81 FR 67398 - Standards for Maintaining, Collecting, and Presenting Federal Data on Race and Ethnicity

OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND BUDGET

Federal Register Volume 81, Issue 190 (September 30, 2016)

Page Range		67398-67401
FR Document		2016-23672

The Standards for Maintaining, Collecting, and Presenting Federal Data on Race and Ethnicity were last revised in 1997 (62 FR 58782, Oct. 30, 1997; see https://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/ fedreg_1997standards). Since these revisions were implemented, much has been learned about how these standards have improved the quality of Federal information collected and presented on race and ethnicity. At the same time, some areas may benefit from further refinement. Accordingly, OMB currently is undertaking a review of particular components of the 1997 standard: The use of separate questions measuring race and ethnicity and question phrasing; the classification of a Middle Eastern and North African group and reporting category; the description of the intended use of minimum reporting categories; and terminology used for race and ethnicity classifications. OMB's current review of the standard is limited to these areas. Specific questions appear under the section, ``Issues for Comment.''

Federal Register, Volume 81 Issue 190 (Friday, September 30, 2016)

[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 190 (Friday, September 30, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 67398-67401]
From the Federal Register Online [www.thefederalregister.org]
[FR Doc No: 2016-23672]

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND BUDGET

Standards for Maintaining, Collecting, and Presenting Federal
Data on Race and Ethnicity

AGENCY: Executive Office of the President, Office of Management and
Budget (OMB).

ACTION: Review and Possible Limited Revision of OMB's Statistical
Policy Directive on Standards for Maintaining, Collecting, and
Presenting Federal Data on Race and Ethnicity.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Standards for Maintaining, Collecting, and Presenting
Federal Data on Race and Ethnicity were last revised in 1997 (62 FR
58782, Oct. 30, 1997; see https://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/fedreg_1997standards). Since these revisions were implemented, much has
been learned about how these standards have improved the quality of
Federal information collected and presented on race and ethnicity. At
the same time, some areas may benefit from further refinement.
Accordingly, OMB currently is undertaking a review of particular
components of the 1997 standard: The use of separate questions
measuring race and ethnicity and question phrasing; the classification
of a Middle Eastern and North African group and reporting category; the
description of the intended use of minimum reporting categories; and
terminology used for race and ethnicity classifications. OMB's current
review of the standard is limited to these areas. Specific questions
appear under the section, ``Issues for Comment.''

DATES: Comments on the review and possible limited revisions to OMB's
Standards for Maintaining, Collecting, and Presenting Federal Data on
Race and Ethnicity detailed in this notice must be in writing. To
ensure consideration of comments, they must be received no later than
[30 days from the publication of this notice]. Please be aware of
delays in mail processing at Federal facilities due to increased
security. Respondents are encouraged to send comments electronically
via email, or http://www.regulations.gov (discussed in ADDRESSES
below).

ADDRESSES: Written comments on these issues may be addressed to
Katherine K. Wallman, Chief Statistician, Office of Management and
Budget, 1800 G St., 9th Floor, Washington, DC 20503. You may also send
comments or questions via Email to Race-ethnicity@omb.eop.gov or to
http://www.regulations.gov--a Federal E-Government Web site that allows
the public to find, review, and submit comments on documents that
agencies have published in the Federal Register and that are open for
comment. Simply type, ``Race-ethnicity'' (in quotes) in the Comment or
Submission search box, click Go, and follow the instructions for
submitting comments.
Comments submitted in response to this notice may be made available
to the public through relevant Web sites. For this reason, please do
not include in your comments information of a confidential nature, such
as sensitive personal information or proprietary

