Revisions to OMB's Statistical Policy Directive No. 15: Standards for Maintaining, Collecting, and Presenting Federal Data on Race and Ethnicity, 22182-22196 [2024-06469]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES
22182
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 62 / Friday, March 29, 2024 / Notices
§ 1627.4(b)’s notice requirement for the
Basic Field Grant program. Only current
or prospective recipients of LSC Basic
Field Grants may apply for approval to
subgrant these funds.
Applications for approval to make
subgrants of 2024 mid-year and calendar
year 2025 Basic Field Grant funds will
be available on or around April 15,
2024. An applicant must apply to make
a mid-year subgrant of LSC Basic Field
Grant funds through GrantEase at least
45 days before the subgrant’s proposed
effective date. 45 CFR 1627.4(b)(2). An
applicant must apply to make calendar
year subgrants of 2025 Basic Field Grant
funds through GrantEase in conjunction
with its application(s) for 2025 Basic
Field Grant funding. 45 CFR
1627.4(b)(1). The deadline for 2025
Basic Field Grant funding application
submissions is June 3, 2024.
All applicants must provide answers
to the application questions in
GrantEase and upload the following
documents:
• A draft subgrant agreement (with
the required terms provided in LSC’s
Subgrant Agreement Template); and
• A subgrant budget (using LSC’s
Subgrant Budget Template).
Applicants seeking to subgrant to a
new subrecipient that is not a current
LSC grantee, or to renew a subgrant with
an organization that is not a current LSC
grantee in a year in which the applicant
is required to submit a full funding
application, must also upload:
• The subrecipient’s accounting
manual;
• The subrecipient’s most recent
audited financial statements;
• The subrecipient’s current cost
allocation policy (if not in the
accounting manual); and
• The recipient’s 45 CFR part 1627
policy (required under 45 CFR 1627.7).
A list of subgrant application
questions, the Subgrant Agreement
Template, and the Subgrant Budget
Template are available on LSC’s website
at https://www.lsc.gov/grants-granteeresources/grantee-guidance/how-applysubgrant.
LSC encourages applicants to use
LSC’s Subgrant Agreement Template as
a model subgrant agreement. If the
applicant does not use LSC’s Template,
the proposed agreement must include,
at a minimum, the substance of the
provisions of the Template.
Once submitted, LSC will evaluate the
application and provide applicants with
instructions on any needed
modifications to the submitted
documents or Draft Agreement provided
with the application. The applicant
must then upload a final and signed
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:49 Mar 28, 2024
Jkt 262001
subgrant agreement through GrantEase
by the date requested.
As required by 45 CFR 1627.4(b)(3),
LSC will inform applicants of its
decision to disapprove or approve an
application for a 2024 mid-year subgrant
no later than the subgrant’s proposed
effective date. As required by 45 CFR
1627.4(b)(1)(ii), LSC will inform
applicants of its decision to disapprove
or approve a 2025 calendar-year
subgrant no later than the date LSC
informs applicants of LSC’s 2025 Basic
Field Grant funding decisions.
(Authority: 42 U.S.C. 2996g(e))
Dated: March 26, 2024.
Stefanie Davis,
Deputy General Counsel, Legal Services
Corporation.
[FR Doc. 2024–06711 Filed 3–28–24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7050–01–P
OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND
BUDGET
Revisions to OMB’s Statistical Policy
Directive No. 15: Standards for
Maintaining, Collecting, and
Presenting Federal Data on Race and
Ethnicity
Office of Information and
Regulatory Affairs, Office of
Management and Budget, Executive
Office of the President.
ACTION: Notice of decision.
AGENCY:
By this Notice, the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) is
announcing revisions to Statistical
Policy Directive No. 15: Standards for
Maintaining, Collecting, and Presenting
Federal Data on Race and Ethnicity
(SPD 15). The revised SPD 15 is
presented at the end of this Notice; it
replaces and supersedes OMB’s 1997
Revisions to the Standards for the
Classification of Federal Data on Race
and Ethnicity. OMB is taking this action
to meet its responsibilities to develop
and oversee the implementation of
Government-wide principles, policies,
standards, and guidelines concerning
the development, presentation, and
dissemination of statistical information.
These revisions to SPD 15 are intended
to result in more accurate and useful
race and ethnicity data across the
Federal government.
DATES: The provisions of these
standards are effective March 28, 2024
for all new record keeping or reporting
requirements that include racial or
ethnic information. All existing record
keeping or reporting requirements
should be made consistent with these
standards through a non-substantive
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00067
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
change request to the Office of
Information and Regulatory Affairs
(OIRA), or at any time a collection of
information is submitted to OIRA for
approval of either a revision or
extension under the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA), as soon as
possible, but not later than March 28,
2029.
Please send correspondence
about OMB’s decisions to: Dr. Karin
Orvis, U.S. Chief Statistician, Office of
Information and Regulatory Affairs,
Office of Management and Budget, 725
17th St. NW, Washington, DC 20506,
email address: Statistical_Directives@
omb.eop.gov.
Electronic Availability: This Federal
Register Notice can be found along with
supplemental materials, including the
final report of the Working Group and
its six annexes, on the Federal Register:
https://www.federalregister.gov/, by
searching for ‘‘OMB–2023–0001’’.
Additional background materials,
including previous OMB standards and
guidance related to the collection of race
and ethnicity can be found at https://
www.statspolicy.gov under ‘‘Policies’’
and on the Working Group’s website:
https://www.spd15revision.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Bob
Sivinski, Statistical and Science Policy,
Office of Information and Regulatory
Affairs, Office of Management and
Budget, 725 17th St. NW, Washington,
DC 20506; email address: Statistical_
Directives@omb.eop.gov, phone number
(202) 395–1205.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
ADDRESSES:
A. Background
Overview of this Notice. Based on the
recommendations of the Federal
Interagency Technical Working Group
on Race and Ethnicity Standards
(Working Group), SPD 15 is revised to:
collect data using a single combined
race and ethnicity question, allowing
multiple responses; add Middle Eastern
or North African (MENA) as a minimum
reporting category, separate and distinct
from the White category; require the
collection of more detail beyond the
minimum race and ethnicity reporting
categories, unless an agency requests
and receives an exemption from OMB’s
Office of Information and Regulatory
Affairs because the potential benefit of
the detailed data would not justify the
additional burden to the agency and the
public or the additional risk to privacy
or confidentiality; update terminology
in SPD 15; and require agency Action
Plans on Race and Ethnicity Data and
timely compliance with this revision to
SPD 15.
E:\FR\FM\29MRN1.SGM
29MRN1
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 62 / Friday, March 29, 2024 / Notices
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES
The Supplementary Information in
this Notice provides background
information on SPD 15 (Section A); a
summary of the review process that
began in the summer of 2022 (Section
B); a synopsis of the major revisions to
SPD 15, including discussion of the
initial proposals of the Working Group,
public input on the standards including
responses to a January 2023 Federal
Register Notice (FRN) 1 that presented
the initial proposals, the final
recommendations from the Working
Group to OMB, and OMB’s decisions on
revisions to SPD 15 (Section C); and
areas for future research (Section D).
