Federal Data Users

The Census Bureau released an unpublished notice requesting public comment on its 2026 Operational Test in support of the 2030 Census (scheduled to publish Feb. 3, 2026).

Three elements of the proposed test seem particularly relevant for federal data users:

➡️ The Operational Test described in the notice is limited to two sites:

• Spartanburg, South Carolina

• Huntsville, Alabama

This is a narrower scope than earlier Census Bureau planning materials. In July 2024, the Bureau announced six planned 2026 test sites, selected to reflect a wide range of enumeration environments, including Tribal lands and rural areas:

• Colorado Springs, CO

• Huntsville, AL

• Tribal lands in Arizona (Fort Apache & San Carlos)

• Spartanburg, SC

• Western North Carolina

• Western Texas

The current notice focuses operational testing on only two of those locations.

➡️ The notice also proposes testing the use of USPS employees as census enumerators.
Under the proposal, U.S. Postal Service staff would conduct in-person census interviews in the same manner as Census Bureau field staff. This represents a notable operational change and raises questions about training, respondent interaction, and whether results from a limited test environment can be generalized nationally.

➡️ The notice specifies that Internet Self-Response (ISR) for the test will be available only in English.

Please share with your networks, and reply here if you notice anything else in this notice that census data stakeholders should be paying attention to.

Thanks.

------------------------------
Mark Mather
Associate VP
PRB
------------------------------

I don't see any mention of Group Quarters in the FRN. Self-enumeration of GQ populations was to be tested and part of the reasons they chose Spartanburg and Huntsville. Something to pay attention too.

I was considering working on a comment (and welcome contributions) that focused on the USPS component, highlighting 3 points: 

1. The 2011 GAO evidence that suggests that using: "full-time mail carriers paid at much higher USPS wage  rates--either for additional duties during the work day or as part of a "postal holiday" (where regular mail operations would be suspended in order to conduct census activities)--would not be cost-effective.  Regarding cost, in 2010, the average USPS mail carrier was paid about  $41 (city) or $34 (rural) per hour including benefits for regular time 
   worked, compared to the average hourly pay of about $15 paid to census enumerators. Moreover, in conducting the 2010 Census, it took about 45 
   million staff hours to contact nonrespondents. Because of the difference in pay rates and the large number of staff hours involved, 
   it would not be practical for mail carriers to perform census duties  in lieu of census workers because of the higher costs and disruption 
   it would cause to U.S. mail service. https://www.gao.gov/assets/a585539.html
2. The 2019 pilot results, which concluded that using USPS employees was impossible because of "irreconcilable differences between the requirements of 13 U.S.C. (Census Bureau) and 18/39 U.S.C. (USPS), as well as various regulations enacted thereunder. I don't see that anything has changed there. https://www2.census.gov/programs-surveys/decennial/2020/program-management/final-analysis-reports/2020-report-postal-carriers-census-enumerators-pilot.pdf 
3. There are also significant unanswered methodological issues related to interviewer effects that could be elucidated. 

Again, would welcome further thoughts / collaboration on these points. 

------------------------------
Philip Rocco

Chair and Associate Professor of Political Science

Marquette University
------------------------------