[[Page 67399]]

information. If you send an email comment, your email address will be
automatically captured and included as part of the comment that is
placed in the public docket. Please note that responses to this public
comment request containing any routine notice about the confidentiality
of the communication will be treated as public comments that may be
made available to the public notwithstanding the inclusion of the
routine notice.
Electronic Availability: This document is available on the Internet
on the OMB Web site at: https://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/omb/inforeg/directive15/race-ethnicity_directive_2016FRN1.pdf.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jennifer Park, Senior Statisitician,
1800 G St., 9th Floor, Washington, DC 20503, Email address: Race-ethnicity@omb.eop.gov, telephone number: (202) 395-9046.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background: Development work on the standards for classification of
Federal data on race and ethnicity originated in the activities of the
Federal Interagency Committee on Education (FICE), which was originally
established by Executive Order 11185 in 1964. The FICE Subcommittee on
Minority Education completed a report in April 1973 on higher education
for Chicanos, Puerto Ricans, and American Indians, which noted in
particular the lack of comparable data on racial and ethnic groups.
Accordingly, the report called for the coordinated development of
common definitions for racial and ethnic groups, and the Federal
collection of racial and ethnic enrollment and other educational data
on a compatible and nonduplicative basis.
In June 1974, FICE created an Ad Hoc Committee on Racial and Ethnic
Definitions whose 25 members came from Federal agencies with major
responsibilities for the collection or use of racial and ethnic data.
It took on the task of determining and describing the major groups to
be identified by Federal agencies when collecting and reporting racial
and ethnic data. The Ad Hoc Committee wanted to ensure that whatever
categories the various agencies used could be aggregated,
disaggregated, or otherwise combined so that the data developed by one
agency could be used in conjunction with the data developed by another
agency. In addition, the Ad Hoc Committee recommended that the
categories could be subdivided into more detailed ethnic groups to meet
users' needs, but that to maintain comparability, such detail data
should aggregate into the minimum racial and ethnic categories.
Following testing of proposed categories, and the receipt of
comments and incorporation of suggested modifications, OMB on May 12,
1977, promulgated for use by all Federal agencies minimum standard
categories for the collection and presentation of data on race and
ethnicity. (See 42 FR 1926 May 12, 1977.) (Although OMB required the
agencies to use these racial and ethnic categories at a minimum, it
should be emphasized that the standard permited collection of
additional detail if the more detailed categories could be aggregated
into the minimum racial and ethnic categories to allow comparability of
data.)
In 1994, OMB published a notice of proposed review and possible
revision of the standard. (See https://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/fedreg_notice_15.) It requested comments on the adequacy of then
current categories. Specifically, it asked for comments on the addition
of a ``multiracial'' category; the addition of an ``Other Race''
category; use of an open-ended question to solicit information on race
and ethnicity; the names of the ``Black'' category and the ``American
Indian or Alaska Native'' category; including ``Native Hawaiians'' as a
separate reporting category from the ``Asian or Pacific Islander''
category; adding Hispanic as a racial designation rather than
ethnicity; and adding an ``Arab or Middle Eastern'' category as an
ethnicity. OMB established an Interagency Committee for the Review of
the Racial and Ethnic Standards, whose members represented the many and
diverse Federal needs for racial and ethnic data, including statutory
requirements for such data.
In 1997, OMB published the recommendations of the Interagency
Committee in its notice of decision. (See https://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/fedreg_1997standards.) Drawing from stakeholder input, Interagency
Committee statistical analysis, and public comment, the standard was
revised in several ways. It required separate measures of race and
ethnicity, with the ``Hispanic or Latino'' ethnicity presented first.
Respondents were offered the option of selecting one or more racial
designations, with the use of the instructions ``Mark one or more'' and
``Select one or more.'' ``AfricanAmerican'' was added to the category
of ``Black.'' ``Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander'' was created
as a separate category from ``Asian or Pacific Islander.'' However,
agreement could not be reached regarding the composition of an ``Arab/
Middle Eastern'' category, and no classification or category was
therefore defined.
Current Review: Since the 1997 revision, the U.S. population has
continued to become more racially and ethnically diverse. Additionally,
much has been learned about the implementation of these standards since
they were issued approximately two decades ago. In accordance with good
statistical practice, several Federal agencies have conducted
methodological research to better understand how use of the revised
standard informs the quality of Federal statistics on race and
ethnicity.
In 2014, OMB formed an Interagency Working Group for Research on
Race and Ethnicity to exchange research findings, identify
implementation issues, and collaborate on a shared research agenda to
improve Federal data on race and ethnicity. The Working Group comprises
representatives from ten cabinet departments and three other agencies
engaged in the collection or use of Federal race and ethnicity data.
Through its systematic review of the implemention of the 1997
revision and stakeholder feedback, the Working Group identified four
particular areas where further revisions to the standard might improve
the quality of race and ethnicity information collected and presented
by Federal agencies. Specifically, these four areas include:
1. The use of separate questions versus a combined question to
measure race and ethnicity and question phrasing;
2. the classification of a Middle Eastern and North African group
and distinct reporting category;
3. the description of the intended use of minimum reporting
categories; and
4. the salience of terminology used for race and ethnicity
classifications and other language in the standard.
Issues for Comment: With this Notice, OMB is seeking comments from
the public on: (1) The adequacy of the current standard in the areas
identified for focused review (see detailed descriptions below); (2)
specific suggestions for the identified areas that have been offered;
and (3) principles that should govern any proposed revisions to the
standards in the identified areas.
Question Format & Nonresponse: Although many respondents report
within the race and ethnicity categories specified by the standard,
recent censuses, surveys, and experimental tests have shown that its
implementation is not well understood and/or is considered inadequate
by some respondents. This results in respondents' inability and/or

