureau-mandated three visits and three telephone calls during NRFU.

Congressional Members' Summary

Summary
The Battle Creek office appeared to conduct various phases of Census 2000 operations well. Successful recruiting, a stable work force, few HTE tracts, along with a high response rate enabled this LCO to complete NRFU quickly. The LCO also formed effective relationships with local officials and CCCs.

Observations
Although the office had a small number of difficult tracts, the LCOM used the Bureau's HTE plan to assist employees in enumerating these areas. The primary strategy from the Bureau's "Toolkit" was team enumeration, supplemented with 56 QACs and 120 "Be Counted!" sites. A large immigrant population, with all the challenges that brings, characterized some of the rural HTE areas.

The office's recruiting requirements were successfully met; many of the enumerators hired were senior citizens. This stable workforce, along with a high response rate, enabled the LCO to be the first of 18 Michigan offices to complete NRFU.

There were a high number of UAAs reported during the May 17 visit. The original mailout universe was approximately 263,000 and almost 17,000 forms (or over 6 percent) were returned to the LCO as UAA.

The LCO maintained good working relationships with local officials and CCCs, especially in the towns of Battle Creek and Jackson. By working together, both groups increased awareness, encouraged census response, and assisted in recruiting. These efforts resulted in a high mail response rate (70 percent).

Overview

Dates of Visits:
March 30, 2000
May 3, 2000
June 12, 2000
Mailback Response Rate
61%

NRFU Workload
55,241 housing units

LCO Type
Type A Office (entirely mailout/mailback, mainly urban, hardest to enumerate)

Geographic Description
The Detroit West LCO was located in the Julian C. Madison Building, 1420 Washington Boulevard, Detroit, Michigan. According to the February 2000 Tract Action Plan, there were 117 tracts in the LCO, of which 47 (40.17 percent) were HTE. According to the 1990 PDB, there were 151,192 housing units. The LCO was responsible for southwest Detroit, primarily an inner city area. About 78 percent of the population is African-American, 17 percent Hispanic, with the remainder from the Middle East, India and West Africa.

Pay Rates

Presidential Members' Summary

Summary
Positive community involvement, large recruiting numbers and a smoothly run NRFU operation contributed to the success of this office.

Observations
A hands-on management style helped this LCO solve problems quickly. Board staff was particularly impressed with the LCO manager who was on a first name basis with most LCO employees. Furthermore, the LCOM reported that she made every attempt to anticipate problems rather than waiting to receive a middle management report. Her dedication contributed to the office's success.

Detroit West's aggressive recruiting effort focused on hiring enumerators to work in their own neighborhoods. The relatively high level of area unemployment helped the LCO achieve recruiting success. The office reached 112 percent of its goal by the end of March and finished at 167 percent of its recruiting goal.

Management created and followed an excellent HTE Action Plan. The plan, drawing on 1990 census data in the Planning Database, summarized the various neighborhoods and living quarters in western Detroit, including local demographic information. The updated information helped recruiters and field managers direct resources to the proper areas during NRFU.

NRFU generally proceeded smoothly but lagged slightly in some Latino neighborhoods in Southwest Detroit. The managers reported that the neighborhoods are growing so quickly that it was hard to reach residents. Despite this newer challenge, the LCO finished NRFU operations ahead of the national deadline on June 21.

"Notice of visit" cards _ flyers left by enumerators when respondents were not home _ were successfully used as calling cards for people who were not at home. However, the cards were printed only in English. The flyers may have been hard to read for non-English speakers.

LCO cooperation with local political officials and community leaders was excellent. The efforts of the Mayor proved particularly helpful to the Census effort. The City of Detroit launched its own public relations campaign to promote the census. In addition, the Mayor asked for detailed weekly reports from all of Detroit's LCOs. To ensure a complete count, the Mayor's office kept a watchful eye on all the LCOs to be extremely thorough and occasionally used its own employees to promote the census.

Congressional Members' Summary

Summary
The Detroit West office was successful at recruiting, outreach and promotional awareness efforts and obtained a strong mail response rate. The LCO maintained good working relationships with local officials and the two local CCCs, Wayne County and the city of Detroit.

Observations
The office was able to recruit successfully, ranking seventh among the Detroit RCC's 42 offices and with a strong mail response rate, was the sixth among the Region's offices to complete NRFU.

Detroit Mayor Dennis W. Archer led the city's efforts to count all its residents, including promotion, town hall meetings, advertising and volunteering. The city's $300,000 promotional campaign included distributing 19,000 yard signs, 10,000 bumper stickers and 20,000 window placards encouraging residents to mail back Census forms. The city reached out to 7,000 volunteers in order to distribute the promotional material. Individuals and corporations could volunteer via the city's Web site.