OMB’s Statistical Policy Directives. To
operate efficiently and effectively, the
Nation relies on the flow of objective,
credible statistics to support the
decisions of individuals, households,
governments, businesses, and other
organizations. As part of its role as
coordinator of the Federal statistical
system under the Paperwork Reduction
Act of 1995, OMB, through the Chief
Statistician of the United States, must
ensure the efficiency and effectiveness
of the system as well as the integrity,
objectivity, impartiality, utility, and
confidentiality of information collected
for statistical purposes.2 This includes
developing and overseeing the
implementation of Government-wide
principles, policies, standards, and
guidelines concerning the development,
presentation, and dissemination of
statistical information.3 OMB maintains
a set of statistical policy directives to
implement these requirements, and
periodically reviews these directives to
ensure they continue to meet their
intended purpose. These reviews are
based on input from subject matter
experts and relevant program staff
across government, evidence generated
by research and testing, and input from
the public.
History of SPD 15. OMB initially
developed SPD 15 in 1977 in
cooperation with other Federal agencies
to provide consistent data on race and
ethnicity throughout the Federal
Government, including the decennial
census, household surveys, and Federal
administrative forms.4 Initial
development of these data standards
stemmed in large part from new Federal
responsibilities to enforce civil rights
1 88 FR 5375 (Jan. 27, 2023), available at https://
www.federalregister.gov/documents/2023/01/27/
2023-01635/initial-proposals-for-updating-ombsrace-and-ethnicity-statistical-standards.
2 44 U.S.C. 3504(e)(1).
3 44 U.S.C. 3504(e)(3).
4 U.S. Dep’t of Com., Statistical Policy Handbook
37–38 (May 1978), available at https://
www2.census.gov/about/ombraceethnicityitwg/
1978-statistical-policy-handbook.pdf.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:49 Mar 28, 2024
Jkt 262001
laws.5 Since 1977, SPD 15 has been
revised one time, resulting in an update
in 1997.
The Goals of SPD 15. The goals of
SPD 15 remain unchanged: to ensure the
comparability of race and ethnicity
across Federal datasets and to maximize
the quality of these data by ensuring the
format, language, and procedures for
collecting the data are consistent.6 To
achieve these goals, SPD 15 provides a
minimum set of categories that all
Federal agencies must use when
collecting information on race and
ethnicity, regardless of the collection
mechanism, as well as additional
guidance on the collection, compilation,
and dissemination of these data.
Defining race and ethnicity. For
purposes of SPD 15, the race and
ethnicity categories set forth are
sociopolitical constructs and are not an
attempt to define race and ethnicity
biologically or genetically.
Rescissions. Finally, this Notice
rescinds the following OMB guidance:
OMB Bulletin No. 00–02—Guidance on
Aggregation and Allocation of Data on
Race for Use in Civil Rights Monitoring
and Enforcement (2000); 7 Provisional
Guidance on the Implementation of the
1997 Standards for Federal Data on
Race and Ethnicity (2000); 8 and
Flexibilities and Best Practices for
Implementing the Office of
Managements and Budget’s 1997
Standards for Maintaining, Collecting,
and Presenting Federal Data on Race
and Ethnicity (2022).9
B. Comprehensive Review Process for
SPD 15
Since the 1997 revision to SPD 15,
there have been large societal, political,
economic, and demographic shifts in
5 62 FR 58782 (Oct. 20, 1997), available at https://
www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-1997-10-30/pdf/
97-28653.pdf.
6 See, e.g., id.; U.S. Dep’t of Com., Statistical
Policy Handbook 37–38 (May 1978), available at
https://www2.census.gov/about/ombraceethnicity
itwg/1978-statistical-policy-handbook.pdf.
7 OMB, Exec. Office of the President, OMB
Bulletin No. 00–02—Guidance on Aggregation and
Allocation of Data on Race for Use in Civil Rights
Monitoring and Enforcement (Mar. 9, 2000),
available at https://www.whitehouse.gov/wpcontent/uploads/2017/11/bulletins_b00-02.pdf.
8 OMB, Exec. Office of the President, Provisional
Guidance on the Implementation of the 1997
Standards for Data on Race and Ethnicity (Dec. 15,
2000), available at https://www.esd.whs.mil/
Portals/54/Documents/DD/info_collect/files_public/
Race%20%20Ethnicity%20Guidance.pdf?ver=201811-01-094407-913.
9 Flexibilities and Best Practices for Implementing
the Office of Management and Budget’s 1997
Standards for Maintaining, Collecting, and
Presenting Federal Data on Race and Ethnicity
(Statistical Policy Directive No. 15) (Jul. 2022),
available at https://www.whitehouse.gov/wpcontent/uploads/2022/07/Flexibilities-and-BestPractices-Under-SPD-15.pdf.
PO 00000
Frm 00068
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
22183
the United States, including increasing
racial and ethnic diversity, a growing
number of people who identify as more
than one race or ethnicity, and changing
immigration and migration patterns.
Recognizing the critical need for
revisions to SPD 15, OMB announced a
formal review in June 2022 with the
goal of updating SPD 15 to better reflect
the diversity of the Nation.10 The
process to review and revise SPD 15
included four major phases: (1) OMB
established the Working Group; (2) the
Working Group developed initial
proposals and sought public input; (3)
the Working Group developed final
recommendations for revising SPD 15;
and (4) OMB deliberated and developed
the revisions presented in this Notice.
Establishing the Federal Interagency
Technical Working Group on Race and
Ethnicity Standards. Consistent with
OMB’s established processes, the
Working Group was composed of
Federal staff with subject matter
expertise in the collection and use of
Federal race and ethnicity data. The 13
OMB-recognized principal statistical
agencies,11 the 24 agencies enumerated
by the Chief Financial Officers Act (CFO
Act),12 and the U.S. Equal Employment
Opportunity Commission (EEOC) were
invited to nominate representatives to
the Working Group through their
Federal Statistical Officials.13 Of the
invitees, 12 principal statistical
agencies, 22 Chief Financial Officers Act
agencies, and the EEOC all provided
staff to participate in the Working
Group. The Working Group was chaired
and co-chaired by career staff members
from OMB and the U.S. Census Bureau,
respectively.
OMB tasked the Working Group with
developing a set of recommendations for
improving the quality and usefulness of
Federal race and ethnicity data with a
focus on developing recommendations
on topics including, but not limited to:
• whether the minimum reporting
categories should be changed and how
to best address detailed race and
ethnicity groups in SPD 15;
• whether updates should be made to
the question format, terminology, and
wording of the questions, as well as the
10 Karin Orvis, Reviewing and Revising Standards
for Maintaining, Collecting, and Presenting Federal
Data on Race and Ethnicity, The White House (June
15, 2022), available at https://www.whitehouse.gov/
omb/briefing-room/2022/06/15/reviewing-andrevising-standards-for-maintaining-collecting-andpresenting-federal-data-on-race-and-ethnicity/.
11 A list of the 13 principal statistical agencies is
available at https://statspolicy.gov.
12 A list of the 24 Chief Financial Officers Act
Agencies is available at https://www.cfo.gov/aboutthe-council/.
13 5 U.S.C. 314.
E:\FR\FM\29MRN1.SGM
29MRN1
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES
22184
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 62 / Friday, March 29, 2024 / Notices
instructions for respondents and
associated guidance; and
• whether guidance for the collection
and reporting of these data can be
improved, including in instances when
self-identification is not possible.