[[Page 67400]]

unwillingness to self-identify as the standard intends.
For a growing segment of respondents, this situation arises because
of the conceptual complexity that is rooted in the standard's
definitional distinction of race from ethnicity. Nearly half of
Hispanic or Latino respondents do not identify within any of the
standard's race categories (Rios et al. 2014; see https://www.census.gov/population/www/documentation/twps0102/twps0102.pdf).
With the projected steady growth of the Hispanic or Latino population,
the number of people who do not identify with any of the standard's
race categories is expected to increase (Compton et al. 2012; see
https://www.census.gov/2010census/pdf/2010_Census_Race_HO_AQE.pdf; Rios
et al. 2014). Additionally, although the reporting of multiple races is
permitted according to the current standard, reporting multiple
Hispanic origins or a mixed Hispanic/non-Hispanic heritage in the
current Hispanic ethnicity question is not permitted. (Please note: The
terms `Hispanic or Latino'' and ``Hispanic'' are used interchangeably
in this Notice.)
To explore this issue further, the U.S. Census Bureau conducted the
2010 Census Race and Hispanic Origin Alternative Questionnaire
Experiment (AQE). Among its most notable findings was that a combined
question design (rather than the current standard of separate
questions) yielded a substantially increased use of OMB standard
categories among Hispanic or Latino respondents, signaling that a
combined question approach may better reflect how Hispanic or Latino
respondents view themselves (see https://www.census.gov/2010census/pdf/2010_Census_Race_HO_AQE.pdf). Qualitative aspects of this research
further supported this interpretation. The Federal Interagency Working
Group for Research on Race and Ethnicity continues to examine this
proposal. If a combined measure were to be used outside of a limited,
methodological experiment, it would be necessary for OMB to revise the
current standard.
Middle Eastern or North African: According to the current standard,
the aggregate reporting category of ``White'' race includes people
having origins in any of the original peoples of Europe, the Middle
East, or North Africa. During the periodic review preceding the 1997
revision, OMB's Interagency Committee for the Review of the Racial and
Ethnic Standards considered suggestions to require an additional,
distinct minimum reporting category for respondents identifying as
``Arabs or Middle Easterners.'' At the conclusion of the review,
agreement could not be reached among public stakeholders on the
intended measurement concept (i.e., whether the category should be
based on language, geography, etc.) nor, accordingly, a definition for
this category. The Committee took this public disagreement into
consideration and thus did not issue a definition nor an additional,
minimum reporting category for this group. Instead, OMB encouraged
further research be done to determine the best way to improve data for
``Arabs/Middle Easterners.'' The Federal Interagency Working Group for
Research on Race and Ethnicity continues to examine this proposal, with
input from multiple stakeholders. If consensus upon a definition for
Middle Eastern or North African can be reached, with or without the
requirement of an additional, separate, aggregate reporting category,
OMB would need to revise the current standard to clarify the
classification instructions. This would address potential
inconsistencies across data collections where data describing a Middle
Eastern or North African group could be reported separately for
detailed analyses (for example, where sample size permits), but
otherwise could be aggregated into the ``White'' reporting category to
facilitate comparability across information collections that would not
have large enough samples to permit separate, detailed reporting.
Intent of Minimum Categories: The standard provides a minimum set
of racial and ethnic categories for use when Federal agencies are
collecting and presenting such information for statistical,
administrative, or compliance purposes. However, it does not preclude
the collection and presentation of additional detailed categories for
statistical, administrative, or compliance purposes, provided that the
additional detailed categories can be aggregated into the minimum set
to permit comparisons. Specifically, the current standard advises, ``In
no case shall the provisions of the standards be construed to limit the
collection of data to the categories described above. The collection of
greater detail is encouraged . . .''
There are numerous examples of Federal agencies collecting detailed
race and ethnicity data in their statistical reporting; these are not
limited to decennial censuses or extremely large surveys, such as the
American Community Survey (ACS). Nonetheless, OMB has learned that the
minimum reporting categories as described in the current standard are
often misinterpreted as the only permissible reporting categories.
Accordingly, OMB has asked the Federal Interagency Working Group for
Research on Race and Ethnicity to examine the language in the current
standard in order to improve the understanding of the intended use of
minimum categories, that is, to facilitate comparison across
information collections, rather than to limit detailed race and ethnic
group information collection and presentation.
Terminology: As the diversity of the U.S. continues to increase, it
becomes more important for people to understand the racial and ethnic
terminology included in Federal data collection systems. The language
used to describe race and ethnicity changes over time, and while some
terminology continues to resonate with group members, other expressions
may fall out of favor or take on other meanings.
For example, the standard currently designates ``Black or African
American'' as the ``principal minority race.'' This designation
provides an option, in certain circumstances, for presentation of the
``White'' category, the ``Black or African American'' category (as the
`principal minority race') and the ``All Other Races'' category,
without the requirement of also presenting other minimum reporting
categories. The designation may warrant revision for several reasons.
First, certain definitions of ``minority'' as including Hispanic (i.e.,
HR 4238; see https://www.congress.gov/bill/114th-congress/house-bill/4238), and the relative prevalence of the Hispanic or Latino population
compared with the Black or African American population, suggest
potential revision of the ``principal minority race'' designation, or
the use of alternative terms (e.g., ``principal minority race/
ethnicity''). Perhaps most broadly, the utility of presenting a
category of ``All Other Races,'' given the diversity of experience
among other race/ethnicity groups, and the salience of designating a
``principal minority'' for presentation purposes, suggests further
review. The Federal Interagency Working Group for Research on Race and
Ethnicity is examining such terminology for possible revision to the
standard.
Guidance for Review:
Federal Uses of Race and Ethnicity Data: When providing comment
regarding proposed areas for possible revision, it may be helpful to
keep in mind how the standard is used. The standard not only guides
information collected and presented from the decennial census and
numerous other statistical collections, but also is used by Federal
agencies for civil rights enforcement and for program

[[Page 67401]]

