Collecting information on disability in the 2000 Census: an example of interagency cooperation

The United States Constitution requires that an enumeration (or census) of the population be conducted every 10 years to apportion seats in the House of Representatives. Census information is also used to allocate funds and to plan and manage programs. Census 2000 occurs on April 1, 2000, when one-sixth of all American households will be mailed the "long form," containing disability, demographic, economic, and housing questions. Although no short set of commonly accepted questions on disability existed, one was developed for Census 2000 by a collaborative, federal interagency work group on disability, convened by the Office of Management and Budget. The work group consisted of staff from the Social Security Administration (SSA), the Department of Health and Human Services, the U.S. Census Bureau, and other agencies. They reviewed questions initially proposed by the Census Bureau, developed an alternative proposal, tested both versions in the Census Bureau's cognitive questionnaire lab, and on the basis of testing, derived a consensus version for Census 2000. In many ways, the six questions now contained on Census 2000 are an improvement over previous efforts. Disability is ascertained for children as well as for adults, and information will be collected separately for several domains of disability (for example, sensory, mental, physical). The need for a brief set of disability measures goes beyond Census 2000. If such data were collected regularly on national surveys, critical policy and program concerns across agencies could be addressed because better information could be gathered on changes in disability prevalence and on the characteristics of persons with disabilities. Other similar efforts include the former Disability Evaluation Study, now known as the National Study of Health and Activity--a national sample survey on working-age disability to be conducted by SSA--and the President's Task Force on the Employment of Adults with Disabilities (Executive Order 13078).     

Articulate statistics and educational equity

Policy research on educational equity from 1965 to 1975 challenged the conventional wisdom about schools. Apparently families, not schools, produce education, and the black-white achievement gap is not explained by school differences. But these counter-intuitive conclusions are drawn from studies of individual differences in achievement, and the radical political perspective articulated by that mode of analysis belittles and distorts relationships that moderates find significant. A moderate-style statistical articulation, that focuses primarily on between-race and between-status differences, is available. It produces findings that are largely consistent with the conventional wisdom when applied to data from Coleman's (1966) study of schools. Despite measurement problems, schools and other environmental variables statistically explain the bulk of the black-white achievement gap.The author is employed by the National Science Foundation, but the opinions expressed in this paper do not reflect policies or positions of the Foundation.     

How Financial Managers Deal with Ethical Stress

This article explores the way public-sector financial managers cope with ethical challenges created by undue political pressure and demands for special treatment. A nationwide survey of financial managers revealed that fiscal stress exacerbates ethical pressure for most financial managers, including chief financial officers (CFOs) and those who report to CFOs. Financial managers do not work in an ethical vacuum; they respond to supervisors who encourage ethical action and to coworkers who demonstrate high standards of personal integrity. Supervisors of CFOs who emphasize political responsiveness in employee evaluations can threaten the ethical behavior of CFOs, while timely feedback can mitigate ethical pressure. In turn, CFOs as supervisors can temper the harsh work environment in fiscally stressed times by encouraging ethical action and by giving adequate feedback to those who report to them.