The Bureau cultivated relations with various community-based organizations, including Latino Family Services, which assisted in identifying cultural facilitators. However, recruitment in Hispanic neighborhoods was difficult. Another Detroit LCO assisted the Detroit West office in hiring bilingual enumerators.

Because the LCO had gained the community's confidence early, the office was able to complete the Final Closeout phase of Census 2000 operations by partnering with the city. Volunteers who signed up to participate in the city's "Knowledgeable Neighbor" helped provide proxy data to the Bureau.

In addition to interviews conducted by the Monitoring Board at the Detroit West office, the city received visits from House Subcommittee on the Census staff in June and General Accounting Office (GAO) officials in July. GAO conducts investigations, primarily budget and financial, on behalf of Congress.

The city wanted to succeed. Through teamwork and aggressive efforts, the LCO made significant strides to ensuring a more accurate enumeration. Approximately 17,000 children may have been undercounted during the last decennial census. It appears that the city of Detroit made an unprecedented effort so that such an undercount would not occur in 2000.

Overview

Dates of Visits:
April 6, 2000
May 25, 2000
June 26, 2000

Mailback Response Rate
53%

NRFU Workload
65,795 housing units

LCO Type
Type A Office (entirely mailout/mailback, mainly urban, hardest to enumerate)

Geographic Description
The Cincinnati LCO was located in the Executive Building, at 35 E. Seventh Street, Cincinnati, Ohio. According to the February 2000 Tract Action Plan, there were 57 tracts, of which 46 (80.70 percent) were HTE. According to the 1990 PDB, there were 131,492 housing units.

Pay Rates

Presidential Members' Summary

Summary
Despite encountering an unusual number of operational obstacles, the Cincinnati LCO was able to complete NRFU well before the July 7 deadline.

Observations
The mail response rate was higher than expected for the LCO at 53 percent, thus reducing the expected NRFU workload to just over 65,000 housing units. The reduced workload mitigated some recruiting and hiring problems but the Cincinnati office nevertheless borrowed enumerators from outside offices to complete enumeration.

The Internal Revenue Service (IRS) may have posed the greatest challenge to a successful count in Cincinnati. According to census staff, the IRS operates a tax form processing facility nearby that competed with the census bureau for workers. The IRS facility required about 5,000 applicants—roughly the same number required by the Cincinnati LCO—in order to fill roughly 1,000 temporary positions. This competition made it extremely difficult for the LCO to find qualified workers. The Detroit Regional Office responded by issuing extra media advertising and raising enumerator pay by a few dollars per hour, but the IRS countered with a stronger benefits package. This competition seemed to hamper the LCO's ability to build a strong applicant pool.

The impressive national advertising campaign increased awareness and census participation in Cincinnati. However, local advertisers were disappointed that some of the advertising buys could not have been handled locally. The New Haven LCOM echoed this sentiment.

Although the LCO faced some problems that were out of its control, managers seemed to place blame rather than find creative remedies. For example, the LCOM complained that operations might have been hindered because supplies were late. Yet other LCOs around the country who had similar problems were able to imaginatively find solutions without compromising operations.

A few prominent community groups representing residents in Over The Rhine, a historically poor, African American neighborhood, voiced concern that not enough people from their community were hired as enumerators. They became especially frustrated when enumerators from neighboring LCOs came to Cincinnati to help finish the count in mid-June. LCO management was aware of the community groups' concerns and followed procedure to hire qualified applicants to work in their own neighborhoods.

Congressional Members' Summary

Summary
The Cincinnati LCO was challenged by low mailback response rates, a high number of UAAs, high turnover among employees and ineffective recruitment from HTE neighborhoods.

Observations
The Cincinnati LCO was ranked last in NRFU productivity, among the Detroit RCC's 42 offices until workers from West Virginia and the Blue Ash (OH) LCO arrived to assist. These reinforcements helped the office complete NRFU on June 19, a day before the RCC's goal for the completion of NRFU and two-and-a-half weeks before the Bureau's July 7 deadline. The LCO could have prepared better for those neighborhoods that were anticipated to be the hardest NRFU cases. Additionally, the LCO's mailback response rate was 53 percent, the lowest of any major city in the Detroit RCC.

We noted a high rate of turnover (reported at 73 percent during the May 25 Monitoring Board visit) and the inability to meet the office's hiring goal (77 percent of its qualified applicant goal, according to the April 20 national recruiting report). During our May 25 visit, in the midst of NRFU, the LCOM reported being understaffed by 210 enumerators. Astonishingly, the LCOM reported no employees had been hired from the office's HTE neighborhoods. The LCO was ineffective in hiring people from the Lower Basin area, the Over The Rhine area and the Winton Hill neighborhood.

Offers of hiring assistance made by various organizations were not acted upon; instead, the Bureau `imported' workers from other offices. Specifically, the New Perspective Community Center offered 50 qualified applicants and the Hamilton County Department of Human Services offered 40 qualified welfare-to-work graduates. The Cincinnati City Council passed a resolution expressing concern and dissatisfaction regarding hiring practices at the local census office.