administrative reporting. These include, among others:
Enforcing the requirements of the Voting Rights Act;
reviewing State congressional redistricting plans;
collecting and presenting population and population
characteristics data, labor force data, education data, and vital and
health statistics;
establishing and evaluating Federal affirmative action
plans and evaluating affirmative action and discrimination in
employment in the private sector;
monitoring the access of minorities to home mortgage loans
under the Home Mortgage Disclosure Act;
enforcing the Equal Credit Opportunity Act;
monitoring and enforcing desegregation plans in the public
schools;
assisting minority businesses under the minority business
development programs; and
monitoring and enforcing the Fair Housing Act.
To most effectively promote information quality, the intended uses
of data on race and ethnicity should be considered when changes to the
standards are contemplated. Additionally, the possible effects of any
proposed changes on the quality and utility of the resulting data must
be considered.
General Principles for the Review of the Racial and Ethnic Data
Categories: When providing comment on particular areas of the current
standard, it also may be helpful to consult the principles that framed
the 1977 and 1997 revisions. Comments on these principles are welcomed.
1. The racial and ethnic categories set forth in the standard
should not be interpreted as being scientific or anthropological in
nature.
2. Respect for individual dignity should guide the processes and
methods for collecting data on race and ethnicity; respondent self-
identification should be facilitated to the greatest extent possible.
3. To the extent practicable, the concepts and terminology should
reflect clear and generally understood definitions that can achieve
broad public acceptance.
4. The racial and ethnic categories should be comprehensive in
coverage and produce compatible, nonduplicated, exchangeable data
across Federal agencies.
5. Foremost consideration should be given to data aggregations by
race and ethnicity that are useful for statistical analysis, program
administration and assessment, and enforcement of existing laws and
judicial decisions, bearing in mind that the standards are not intended
to be used to establish eligibility for participation in any Federal
program.
6. While Federal data needs for racial and ethnic data are of
primary importance, consideration should also be given to needs at the
State and local government levels, including American Indian tribal and
Alaska Native village governments, as well as to general societal needs
for these data.
7. The categories should set forth a minimum standard; additional
categories should be permitted provided they can be aggregated to the
standard categories. The number of standard categories should be kept
to a manageable size, as determined by statistical concerns and data
needs.
8. A revised set of categories should be operationally feasible in
terms of burden placed upon respondents and the cost to agencies and
respondents to implement the revisions.
9. Any changes in the categories should be based on sound
methodological research and should include evaluations of the impact of
any changes not only on the usefulness of the resulting data but also
on the comparability of any new categories with the existing ones.
10. Any revision to the categories should provide for a crosswalk
at the time of adoption between the old and the new categories so that
historical data series can be statistically adjusted and comparisons
can be made.
11. Because of the many and varied needs and strong interdependence
of Federal agencies for racial and ethnic data, any changes to the
existing categories should be the product of an interagency
collaborative effort.
OMB recognizes that these principles may in some cases represent
competing goals for the standard. Through the review process, it will
be necessary to balance statistical issues, needs for data, and social
concerns. The application of these principles to guide the review and
possible revision of the standard ultimately should result in
consistent, publicly accepted data on race and ethnicity that will meet
the needs of the government and the public while recognizing the
diversity of the population and respecting the individual's dignity.

Howard A. Shelanski,
Administrator, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs.
[FR Doc. 2016-23672 Filed 9-29-16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3110-01-P

Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 190 / Friday, September 30, 2016 / Notices 67399