The Working Group adopted a set of
principles to govern their work (e.g.,
category changes should be based on
sound research; all racial and ethnic
categories should adhere to public law;
operational feasibility should also be
considered) consistent with processes
used by the working groups for the
original 1977 SPD 15 and the 1997
revision.14
Developing Initial Proposals. The
Working Group developed initial
proposals for revising SPD 15 by
examining existing evidence and
building on the work of a previous
interagency working group that
reviewed SPD 15 from 2014 to 2018.
The existing evidence included several
large-scale, rigorous studies conducted
by the Census Bureau.
The initial set of proposals developed
by the Working Group included
collecting race and ethnicity together
with a single question; adding a MENA
response category, separate from the
White category; requiring the collection
of more detailed data beyond the
minimum categories as a default; and
updating SPD 15’s terminology,
definitions, and question wording. The
Working Group also developed a set of
questions regarding various aspects of
the proposals, implementation issues,
and additional topics for public
feedback. OMB published these
preliminary proposals and questions in
a January 2023 FRN 15 that provided the
public an opportunity to submit
comments from January 27 to April 27,
2023.
Developing Final Recommendations.
To meet the goal of producing accurate
and useful race and ethnicity data
across the Federal Government, it is
important to base SPD 15 on a solid
portfolio of evidence that includes
rigorous testing, input from the public
on how individuals prefer to identify,
and input from data providers and
users.
In developing their initial and final
recommendations, the Working Group
relied heavily on research conducted by
Federal agencies over the last decade,
especially the U.S. Census Bureau’s
2015 National Content Test (NCT).16
14 Refer
to the Working Group’s final report on for
additional details, available on the Federal
Register, https://www.federalregister.gov/, by
searching for ‘‘OMB–2023–0001’’.
15 88 FR 5375.
16 Kelly Mathews et al., U.S. Census Bureau, 2015
National Content Test Race and Ethnicity Analysis
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:49 Mar 28, 2024
Jkt 262001
The NCT specifically tested the impact
and effectiveness of using a combined
question, adding a MENA category, and
making various revisions to question
wording and terminology. The NCT
included a nationally representative
sample of 1.2 million housing units
across the United States, including
Puerto Rico. Importantly, it also
included a re-interview of
approximately 75,000 cases, designed to
generate better understanding of how
respondents interpret the questions and
prefer to identify. In addition to preexisting research conducted over the
last decade, several agencies
represented on the Working Group
collaborated to conduct supplementary
qualitative and quantitative research.
This additional research helped inform
and improve the Working Group’s final
recommendations to OMB.
In recognition of the importance of
public participation in the revision of
SPD 15, obtaining input and feedback
from the public played a key role in the
development of the final
recommendations. The Working Group
and OMB used a variety of approaches
to raise awareness and encourage input.
Outreach efforts included White House
blog posts and social media posts, the
creation of a dedicated website for the
review process (https://www.spd15
revision.gov), interviews with news
outlets, participation in professional
conferences and workshops, and direct
outreach to stakeholders using contact
lists maintained by the agencies
participating on the Working Group. In
September 2022, the Working Group
began conducting bi-monthly listening
sessions with members of the public,
which allowed organizations, advocacy
groups, academics, and the general
public to share their perspectives and
recommendations regarding SPD 15.17
In March 2023, the Chief Statistician of
the United States, joined by the chair
and co-chair of the Working Group,
hosted a series of three virtual public
town hall meetings. OMB also held a
Tribal consultation with Tribal leaders
and members to discuss the proposed
revisions. As a result of these efforts,
members of the public submitted over
Report: A New Design for the 21st Century (Feb. 28,
2017), available at https://www.census.gov/
programs-surveys/decennial-census/decade/2020/
planning-management/plan/final-analysis/2015nctrace-ethnicity-analysis.html.
17 Karin Orvis, OMB Launches New Public
Listening Sessions on Federal Race and Ethnicity
Standards Revision, The White House (Aug. 30,
2022), available at https://www.whitehouse.gov/
omb/briefing-room/2022/08/30/omb-launches-newpublic-listening-sessions-on-federal-race-andethnicity-standards-revision/.
PO 00000
Frm 00069
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
20,000 comments to the FRN,18 the
Working Group scheduled 94 separate
30-minute listening sessions, and about
3,350 people joined the virtual town
halls where over 200 people spoke to
share their perspectives on SPD 15.
The input from the experts on the
Working Group, the strong existing
research base, and the robust
participation of the public, all helped
shape the activities of the Working
Group, their final recommendations to
OMB, and OMB’s final decisions.
C. Revisions to SPD 15
The revised standards presented in
the Notice adopt several revisions
intended to improve the quality and
usefulness of Federal race and ethnicity
data. This section explains the revisions
by: describing the initial proposals of
the Working Group, summarizing public
input, describing the final
recommendations of the Working Group
(and how they differed, if at all, from
the initial proposals), and presenting
and explaining OMB’s decisions.
1. Collect Race and Ethnicity
Information Using One Combined
Question
Working Group’s Initial Proposals.
The Working Group initially proposed
that SPD 15 move from two separate
questions to a single combined race and
ethnicity question as the required
design for self-reported race and
ethnicity information collections. Refer
to Section C, Part 1 of the January 2023
FRN 19 for additional information about
this initial proposal from the Working
Group.
Summary of Public Input. Many
comments stated the current two
questions structure is confusing to
respondents, especially respondents
who identify as Hispanic or Latino and
do not identify with the 1997 SPD 15
race categories. Some commenters
expressed that the current format with
two separate questions creates an
impediment to the collection of accurate
race data on the Hispanic or Latino
population. A common theme was the
proposed change would improve the
collection of race data for the Hispanic
or Latino population by reducing the
number of responses that leave the race
question blank or are classified as
‘‘Some Other Race’’ when that option is
available.20 Some commenters, while
18 Initial Proposals for Updating OMB’s Race and
Ethnicity Data Standards Docket, Regulations.gov,
available at https://www.regulations.gov/docket/
OMB-2023-0001/comments (last visited Feb. 15,
2024).
19 88 FR 5379.
20 Under the 1997 standards, data collections by
Federal agencies may not include a Some Other
E:\FR\FM\29MRN1.SGM
29MRN1
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 62 / Friday, March 29, 2024 / Notices
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES
generally in support of a combined
question, suggested removing the words
‘‘race’’ and ‘‘ethnicity’’ from the
question stem and emphasizing that
respondents should select all categories
that apply to them.
Some comments were opposed to, and
expressed concerns about, this initial
proposal. A notable concern was that
the new format would lead to the
potential loss of data about Afro-Latino
respondents. Some commenters viewed
a combined race and ethnicity question
as conflating two distinct concepts and
implying that Hispanic or Latino is a
‘‘race.’’ Commenters viewed that a
combined question would result in a
large percentage of Afro-Latinos only
identifying as Hispanic or Latino,
thereby contributing to an undercount
of the Afro-Latino population. Overall,
the majority of comments on the subject
expressed support for using a single
combined question and allowing
multiple responses.21
Working Group’s Final
Recommendations. The final
recommendation to OMB, consistent
with the initial proposal, was to
combine the current separate questions
on Hispanic or Latino ethnicity and race
into a single combined race and
ethnicity question that allows
respondents to select one or multiple
categories, and require the use of this
single-question format for both selfresponse and proxy response (for
example, when one member of a
household responds on behalf of other
members). The final recommendation
further specifies that a single selection
would be considered a complete
response (e.g., Hispanic or Latino
respondents are not required to select an
additional category), although
respondents will be encouraged to
provide multiple responses when
appropriate.
