1. FSCPE Briefing on LUCA September 27, 2006 Linda Franz Geography Division

2. 2 Local Update of Census Addresses (LUCA) First implemented for Census 2000 Purpose is to improve the census address list using local knowledge Confidentiality of address information Changes validated in the pre-census address canvassing operation

3. 3 Improvements for the 2010 LUCA Program Single cycle of review for all address types Longer review period More advance notice Software provided to participants Proposal to invite states to participate Improved training

4. 4 Options for LUCA Participants Full address list review, Title 13 confidential Provide local address list (city-style) for Census Bureau matching, Title 13 confidential Provide local address list (city-style) for Census Bureau matching, no Title 13

5. 5 Other LUCA Features Treatment of non-city style addresses Feedback to participants Appeals process

6. 6 Important LUCA Dates Advance-notice letters January 2007 LUCA invitations July 2007 LUCA review by participants August 2007 to April 1, 2008 Feedback to LUCA participants June 2009 to October 2009 LUCA appeals September 2009 to December 2009

7. 7 State LUCA Pilot Test Demonstrate/determine whether states can add valid addresses to the address list Learn from state experience with LUCA

8. 8 Caveats about Pilot Test Conducted on a very compressed time schedule Conducted using draft materials Census Bureau thanks our test participants in WI and IN!!

9. 9 Approach and Methods Conducted test in partnership with existing SDC/FSCPE contacts Chose 5 test counties in WI and IN based on growth, 2000 LUCA participation, and number of ungeocoded DSF addresses (i.e. presumed existing addresses missing from the MAF)

10. 10 Approach and Methods (continued) States performed review and submitted address changes within a compressed schedule Census staff processed addresses Census staff designed an area sample of blocks containing new addresses added by participants Census staff performed a truncated field verification

11. 11 Approach and Methods (continued) Census staff tallied and analyzed results Census and SDC/FSCPE participants debriefed one another about experiences and findings

12. 12 Specific Findings 70% of the WI adds and 55% of the IN adds were found in the field verification “Yield rate” similar to nationwide LUCA result for Census 2000 (59%) IN encountered problems with address matching and geocoding (many verified addresses found in a different block) WI had difficulty distinguishing residential/non-residential addresses

13. 13 Specific Findings (continued) States said they could have mitigated these problems given more lead time and review time States provided useful suggestions about how to improve address presentation

14. 14 Dress Rehearsal LUCA CA and NC governors both accepted LUCA invitations No submissions yet

15. 15 Some Conclusions State-level reviewers are capable of providing valid new addresses Not all states have comprehensive address data and address processing capability (but we know of some that are very well positioned in this regard) Census Bureau will offer LUCA participation to all states.

16. 16 How State LUCA Will Work Invitations to governor Governor appoints LUCA Liaison LUCA liaison identifies resources/participants Census Bureau will suggest potential participants