information. If you send an email aggregate into the minimum racial and Eastern’’ category, and no classification
comment, your email address will be ethnic categories. or category was therefore defined.
automatically captured and included as Following testing of proposed Current Review: Since the 1997
part of the comment that is placed in the categories, and the receipt of comments revision, the U.S. population has
public docket. Please note that and incorporation of suggested continued to become more racially and
responses to this public comment modifications, OMB on May 12, 1977, ethnically diverse. Additionally, much
request containing any routine notice promulgated for use by all Federal has been learned about the
about the confidentiality of the agencies minimum standard categories implementation of these standards since
communication will be treated as public for the collection and presentation of they were issued approximately two
comments that may be made available to data on race and ethnicity. (See 42 FR decades ago. In accordance with good
the public notwithstanding the 1926 May 12, 1977.) (Although OMB statistical practice, several Federal
inclusion of the routine notice. required the agencies to use these racial agencies have conducted
Electronic Availability: This and ethnic categories at a minimum, it methodological research to better
document is available on the Internet on should be emphasized that the standard understand how use of the revised
the OMB Web site at: https:// permited collection of additional detail standard informs the quality of Federal
www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/ if the more detailed categories could be statistics on race and ethnicity.
omb/inforeg/directive15/race-ethnicity_ aggregated into the minimum racial and In 2014, OMB formed an Interagency
directive_2016FRN1.pdf. ethnic categories to allow comparability Working Group for Research on Race
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
of data.) and Ethnicity to exchange research
In 1994, OMB published a notice of findings, identify implementation
Jennifer Park, Senior Statisitician, 1800
proposed review and possible revision issues, and collaborate on a shared
G St., 9th Floor, Washington, DC 20503,
of the standard. (See https:// research agenda to improve Federal data
Email address: Race-ethnicity@
www.whitehouse.gov/omb/fedreg_ on race and ethnicity. The Working
omb.eop.gov, telephone number: (202)
notice_15.) It requested comments on Group comprises representatives from
395–9046.
the adequacy of then current categories. ten cabinet departments and three other
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Specifically, it asked for comments on agencies engaged in the collection or
Background: Development work on the addition of a ‘‘multiracial’’ category; use of Federal race and ethnicity data.
the standards for classification of the addition of an ‘‘Other Race’’ Through its systematic review of the
Federal data on race and ethnicity category; use of an open-ended question implemention of the 1997 revision and
originated in the activities of the Federal to solicit information on race and stakeholder feedback, the Working
Interagency Committee on Education ethnicity; the names of the ‘‘Black’’ Group identified four particular areas
(FICE), which was originally established category and the ‘‘American Indian or where further revisions to the standard
by Executive Order 11185 in 1964. The Alaska Native’’ category; including might improve the quality of race and
FICE Subcommittee on Minority ‘‘Native Hawaiians’’ as a separate ethnicity information collected and
Education completed a report in April reporting category from the ‘‘Asian or presented by Federal agencies.
1973 on higher education for Chicanos, Pacific Islander’’ category; adding Specifically, these four areas include:
Puerto Ricans, and American Indians, Hispanic as a racial designation rather 1. The use of separate questions
which noted in particular the lack of than ethnicity; and adding an ‘‘Arab or versus a combined question to measure
comparable data on racial and ethnic Middle Eastern’’ category as an race and ethnicity and question
groups. Accordingly, the report called ethnicity. OMB established an phrasing;
for the coordinated development of Interagency Committee for the Review 2. the classification of a Middle
common definitions for racial and of the Racial and Ethnic Standards, Eastern and North African group and
ethnic groups, and the Federal whose members represented the many distinct reporting category;
collection of racial and ethnic and diverse Federal needs for racial and 3. the description of the intended use
enrollment and other educational data ethnic data, including statutory of minimum reporting categories; and
on a compatible and nonduplicative requirements for such data. 4. the salience of terminology used for
basis. In 1997, OMB published the race and ethnicity classifications and
In June 1974, FICE created an Ad Hoc recommendations of the Interagency other language in the standard.
Committee on Racial and Ethnic Committee in its notice of decision. (See Issues for Comment: With this Notice,
Definitions whose 25 members came https://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/ OMB is seeking comments from the
from Federal agencies with major fedreg_1997standards.) Drawing from public on: (1) The adequacy of the
responsibilities for the collection or use stakeholder input, Interagency current standard in the areas identified
of racial and ethnic data. It took on the Committee statistical analysis, and for focused review (see detailed
task of determining and describing the public comment, the standard was descriptions below); (2) specific
major groups to be identified by Federal revised in several ways. It required suggestions for the identified areas that
agencies when collecting and reporting separate measures of race and ethnicity, have been offered; and (3) principles
racial and ethnic data. The Ad Hoc with the ‘‘Hispanic or Latino’’ ethnicity that should govern any proposed
Committee wanted to ensure that presented first. Respondents were revisions to the standards in the
whatever categories the various agencies offered the option of selecting one or identified areas.
used could be aggregated, disaggregated, more racial designations, with the use of Question Format & Nonresponse:
or otherwise combined so that the data the instructions ‘‘Mark one or more’’ Although many respondents report
developed by one agency could be used and ‘‘Select one or more.’’ within the race and ethnicity categories
mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with NOTICES