The Working Group’s final report
states that ‘‘[s]ince 1980, responses to
the decennial census in each subsequent
decade have shown increasing nonresponse to the race question,
confusion, and concern from the public
about separate questions on ethnicity
Race (SOR) response category unless required by
statute. Since 2005, the decennial census and
American Community Survey (ACS) are required by
law to include a SOR category, thereby adding a
sixth minimum race category for these collections.
The decennial census and ACS are the only
information collections with a statutory
requirement for the use of a SOR category. See
Science, State, Justice, Commerce, and Related
Agencies Appropriations Act, 2006, Public Law
109–108, tit. II, 119 Stat. 2290, 2308–09 (2005).
21 A comprehensive review of public input on
this initial proposal can be found in the Working
Group’s Annex 4, available on the Federal Register,
https://www.federalregister.gov/, by searching for
‘‘OMB–2023–0001’’.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:49 Mar 28, 2024
Jkt 262001
and race. . . . Results from the 2020
Census showed that 43.5 percent of
those who self-identified as Hispanic or
Latino either did not report a race or
were classified as ‘Some Other Race’
(SOR) alone (over 23 million people).’’
This increasing non-response and
reporting of SOR was one of the primary
indicators to OMB that SPD 15 was no
longer providing options that align with
how respondents prefer to identify. The
NCT described in Section B, along with
other Census Bureau research
conducted in preparation for the 2020
Census,22 found that a combined
question reduced confusion and
improved data quality, including
drastically reducing the selection of
SOR by Hispanic or Latino respondents.
In response to concerns from the AfroLatino community about the potential
impact of a combined question on
population estimates, the Working
Group evaluated several sources of
evidence to inform their
recommendations. The NCT compared
Afro-Latino population estimates when
using a combined question versus a
separate questions format and did not
find a significant difference between the
approaches. In fact, Afro-Latino
population estimates were slightly
higher when using a combined question
with detailed checkboxes and write-in
fields. Additionally, the Working Group
conducted cognitive interviews with
Afro-Latino participants to explore how
they identify and how they interpret
questions about race and ethnicity.
About half of interview participants
selected only the Hispanic or Latino
response category when shown a
combined question, despite selecting
both Hispanic or Latino and Black or
African American response categories
during recruitment. These cognitive
interviews contributed to the Working
Group’s recommendation for future
research on collecting data for Afrodescendent populations.23
OMB Decisions. OMB accepts the
recommendation to combine the
separate questions on race and ethnicity
into a single combined race and
22 Elizabeth Compton et al., U.S. Census Bureau,
2010 Census Race and Hispanic Origin Alternative
Questionnaire Experiment (Feb. 28, 2013), available
at https://www.census.gov/programs-surveys/
decennial-census/decade/2010/programmanagement/cpex/2010-cpex-211.html; Jacquelyn
Harth, U.S. Census Bureau, 2016 American
Community Survey Content Test: Race and
Hispanic Origin (Sept. 19, 2017), available at
https://www.census.gov/library/working-papers/
2017/acs/2017_Harth_01.html.
23 Refer to the Working Group’s final report and
its Annexes 1 and 2 to learn more about the
Working Group’s research and analysis that
ultimately led to this recommendation, available on
the Federal Register, https://www.federal
register.gov/, by searching for ‘‘OMB–2023–0001’’.
PO 00000
Frm 00070
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
22185
ethnicity question. Because respondents
may perceive categories like Hispanic or
Latino or MENA as either a race or
ethnicity, the revised SPD 15 requires
agencies to treat the categories equally
and report them as ‘‘race and/or
ethnicity’’ categories.
OMB’s decision on this
recommendation reflects the strong
evidence that a combined question
format results in higher quality and
more useful data, and provides a format
that is clearer and more concise for
respondents while still allowing them to
select as many race and/or ethnicity
options that correspond to how they
identify. OMB recognizes that
additional research, testing, and
stakeholder engagement is needed to
understand how to best encourage the
selection of multiple race and/or
ethnicity categories for people who
identify as Afro-Latino, and is
prioritizing that research as discussed
further in Section D. Finally, we note
here that the revised SPD 15 adopts the
Working Group’s recommendation to
modify the question instructions to
better signal to respondents that they
should select all of the categories that
reflect their identity.
2. Add Middle Eastern or North African
as a New Minimum Category
Working Group’s Initial Proposals.
The Working Group initially proposed
that Middle Eastern or North African be
added to SPD 15 as a new minimum
reporting category distinct from all other
reporting categories, and that the
definition of the current White reporting
category be edited to remove MENA
from its definition. Refer to Section C,
Part 2 of the January 2023 FRN 24 for
additional information about this initial
proposal from the Working Group.
Summary of Public Input. Nearly all
comments addressing the MENA
category supported the proposal.
Commenters expressed that the current
classification of MENA respondents as
White does not reflect the reality of
many who are MENA. A few
commenters were opposed, either
stating some individuals from the
MENA region of the world do consider
themselves to be White or that race and
ethnicity data should not be collected
by the Federal Government.
Many commenters also provided
feedback about which groups should be
considered MENA or have a checkbox
under the MENA category, commenting
that it was important for groups such as
Armenians, Somalis, and Sudanese to
be part of any MENA category. Overall,
the vast majority of comments expressed
24 88
E:\FR\FM\29MRN1.SGM
FR 5379.
29MRN1
22186
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 62 / Friday, March 29, 2024 / Notices
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES
support for adding a MENA minimum
category, separate and distinct from
White.25
Working Group’s Final
Recommendations. The Working
Group’s final recommendation was not
changed from the initial proposal: ‘‘Add
MENA as a new minimum reporting
category distinct from all other reporting
categories. Revise the definition for the
White category to remove references to
MENA, and classify and tabulate MENA
responses under the new MENA
category.’’ 26
OMB Decisions. OMB accepts the
recommendation to create a new
minimum reporting category for MENA
separate and distinct from the White
category, and to revise the White
category definition accordingly.
MENA groups and members of the
public generally have long voiced the
need for a separate MENA minimum
category. The 1997 revision to SPD 15
also identified MENA as a topic for
further research because there was a
lack of public consensus on how to
define the category (e.g., shared
language, geography) at the time.27
Since then, Federal agencies have
conducted research and stakeholder
outreach showing broad public support
for the use of the term ‘‘Middle Eastern
or North African,’’ and that MENA
respondents understand the use of the
category and select it when available.28
Described further in Part 3 below and
consistent with the existing minimum
categories, the detailed checkboxes and
definition examples for the MENA
category were selected to represent the
largest population groups in the United
States as reported by the 2020 Census.
Although several commenters expressed
interest in explicitly including
Armenian, Somali, or Sudanese, the
2015 NCT found that most respondents
who identify as Armenian, Somali, and
Sudanese did not select MENA when it
was offered.29 Additional research is
25 A comprehensive review of public input on
this initial proposal can be found in the Working
Group’s Annex 4, available on the Federal Register,
https://www.federalregister.gov/, by searching for
‘‘OMB–2023–0001’’.
26 Refer to the Working Group’s final report and
its Annex 1 to learn more about the Working
Group’s research and analysis that ultimately led to
this recommendation, available on the Federal
Register, https://www.federalregister.gov/, by
searching for ‘‘OMB–2023–0001’’.
27 62 FR 58787.
