Dean H. Judson

1. The 2006 American Community Survey (ACS) Content Test Questions on International Migration: Improving Data on the U.S. Foreign-Born Dean H. Judson For presentation at the Conference of European Statisticians, Edinburgh, Scotland, 20-22 November, 2006

2. CES Recommendations for 2010 Censuses: Migration Section • “To facilitate and improve the • comparability of data at a regional level • through the selection of a core set of • census topics and the harmonization of • definitions and classifications.”

3. Issues with U.S. Census Bureau International Migration Data • Difficult to obtain accurate distributions of the • foreign born by U.S. citizenship status (citizen • versus non-citizen) • Difficult to estimate time spent in the United States by the foreign born

4. Opportunities for Improvement: The American Community Survey • An ongoing nationwide survey that • collects socioeconomic and housing • information and • replaces the long form component • of the 2010 census

5. Opportunities for Improvement: The ACS Content Test • 63,000 housing units • Two versions of question content 1) a control version and 2) a variant, or test, version 3) Followup tested consistency of responses • Changes that met data quality criteria will be implemented in the 2008 ACS, and reflected in the 2009 data release.

6. Improving Data on International Migration: Questions on the ACS • U.S. Citizenship Status • Year of Entry • Related but Not Discussed Here. . . • Place of Birth • Residence One Year Ago

7. Motivation for Changes: Citizenship Status • Naturalization: appears to be over-reported in some Census & survey data (Passel and Clark, 1997) • Year of Naturalization: • -item would help to reduce reports of naturalization • by non-citizens (by prompting them to examine their answer) • -Year naturalized could be compared with year • first entered to determine if respondent had been • in country long enough to naturalize

8. Motivation for Changes: Year of Entry • Current question does not account for multiple entries • (Redstone and Massey, 2004) • Will better approximate host country experience by asking for first & most recent entry

9. Control Variant Content Test Questions: Citizenship

10. Control Variant Content Test Questions: Year of Entry

11. Summary of Question Changes Test version: Citizenship -five categories, including “Naturalized Citizen” and write-in for year naturalized -U.S. Citizen Parents Year of Entry -Allows for reporting more than one entry (first and most recent) • Control version: • Citizenship • -five categories, including • “Naturalized Citizen” • -American parent(s) • Year of Entry • -Allows for reporting one entry

12. Selection Criteria: U.S. Citizenship Status • The percent naturalized in the test version will be equal to or less than the percent for the control. • The percent of non-responses in the test will be equal to or less than the percent for the control.

13. Citizenship Status: Naturalized Citizens Universe: All nonblank records

14. Citizenship Status Nonresponse Rates 1: Universe includes all nonblank records 2: Universe includes all test records of naturalized citizens

15. Summary: Citizenship Status • Percent Naturalized (Control versus Test) • No statistical difference • Item Non-response: • -Citizenship Status (Control versus Test) • No statistical difference • -Year of Naturalization • Ten percent non-response for those naturalized • Conclusion: • Asking for year naturalized had no statistically significant effect on Citizenship item but does have other uses

16. Selection Criteria: Year of Entry • The net difference rate will be lower in the test version than the control (by period of entry). • The percent of non-responses for the test version will be equal to or less than the percent for the control. • (for information purposes only. . .) • Determine if the year of entry values provided in the control version reflect a first year of arrival, most recent year of arrival, or something else.

17. Number of Arrivals: Test versus Follow-up Universe: Test cases of population born outside the U.S.

18. Year Entered: Control and Test versus Follow-Up (Year entered matches exactly) Universe: All persons born outside the United States.

19. Year Entered: Control and Test versus Follow-Up (Year entered matches within two years) Universe: All persons born outside the United States.

20. Year of Entry Nonresponse Rates Universe: Population born outside the United States 1: Includes all nonblank records. 2: Includes all test cases that marked more than one entry.

21. Years Entered for Persons with Multiple Entries: Follow-up Interviews with Control Group to Check for Consistency of Year Provided Universe: All control records indicating more than one arrival in reinterview.

22. Summary: Year of Entry • Item Consistency • Number of Entries (Test versus Follow-Up): • Large difference (48 percentage points) in proportion of • respondents indicating single versus multiple entries. • Year Entered (Control and Test versus Follow-up): • Somewhat consistent reporting of exact year and good reporting • within two years. • Year Entered (Control vs. Follow-up, Multiple Entries): • Follow-up reporting indicated that the original response more often • represented the first year of arrival than the most recent year of arrival. • However, exact year matches and same decade reporting was poor, • with a sizeable proportion matching neither first nor last arrival.

23. Summary: Year of Entry (Cont.) • Item Non-response • Year Entered (Control versus Test): • Only or first arrival • -No statistical difference • -non-response somewhat high for both versions (22 percent). • Year of most recent arrival • -very high non-response (83 percent) • Conclusion • The control version performed better, although • follow-up interviewing suggested concerns for the • control.

24. Thoughts on lessons learned • The purpose was to better represent the hard-to-enumerate foreign born • Year of naturalization has analytic value • Did no harm to the overall question • Can be used for consistency checking • Appears to be well understood • Year of arrival • Despite successful cognitive testing… • Question form continues to be problematic • Many inconsistent responses