in conjunction with the data developed ‘‘AfricanAmerican’’ was added to the specified by the standard, recent
by another agency. In addition, the Ad category of ‘‘Black.’’ ‘‘Native Hawaiian censuses, surveys, and experimental
Hoc Committee recommended that the or Other Pacific Islander’’ was created as tests have shown that its
categories could be subdivided into a separate category from ‘‘Asian or implementation is not well understood
more detailed ethnic groups to meet Pacific Islander.’’ However, agreement and/or is considered inadequate by
users’ needs, but that to maintain could not be reached regarding the some respondents. This results in
comparability, such detail data should composition of an ‘‘Arab/Middle respondents’ inability and/or

VerDate Sep<11>2014 20:49 Sep 29, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00111 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\30SEN1.SGM 30SEN1

67400 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 190 / Friday, September 30, 2016 / Notices

unwillingness to self-identify as the Easterners.’’ At the conclusion of the reporting categories. Accordingly, OMB
standard intends. review, agreement could not be reached has asked the Federal Interagency
For a growing segment of among public stakeholders on the Working Group for Research on Race
respondents, this situation arises intended measurement concept (i.e., and Ethnicity to examine the language
because of the conceptual complexity whether the category should be based in the current standard in order to
that is rooted in the standard’s on language, geography, etc.) nor, improve the understanding of the
definitional distinction of race from accordingly, a definition for this intended use of minimum categories,
ethnicity. Nearly half of Hispanic or category. The Committee took this that is, to facilitate comparison across
Latino respondents do not identify public disagreement into consideration information collections, rather than to
within any of the standard’s race and thus did not issue a definition nor limit detailed race and ethnic group
categories (Rios et al. 2014; see https:// an additional, minimum reporting information collection and presentation.
www.census.gov/population/www/ category for this group. Instead, OMB Terminology: As the diversity of the
documentation/twps0102/ encouraged further research be done to U.S. continues to increase, it becomes
twps0102.pdf). With the projected determine the best way to improve data more important for people to
steady growth of the Hispanic or Latino for ‘‘Arabs/Middle Easterners.’’ The understand the racial and ethnic
population, the number of people who Federal Interagency Working Group for terminology included in Federal data
do not identify with any of the Research on Race and Ethnicity collection systems. The language used
standard’s race categories is expected to continues to examine this proposal, to describe race and ethnicity changes
increase (Compton et al. 2012; see with input from multiple stakeholders. over time, and while some terminology
https://www.census.gov/2010census/ If consensus upon a definition for continues to resonate with group
pdf/2010_Census_Race_HO_AQE.pdf; Middle Eastern or North African can be members, other expressions may fall out
Rios et al. 2014). Additionally, although reached, with or without the of favor or take on other meanings.
the reporting of multiple races is requirement of an additional, separate, For example, the standard currently
permitted according to the current aggregate reporting category, OMB designates ‘‘Black or African American’’
standard, reporting multiple Hispanic would need to revise the current as the ‘‘principal minority race.’’ This
origins or a mixed Hispanic/non- standard to clarify the classification designation provides an option, in
Hispanic heritage in the current instructions. This would address certain circumstances, for presentation