28 Stephanie Wilson & Sheba K. Dunston, Nat’l
Ctr. for Health Stat., Ctrs. for Disease Control &
Prevention, Cognitive Interview Evaluation of the
Revised Race Question, with Special Emphasis on
the Newly Proposed Middle Eastern/North African
Response Option (2017), available at https://
wwwn.cdc.gov/qbank/report/Willson_2017_NCHS_
MENA.pdf; Kelly Mathews, supra note 16.
29 In NCT test panels that did not include a
MENA category, Armenian respondents chose the
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:49 Mar 28, 2024
Jkt 262001
needed on these groups to monitor their
preferred identification.
3. Require the Collection of Detailed
Race and Ethnicity Categories as a
Default
Working Group’s Initial Proposals.
The Working Group initially proposed
requiring data collection of specific
detailed data beyond the minimum
categories, unless an agency determines
the potential benefit of the detailed data
would not justify the additional burden
to the agency and the public or the
additional risk to privacy or
confidentiality and the agency requests
and receives an exemption from OIRA.
In those cases, agencies must at least use
SPD 15’s minimum categories. In any
circumstance, agencies are encouraged
to collect and provide more granular
data than the minimum categories.
The specific detailed checkboxes
shown in the January 2023 FRN
represent the six largest population
groups in the United States within each
minimum category, based on responses
to the 2010 Census. The exception to
this rule is the six checkboxes shown for
the MENA category, which represent the
two largest Arab nationalities in the
United States from the Middle East
(Lebanese and Syrian), the two largest
Arab nationalities in the United States
from North Africa (Egyptian and
Moroccan), and the two largest nonArab nationalities in the United States
from the MENA region (Iranian and
Israeli). Refer to Section C, Part 3 of the
January 2023 FRN 30 for additional
information about this initial proposal
from the Working Group.
Summary of Public Input. Comments
supporting this proposal cited the
diverse experiences of groups within
each minimum reporting category. In
particular, a number of health
organizations expressed the importance
of having data available for detailed
groups to measure differences in
healthcare outcomes. There were also
comments advocating for flexibility in
SPD 15 to allow for changes in the
specific detailed categories used as new
White category 90.8% of the time and Some Other
Race 9.6% of the time, Somali respondents chose
the Black or African American category 96.2% of
the time, and Sudanese respondents chose the
Black or African American category 98.4% of the
time.
In NCT test panels that did include a MENA
category, Armenian respondents chose the White
category 79.0% of the time, the MENA category
12.6% of the time, and Some Other Race 9.3% of
the time; Somali respondents chose the Black or
African American category 94.2% of the time, Some
Other Race 4.8% of the time, and the MENA
category 0.0% of the time; Sudanese respondents
chose the Black or African American category
87.2% of the time and MENA 8.0% of the time.
30 88 FR 5380.
PO 00000
Frm 00071
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
demographic data of the United States
become available. Some urged that
Federal agencies should be allowed to
adapt the detailed categories based on
their data collection needs and contexts,
while others urged strict requirements
for all agencies out of concern that any
flexibility could be misused.
A few commenters were opposed,
expressing concerns with the burden on
Federal agencies, the risks to data
privacy and disclosure for small
population groups, and burden on
respondents. Overall, the majority of
comments expressed support for
requiring the collection of more detail
beyond the minimum categories as a
default, but allowing agencies to
determine what additional data to
collect in order to best meet program
and stakeholder needs.31
Working Group’s Final
Recommendations. The final
recommendation of the Working Group
differed from the initial proposal in the
January 2023 FRN, reflecting input from
Federal agencies concerned about the
lack of flexibility. The Working Group’s
final recommendation was to require the
collection of data on race and ethnicity
with greater detail beyond the minimum
reporting categories as a default, but to
allow agencies flexibility to determine
what additional data to collect to best
meet program and stakeholder needs,
provided the detailed data aggregate
into the minimum reporting categories,
and subject to OIRA approval. In cases
where agencies determine the additional
burden would outweigh the potential
benefits of collecting detailed data,
Federal agencies may seek approval
from OIRA to use the minimum
reporting categories. In any
circumstance, SPD 15 should encourage
to collect and provide more granular
data than the minimum reporting
categories.32
OMB Decisions. OMB accepts the
recommendation to require the
collection of more detailed data as a
default. However, the intent of SPD 15
to produce consistent and comparable
data is best served by providing a
common framework for the collection of
detailed data, rather than allowing each
agency to determine what additional
detail to collect. Therefore, agencies are
required to collect the detailed
31 A comprehensive review of public input on
this initial proposal can be found in the Working
Group’s Annex 4, available on the Federal Register,
https://www.federalregister.gov/, by searching for
‘‘OMB–2023–0001’’.
32 Refer to the Working Group’s final report and
its Annex 1 to learn more about the Working
Group’s research and analysis that ultimately led to
this recommendation, available on the Federal
Register, https://www.federalregister.gov/, by
searching for‘‘OMB–2023–0001’’.
E:\FR\FM\29MRN1.SGM
29MRN1
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 62 / Friday, March 29, 2024 / Notices
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES
categories described in this Notice as a
default. These detailed categories were
selected to represent the largest
population groups within the minimum
categories, according to the results of
the 2020 Census. Selecting the largest
groups by United States population
prioritizes the utility of the data by
maximizing the sample sizes. Small
sample sizes are often the primary
barrier to publication of data for specific
groups; small samples decrease
precision, make it harder to identify
differences between groups, and
increase privacy risk.
OMB recognizes racial and ethnic
identities and terminology are
continuously changing and SPD 15
needs to balance the need for
consistency with the ability to adapt to
change and meet specific program
needs. An agency may submit a request
to OIRA for an exemption to the
requirement to collect more detailed
data beyond the minimum categories if
the agency determines that the potential
benefit of the detailed data would not
justify the additional burden to the
agency and the public or the additional
risk to privacy or confidentiality.
Agencies may also submit a request to
OIRA for a variance to the detailed
categories if they determine that
collecting different detailed data
categories than the ones listed in SPD 15
provides more useful or accurate data
for the collection’s specific context and
intended uses. Any variances in
detailed data collection must be able to
be aggregated up to the required
minimum categories. OIRA will review
agency requests for exceptions and
variances, and they will only be
approved if they contain sufficient
justification. Finally, due to the
extensive testing done in the context of
the American Community Survey,
agencies may collect the detailed
categories used on the most recent
version of that survey, should they
differ from the detailed categories listed
in SPD 15, without further justification.
4. Updates to Terminology in SPD 15
Working Group’s Initial Proposals.
The Working Group initially proposed
SPD 15 remove certain terms or phrases
in the minimum category definitions:
‘‘Negro’’ from the Black or African
American definition; ‘‘Far East’’ from
the Asian definition, replacing with
‘‘East Asian;’’ ‘‘Other’’ from Native
Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander;
and ‘‘who maintain tribal affiliation or
community attachment’’ from the
American Indian or Alaska Native
(AIAN) definition.
The FRN also proposed: (1) correcting
‘‘Cuban’’ from being listed twice in the
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:49 Mar 28, 2024
Jkt 262001
minimum category definition for
Hispanic or Latino; (2) changing the
AIAN minimum category description to:
‘‘The category ‘American Indian or
Alaska Native’ includes all individuals
who identify with any of the original
peoples of North, Central, and South
America;’’ (3) discontinuing the use of
the terms ‘‘majority’’ and ‘‘minority;’’ (4)
using ‘‘race’’ and ‘‘ethnicity’’ as part of
the question stem, e.g., ‘‘What is < your/
name’s > race or ethnicity?;’’ and (5)
updating the current instructions of
‘‘Mark one or more’’ and ‘‘Select one or
more’’ to ‘‘Mark all that apply’’ and
‘‘Select all that apply.’’ Refer to Section
C, Part 4 of the January 2023 FRN 33 for
additional information about this initial
proposal from the Working Group.
