Woodrow-Lafield, Karen A. and Anand Ramanujan. 2003. A Snapshot on Census 2000 Coverage: Answers, Questions, and Geography, Presented at the annual meeting of the Southern Demographic Association, October 24, Alexandria, Virginia.


The 2000 Census is regarded as covering the population more completely than prior censuses and giving new knowledge of the Hispanic or Latino population, foreign-born population, and, indirectly, unauthorized residents. This paper examines the scientific evaluations of accuracy of the 2000 Census, including the A.C.E. Revision II results as to coverage nationally and for states and regions. Net undercount rates were reduced, as were also differences in net undercount rates between historically less well counted groups and other groups. An expert assessment stated a reasonable inference that differences in net undercount rates among geographic areas were probably smaller in 2000 than in 1990. Nevertheless, large numbers of duplicate census enumerations and wholly imputed census records cast a pall on Census 2000, and attention to the geographic distribution of census coverage is warranted by the disproportionate representation of duplicates and imputations among historically less-well-counted groups. A.C.E. Revision II results showed net overcounts for the majority of states, especially Illinois, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Florida, and Indiana, and a net undercount for the District of Columbia. It may be plausible that the 2000 Census counts and the A.C.E. estimates may be the “same” for the South and the West, but there are indications of net overcounts for the Midwest and Northeast. Because there is uncertainty about A.C.E. results, Census 2000 count data are the basis for apportionment, redistricting, federal funding allocation, intercensal population estimates, and national survey controls for the decade. Because the Hispanic or Latino and foreign-born populations have increased since 1990 and censuses have historically shown undercounting for Hispanics, foreign-born persons, recent immigrants, and unauthorized residents, questions of coverage within states, counties and places merit continuing scrutiny.