Hispanic ethnicity question is not potential inconsistencies across data of the ‘‘White’’ category, the ‘‘Black or
permitted. (Please note: The terms collections where data describing a African American’’ category (as the
‘Hispanic or Latino’’ and ‘‘Hispanic’’ are Middle Eastern or North African group ‘principal minority race’) and the ‘‘All
used interchangeably in this Notice.) could be reported separately for detailed Other Races’’ category, without the
To explore this issue further, the U.S. analyses (for example, where sample requirement of also presenting other
Census Bureau conducted the 2010 size permits), but otherwise could be minimum reporting categories. The
Census Race and Hispanic Origin aggregated into the ‘‘White’’ reporting designation may warrant revision for
Alternative Questionnaire Experiment category to facilitate comparability several reasons. First, certain definitions
(AQE). Among its most notable findings across information collections that of ‘‘minority’’ as including Hispanic
was that a combined question design would not have large enough samples to (i.e., HR 4238; see https://
(rather than the current standard of permit separate, detailed reporting. www.congress.gov/bill/114th-congress/
separate questions) yielded a Intent of Minimum Categories: The house-bill/4238), and the relative
substantially increased use of OMB standard provides a minimum set of prevalence of the Hispanic or Latino
standard categories among Hispanic or racial and ethnic categories for use population compared with the Black or
Latino respondents, signaling that a when Federal agencies are collecting African American population, suggest
combined question approach may better and presenting such information for potential revision of the ‘‘principal
reflect how Hispanic or Latino statistical, administrative, or minority race’’ designation, or the use of
respondents view themselves (see compliance purposes. However, it does alternative terms (e.g., ‘‘principal
https://www.census.gov/2010census/ not preclude the collection and minority race/ethnicity’’). Perhaps most
pdf/2010_Census_Race_HO_AQE.pdf). presentation of additional detailed broadly, the utility of presenting a
Qualitative aspects of this research categories for statistical, administrative, category of ‘‘All Other Races,’’ given the
further supported this interpretation. or compliance purposes, provided that diversity of experience among other
The Federal Interagency Working Group the additional detailed categories can be race/ethnicity groups, and the salience
for Research on Race and Ethnicity aggregated into the minimum set to of designating a ‘‘principal minority’’ for
continues to examine this proposal. If a permit comparisons. Specifically, the presentation purposes, suggests further
combined measure were to be used current standard advises, ‘‘In no case review. The Federal Interagency
outside of a limited, methodological shall the provisions of the standards be Working Group for Research on Race
experiment, it would be necessary for construed to limit the collection of data and Ethnicity is examining such
OMB to revise the current standard. to the categories described above. The terminology for possible revision to the
Middle Eastern or North African: collection of greater detail is standard.
According to the current standard, the encouraged . . .’’ Guidance for Review:
aggregate reporting category of ‘‘White’’ There are numerous examples of Federal Uses of Race and Ethnicity
race includes people having origins in Federal agencies collecting detailed race Data: When providing comment
any of the original peoples of Europe, and ethnicity data in their statistical regarding proposed areas for possible
the Middle East, or North Africa. During reporting; these are not limited to revision, it may be helpful to keep in
mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with NOTICES