Summary of Public Input. Comments
generally demonstrated support for
these proposals. The removal of the
phrase ‘‘who maintain tribal affiliation
or community attachment’’ was
supported by several key organizations
including the National Congress of
American Indians. Some commenters
called for greater clarity in which
geographic areas would be referenced in
the Asian definition. Comments from
organizations that work with Central
Asian populations in the United States
explicitly requested ‘‘Central Asia’’ be
included in the Asian definition. A
number of public comments supported
the replacement of the term ‘‘Far East’’
in the Asian definition and the removal
of the term ‘‘Other’’ from the Native
Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander
definition. Among those who submitted
comments about SPD 15 terminology,
the majority agreed with the proposal to
remove ‘‘Negro’’ from the Black or
African American definition; however,
some comments asked to retain the
term, citing its long history on
government records such as birth
certificates and prior decennial census
records.34
Working Group’s Final
Recommendations. The Working Group
refined their initial proposals based on
public comment and delivered the
following recommendations to OMB to
update terminology in SPD 15.35
(a) Remove ‘‘majority’’ and
‘‘minority’’ terminology, except when
statistically accurate and used for
33 88
FR 5382.
comprehensive review of public input on
this initial proposal can be found in the Working
Group’s Annex 4, available on the Federal Register,
https://www.federalregister.gov/, by searching for
‘‘OMB–2023–0001’’.
35 Refer also to the Working Group’s final report
and its Annex 1 to learn more about the Working
Group’s research and analysis that ultimately led to
these recommendations, available on the Federal
Register, https://www.federalregister.gov/, by
searching for ‘‘OMB–2023–0001’’.
34 A
PO 00000
Frm 00072
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
22187
statistical descriptions or when legal
requirements call for use of the terms.
(b) Use ‘‘race and/or ethnicity’’ in the
question stem.
(c) Use instructions that emphasize
reporting multiple categories is allowed
(and encouraged), regardless of whether
minimum or detailed reporting
categories are collected. Explicit
instructions that the respondent can
select all that apply AND provide
detailed reporting is helpful. For
example:
i. In a self-administered instrument
collecting the minimum reporting
categories: ‘‘Select all that apply. Note,
you may report more than one group.’’
ii. In a self-administered instrument
collecting detailed categories: ‘‘Select all
that apply and enter additional details
in the spaces below. Note, you may
report more than one group.’’
(d) Use ‘‘Multiracial and/or
Multiethnic’’ in tabulations to represent
people who identify with multiple
minimum reporting categories.
(e) Provide balance for definitions and
use six example groups to illustrate the
breadth and diversity of the category. In
addition, make the following updates to
the race and ethnicity definitions:
i. Remove the phrase ‘‘who maintains
tribal affiliation or community
attachment’’ in the AIAN definition.
ii. Change ‘‘(including Central
America)’’ to having ‘‘Central America’’
listed co-equally with North and South
America in the AIAN definition.
iii. Replace ‘‘Far East’’ with ‘‘Central
or East Asia’’ and ‘‘Indian
Subcontinent’’ with ‘‘South Asia’’ in the
Asian definition.
iv. Remove ‘‘Negro’’ from the Black or
African American definition.
v. Correct ‘‘Cuban’’ being listed twice
in the Hispanic or Latino definition.
vi. Remove ‘‘. . . regardless of race.
The term ‘Spanish origin’ can be used
in addition to ‘Hispanic or Latino’ ’’
from the Hispanic or Latino definition.
vii. Remove ‘‘Other’’ from the ‘‘Native
Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander’’
category title.
OMB Decisions. OMB accepts the
Working Group’s final
recommendations for revising the
terminology in SPD 15, including the
recommendations for revisions to the
question stem and minimum category
definitions, with the following two
exceptions. First, in regards to
recommendation (c) above, OMB does
not include the phrase ‘‘Note, you may
report more than one group’’ in the
required question instructions.
Additional testing conducted after the
Working Group delivered their final
recommendations found that including
this phrase had the opposite of the
E:\FR\FM\29MRN1.SGM
29MRN1
22188
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 62 / Friday, March 29, 2024 / Notices
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES
intended effect and resulted in a
sizeable decrease in the number of
respondents selecting multiple
responses. Encouraging multiple
responses whenever appropriate is
critical to measuring the completeness
and complexity of racial and ethnic
identity. The revised standards require
the use of the following question
instructions: ‘‘What is your race and/or
ethnicity? Select all that apply and enter
additional details in the spaces below.’’
Section D of this notice, which
identifies OMB’s priority areas for
future research, includes the following
research topic: how to encourage
respondents to select multiple race and/
or ethnicity categories when appropriate
by enhancing question design and
inclusive language.
Second, in regards to
recommendation (e) above, to align
better with the other category
definitions, as well as the previous
definition, the revised SPD 15 adopts
the following definition for the Hispanic
or Latino category: ‘‘Hispanic or Latino.
Includes individuals of Mexican, Puerto
Rican, Salvadoran, Cuban, Dominican,
Guatemalan, and other Central or South
American or Spanish culture or origin.’’
Consistent with the Working Group’s
recommendations, the revised category
definitions list six example groups
reflecting the largest population groups
in the United States according to the
2020 Census.
These revisions will bring the
terminology in SPD 15 more up to date,
will more clearly explain that
respondents should select more than
one category when appropriate, and
greatly increase the consistency and
clarity of the minimum category
definitions.
5. Implementation Guidance
Working Group’s Initial Proposals.
The Working Group requested public
input on how to best implement
revisions to SPD 15. It listed several
related issues including dates agencies
must meet as they incorporate revisions;
statistical methods to connect data
produced from previous and revised
collection formats; approaches for
collecting race and ethnicity
information by proxy when selfidentification is not possible;
approaches for reporting data for
respondents who select more than one
race or ethnicity; obtaining OIRA
approval under the PRA to revise
existing collections; and best practices
for communicating SPD 15 revisions to
stakeholders. Refer to Section C, Part 5
of the January 2023 FRN 36 for
36 88
FR 5383.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:49 Mar 28, 2024
Jkt 262001
additional information about the
Working Group’s request for public
input.
Summary of Public Input. OMB
received fewer public comments on the
implementation issues than on the
previous initial proposals. Public input
on these issues included statements on
the following topics: 37
• The importance of establishing a
specific time Federal agencies would
need to come into compliance with the
revised SPD 15, and generally
supporting the inclusion of an
implementation timeline in the revised
SPD 15;
• Concerns about data consistency
when data are collected using the 1997
revision versus the current revision,
whether across different data sets or
within the same data set when data are
collected over time;
• The need for tools to support
bridging, or combining data collected
under different versions of SPD 15;
• Support for requiring agencies to
transparently describe how data were
collected or generated and how
nonresponse or other missing data were
assigned or allocated when data were
not collected via self-report;
• Questions about tabulation under a
revised SPD 15, including:
Æ Will those of Hispanic or Latino
origin continue to be treated differently
in civil rights reporting? 38
Æ How will multiple race and
ethnicity responses be tabulated?