We are also concerned with the 65,788 forms returned to the LCO as UAA, as reported during the May 25 visit.

The office's 83 QACs and 147 "Be Counted!" sites served only 17 people, which raised questions regarding their location, staffing levels and hours of service.

The LCO was in a high crime area. In addition, a fire and two break-ins led to hiring an armed security guard.

Overview

Dates of Visits:
March 23, 2000
May 2, 2000
June 9, 2000

Mailback Response Rate
49%

NRFU Workload
73,426 housing units

LCO Type
Type A Office (Entirely Maiout/Mailback, mainly urban , hardest to enumerate)

Geographic Description
The Cleveland LCO was located in the North Point Tower, at 1001 Lakeside Avenue, Cleveland, Ohio. According to the February 2000 Tract Action Plan, there are 166 tracts in the LCO, of which 112 (67.47 percent) are HTE. According to the 1990 PDB, there were 142,401 housing units. The LCO was responsible for most of the city of Cleveland.

Pay Rates

Presidential Members' Summary

Summary
The Cleveland office did good work based on our three visits. Excellent recruiting and HTE planning highlight the success of the office.

Observations
The Cleveland LCO reached 100 percent of its recruiting goal by our first visit on March 23, before many other LCOs. In the end, the LCO reached 108 percent of its goal. With HTE tracts comprising nearly 85 percent of the LCO's tract total and a generally low mail response rate (49 percent), this recruiting success was crucial.

The office produced and implemented a well-organized Hard-To-Enumerate Action Plan. The LCO's enumeration plan noted that some areas previously considered easy to enumerate during the 1990 census would need far greater attention in the 2000 Census due to changing demographics. Most HTE tracts were in low income and immigrant neighborhoods, some of which changed since 1990.

The LCOM said that general apathy and an increased number of HTE neighborhoods contributed to the mail response rate. However, the national advertising campaign seemed to keep mail response from falling below 1990 levels. The office was behind regional goals for completion of NRFU when we last visited on June 13 but appeared to be on track to complete the operation by the national deadline.

The LCO operated 98 QACs, each of which doubled as a Be Counted site. The LCO also operated about 85 additional Be Counted sites. Public use of these sites was moderate and the LCO manager considered them worth-while efforts to maintain good relations with the community.

Management was slightly frustrated that qualified applicants could refuse work three times before they were removed from selection lists. Many of these applicants made clear that they could not work during the first call but were called twice more because of the Bureau's policy. Management felt this was unfair to other qualified applicants who might have been called sooner.

Bureau policy requires qualified applicants, those with the highest test scores and who pass the security background checks, to refuse work three times before the applicant's name can be removed from selection lists. Presumably, some qualified applicants would be able to work at a later date even though they refused once or twice in the past. The LCOM noted that the vast majority of people who refused once were not available to work at any later time. He suggested that in 2010, selection clerks be authorized to remove qualified applicants from selection lists who do not wish to work after the first inquiry. This new policy could allow recruiters to find available workers more quickly.

Congressional Members' Summary

Summary
The Cleveland LCO was supported by two local CCCs and other partner organizations. Additional support came from elected officials as well as innovative outreach efforts. The LCOM did not want to repeat 1990's mailback response rate and focused significant efforts on promotion and outreach.

Observations
The office's management staff wrote an HTE Action Plan to address its difficult areas, a copy of which was not provided for evaluation. According to the LCOM, team and blitz enumeration strategies were going to be used to target HTE neighborhoods. In the Lower Westside neighborhood, a large monolingual Japanese population presented additional challenges.

The office's recruiting efforts were average, ranking 25th among the Detroit RCC's 42 offices according to the final April 20 national recruiting report. The office had met 100 percent of its qualified applicant goal and had little margin to account for attrition. The LCOM reported during our May 2 visit that the office had a "high turnover rate," compounded by others who would complete training, but not begin their job.

The LCO cultivated relations with various organizations, including the city of Cleveland's Metro Housing Authority, which assisted in identifying trusted third parties in areas like housing projects. Cleveland Public Power assisted with mass mailings. Major efforts had been made in outreach to the rapidly growing Hispanic and Asian communities.

The Bureau maintained good working relationships with local elected officials and the two local CCCs, Cuyahoga County and the city of Cleveland. Both CCCs operated impressive marketing efforts and committed funding for outreach. The city appropriated $30,000 for various programs and the county appropriated $25,000 for promotional material, encouraging residents to mail back census forms.

The response rate was the main concern of the LCOM as related to CMB staff during our second visit. The LCOM felt confident that his office could improve upon the 1990 response rate due to improved outreach. The city of Cleveland's overall 1990 response rate was 47 percent. Final figures for 2000 put their response rate at 57 percent.