the periodic review preceding the 1997 decennial censuses or extremely large mind how the standard is used. The
revision, OMB’s Interagency Committee surveys, such as the American standard not only guides information
for the Review of the Racial and Ethnic Community Survey (ACS). Nonetheless, collected and presented from the
Standards considered suggestions to OMB has learned that the minimum decennial census and numerous other
require an additional, distinct minimum reporting categories as described in the statistical collections, but also is used
reporting category for respondents current standard are often by Federal agencies for civil rights
identifying as ‘‘Arabs or Middle misinterpreted as the only permissible enforcement and for program

VerDate Sep<11>2014 20:49 Sep 29, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00112 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\30SEN1.SGM 30SEN1

Document Created: 2018-02-09 13:34:18
Document Modified: 2018-02-09 13:34:18

Category		Regulatory Information
Collection		Federal Register
sudoc Class		AE 2.7: GS 4.107: AE 2.106:
Publisher		Office of the Federal Register, National Archives and Records Administration
Section		Notices
Action		Review and Possible Limited Revision of OMB's Statistical Policy Directive on Standards for Maintaining, Collecting, and Presenting Federal Data on Race and Ethnicity.
Dates		Comments on the review and possible limited revisions to OMB's Standards for Maintaining, Collecting, and Presenting Federal Data on Race and Ethnicity detailed in this notice must be in writing. To ensure consideration of comments, they must be received no later than [30 days from the publication of this notice]. Please be aware of delays in mail processing at Federal facilities due to increased security. Respondents are encouraged to send comments electronically
Contact		Jennifer Park, Senior Statisitician,
FR Citation		81 FR 67398