Æ What will be the best practices and
flexibilities for tabulating detailed data?
• Concern about individuals that
select multiple response categories
being grouped into one ‘‘multiple race
or ethnicity’’ category, resulting in
respondents with very different racial
and ethnic identities being placed into
the same category and in less
information being released about the
population’s diversity;
• The importance of guidance on
flexibility and best practices on how to
tabulate detailed categories based on the
population or sample size; and
• The limitations of proxy or
observational data and the importance
of clearly acknowledging those
limitations. Several expressed how
these forms of data collection are
37 A comprehensive review of public input on
this initial proposal can be found in the Working
Group’s Annex 4, available on the Federal Register,
https://www.federalregister.gov/, by searching for
‘‘OMB–2023–0001’’.
38 Currently most civil rights reporting in practice
(not by SPD 15 guidance) is tabulated such that
Hispanic or Latino responses supersede any race
response. Hispanic or Latino responses are
tabulated separately and race is only tabulated and
reported for non-Hispanic or Latino respondents.
Office of Management and Budget, supra note 8.
PO 00000
Frm 00073
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
inherently biased. Some comments
requested training, guidance, or
technical assistance for how and when
to use these methods and how to
analyze resulting data. Some noted
observational data collection is not
necessarily of lesser value in some
circumstances than self-identification,
but instead measures a different concept
and provides answers to a different set
of questions that may be of interest (e.g.,
discrimination resulting from perceived
race). Overall, the majority of public
comments on the subject leaned toward
prohibiting the collection of race and
ethnicity by proxy.
Working Group’s Final
Recommendations. Based on public
input and further discussions with
Federal agencies, the Working Group
developed five final recommendations
related to implementation.39 The first
set includes two recommendations on
planning and timing, and the second set
includes three recommendations on
how to improve collection and reporting
practices for race and ethnicity data.
Recommendations on implementation
and timing.
(a) Require an Action Plan on Race
and Ethnicity Data within 12 months of
the publication of a revised SPD 15.
Encourage Federal agencies to use these
action plans to make a unified plan to
comply with SPD 15, identify potential
risks, and inform stakeholders of these
plans. OMB should encourage agencies
to share this information publicly.
Statistical agencies may still create their
own action plan alongside the unified
department plan to provide more detail
on various data collection efforts and
dissemination plans.
(b) Existing Federal agency-conducted
or -sponsored data collection efforts that
include data on race and ethnicity shall
be made consistent with the revised
SPD 15 within four years of its
publication. New Federal data
collections that include data on race and
ethnicity will adhere to the revised SPD
15 immediately.
Recommendations for improving the
collection and reporting practices for
race and ethnicity data.
(c) When the collection of race and
ethnicity is done through visual
observation, require the use of the
minimum reporting categories but do
not require the collection of detailed
race and ethnicity. Respondent selfidentification should be facilitated to
the greatest extent possible.
39 Refer to the Working Group’s final report and
its Annex 3 to learn more about the Working
Group’s research and analysis that ultimately led to
these recommendations, available on the Federal
Register, https://www.federalregister.gov/, by
searching for ‘‘OMB–2023–0001’’.
E:\FR\FM\29MRN1.SGM
29MRN1
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 62 / Friday, March 29, 2024 / Notices
(d) When data are not self-reported,
encourage agencies to transparently
describe how the data were collected or
generated, and how nonresponse or
other missing data were assigned or
allocated. Federal agencies and
researchers should make it a practice to
identify when data collections of race
and ethnicity are intentionally designed
to collect proxy responses, observational
data, or employ a combination of selfidentification, visual observation, and
other collection methods.
(e) With respect to tabulation, require
that the seven minimum race and
ethnicity reporting categories be treated
co-equally, by not using different
tabulation approaches or rules for
different categories in the same table.
Additionally, require that tabulation
procedures used by Federal agencies
result in the production of as much
information on race and ethnicity as
possible, including data on people
reporting more than one race and/or
ethnicity. However, Federal agencies
shall not present data on detailed
categories and specific Multiracial and/
or Multiethnic populations if doing so
would compromise data quality or
respondent privacy.
OMB Decisions.
(a) OMB accepts this recommendation
to require an Action Plan on Race and
Ethnicity Data with the following
modifications: Based on input from
Federal agencies, each agency’s Action
Plan on Race and Ethnicity Data is
required within 18 months of
publication of this Notice, rather than
the recommended 12 months. This will
provide more time for agencies to
coordinate across programs and engage
stakeholders and data providers to
submit a more specific Action Plan to
OMB. Agencies do not need to wait for
their Action Plans to be complete to
start implementing the revisions
wherever possible. To improve
transparency, agencies must make their
Action Plans publicly available upon
submission to OMB.
(b) OMB accepts this recommendation
to create a deadline for implementation
with the following modification: Based
on input from Federal agencies, the
deadline for compliance with this
revised SPD 15 is five years after the
publication of this Notice, rather than
the recommended four years. Most
programs will be able to, and should,
implement revisions sooner than the
five-year deadline for compliance.
Certain programs that involve
interconnected data across multiple
agencies or offices, or that rely on data
collected and provided by non-Federal
entities, may take longer to implement
than programs like statistical surveys,
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:49 Mar 28, 2024
Jkt 262001
but all programs are required to bring
their collections into compliance within
the five-year implementation period.
OIRA will use the PRA review process
to ensure that agencies adopt these
revisions in a timely manner.
(c) OMB accepts without modification
this recommendation to exempt data
collected through visual observation
from requirements to collect detailed
data. The revised SPD 15 further
specifies that wherever possible, race
and ethnicity data should be collected
through self-report.
(d) OMB accepts this recommendation
to encourage agencies to transparently
describe race and ethnicity data with
the following modifications: For
statistical survey reporting, agencies are
required, rather than encouraged, to
transparently describe whether race and
ethnicity data are self-reported or
collected by proxy, along with any
imputation or coding procedures. With
respect to other agency products,
agencies are strongly encouraged to
provide this information whenever
possible. OIRA will continue to review
agency PRA requests to ensure that race
and ethnicity data are collected by selfreport whenever possible.
(e) OMB accepts this recommendation
to require agencies to treat the race and
ethnicity categories co-equally with the
following clarifications: With respect to
collection, the seven minimum race and
ethnicity categories shall be treated coequally, except if a program or
collection effort focuses on a specific
racial or ethnic group, as approved by
OIRA. Collection forms may not
indicate to respondents that they should
interpret some categories as ethnicities
and others as races, or otherwise
indicate conceptual differences among
the minimum categories. Similarly, with
respect to tabulation and presentation,
the seven minimum race and ethnicity
categories shall also be treated coequally, which means that when
tabulating and presenting data, agencies
may not use different tabulation
approaches or rules for different
categories within the same table. Again,
an exception may be granted, if a
program or collection effort focuses on
a specific racial or ethnic group, as
approved by OIRA.
6. Additional Topics
Section C, Part 5 of the January 2023
FRN 40 posed several additional
questions for the public. This section
presents public input on these topics, as
well as any associated recommendations
40 88
PO 00000
FR 5383.
Frm 00074
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
22189
from the Working Group and OMB’s
decisions.
Order of Minimum Categories
Summary of Public Input. The 1997
revision of SPD 15 does not dictate the
order in which the minimum categories
are displayed. Agencies generally order
alphabetically or by population size;
however, both approaches have received
criticism. The Working Group asked
what order, alphabetical or by
population size, is preferred and why;
or what alternative approach would be
recommended. The comments
addressing this subject agreed on
ordering alphabetically, as this seemed
the easiest way to order the categories
and would be the least likely to be
perceived as motivated by nonstatistical preferences.41
Working Group’s Final
Recommendation. The Working Group
did not make a recommendation on this
topic, citing insufficient research.
Members of the Working Group raised
concerns that alphabetical ordering
could lead to measurement error if
respondents scanning the question
quickly see the term ‘‘American’’ in the
AIAN category and mistakenly select
that category to indicate American
identity, even if they do not identify as
American Indian or Alaska Native.
OMB Decision. OMB concurs with the
Working Group’s determination that
there is not sufficient evidence at this
time to justify requiring a specific
ordering for presentation, and SPD 15
will continue to provide agencies
flexibility on how to order the response
categories on information collections so
that future research can inform the
optimal approach to ordering response
options. Note that all examples in this
revision to SPD 15 will be shown with
alphabetically-ordered minimum
response categories.
Terms for Minimum Categories
Summary of Public Input. The FRN
asked for suggestions for different terms
for any of the current minimum race
and ethnicity categories. There were no
prominent themes for such specific
changes. Input from the public included
requests to add Caribbean and SubSaharan African minimum response
categories, separate from African
American; retire the use of the term
‘‘African American;’’ broaden the AIAN
category title to signal inclusion of all
indigenous people of the Americas;
remove ‘‘color’’ words in category titles
41 A comprehensive review of public input on
this question can be found in the Working Group’s
Annex 4, available on the Federal Register, https://
www.federalregister.gov/, by searching for ‘‘OMB–
2023–0001’’.
E:\FR\FM\29MRN1.SGM
29MRN1
22190
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 62 / Friday, March 29, 2024 / Notices
(i.e., Black and White) and replace with
regional terms; create South Asian and
Southeast Asian minimum response
categories; and add categories related to
contextualized Hispanic or Latino
heritage, such as Mestizo, Afro-Latino,
or Triguen˜o.42 A comprehensive review
of public input on this question can be
found in the Working Group’s Annex 4.
Working Group’s Final
Recommendation. The Working Group
recommends preserving the existing
minimum category titles in SPD 15, but
also recommends future research,
stakeholder engagement, and
consultation on legal requirements to
explore whether the names of minimum
categories should be revised and, if so,
how.43
OMB Decision. OMB concurs with
these recommendations and will
maintain existing category titles.
Continuity in the category titles
supports more consistent and
comparable data over time. Therefore,
the only changes to the minimum
category titles will be the addition of the
MENA category and the removal of
‘‘Other’’ from the ‘‘Native Hawaiian and
Other Pacific Islander’’ category title.
With regard to concerns with the AIAN
category title, OMB recognizes the need
for further research and reiterates the
importance of ensuring that major
revisions to the question format, such as
substantially changing a category title,
are based on rigorous research and
public input to avoid inadvertently
affecting population estimates, creating
breaks in series, or confusing
respondents. OMB also notes that SPD
15 is not intended to measure Tribal
enrollment or the status of Tribes. The
revisions to the category definition are
intended to improve estimates of the
AIAN population in Federal statistics,
and are not intended to in any way
diminish or otherwise affect the
political relationship between the
sovereign Tribes and the Federal
Government.
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES
Collecting Data Related to Descent From
Persons Who Were Enslaved in the
United States
Summary of Public Input. The FRN
asked, ‘‘How can Federal surveys or
forms collect data related to descent
from enslaved peoples originally from
the African continent? For example,
42 A comprehensive review of public input on
this question can be found in the Working Group’s
Annex 4, available on the Federal Register, https://
www.federalregister.gov/, by searching for ‘‘OMB–
2023–0001’’.
43 Refer to the Working Group’s final report and
its Annexes 1 and 5 to learn more, available on the
Federal Register, https://www.federalregister.gov/,
by searching for ‘‘OMB–2023–0001’’.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:49 Mar 28, 2024
Jkt 262001
when collecting and coding responses,
what term best describes this population
group (e.g., is the preferred term
‘American Descendants of Slavery,’
‘American Freedmen,’ or something
else)? How should this group be
defined? Should it be collected as a
detailed group within the ‘Black or
African American’ minimum category,
or through a separate question or other
approach?’’
The majority of the public input on
this subject expressed support for
adding a category or question to identify
descendants of persons enslaved in the
United States. There was support for
terms including: Foundational Black
American, American Descendant of
Slavery, American Freedman or
Freedman, Black American, AfricanAmerican, and Negro or American
Negro; however, there was disagreement
about which term is preferred.
Commenters described the importance
of collecting these data and the value for
data users and policymakers, pointed to
existing research that shows differences
in outcome measures, like income and
wealth, and stated that descendants of
persons who were enslaved in the
United States are ethnically distinct
from African immigrants.
Other commenters, including civil
rights groups, opposed the collection of
these data. Commenters expressed
concern about the difficulty of verifying
that identification is accurate, the
usefulness or necessity of the data, the
exclusion of other groups of historically
enslaved people, and the creation of
confusion that could make the Black or
African American community harder to
count. Related, there was also concern
about potential harm to the full and
accurate count of the Black or African
American population, particularly Black
or African American immigrants. The
comments noted the lack of in-depth
research and engagement with the
diverse Black or African American
community on terminology, definition,
and data collection and coding protocol,
as well as implications on the counts of
other Black or African American
diasporic populations.44
Working Group’s Final
Recommendation. The Working Group
did not recommend disaggregation of
the Black or African American category
by descent from persons who were
enslaved in the United States. They
identified the disaggregation of Black or
African American population groups as
a priority area for future research and
44 A comprehensive review of public input on
this question can be found in the Working Group’s
Annex 4, available on the Federal Register, https://
www.federalregister.gov/, by searching for ‘‘OMB–
2023–0001’’.
PO 00000
Frm 00075
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
noted that additional stakeholder
engagement is also needed.45
OMB Decision. OMB concurs with
this recommendation and the Working
Group’s determination that further
research is needed. Individuals and civil
rights groups disagreed on whether or
how to implement this potential
revision. We note that the revised SPD
15 does not prohibit agencies from
asking additional questions related to
race, ethnicity, ancestry, or other related
concepts, including descent from
persons who were enslaved in the
United States. We also note that the
revised SPD 15 maintains the longstanding position that the race and/or
ethnicity categories are not to be used as
determinants of eligibility for
participation in any Federal program.
Additional Comments Not Covered
Above
Finally, the Working Group and OMB
welcomed other comments and
suggestions on any other ways SPD 15
could be revised to produce more
accurate and useful data.
Some comments suggested adding a
box for people to choose not to identify.
OMB maintains the current practice of
not allowing agencies to provide a
specific response option for ‘‘prefer not
to respond,’’ in order to maximize the
quality, usefulness, and consistency of
Federal race and ethnicity data. We note
that with very few exceptions, provision
of race and ethnicity information is
voluntary for respondents.
Other commenters asked OMB to
revise the category definitions to
include an exhaustive list of
nationalities and their associations with
the minimum categories for use in
coding write-in responses. Aligned with
the Working Group’s recommendations
on category definitions, OMB’s revisions
do not establish an exhaustive coding
list that associates all possible
nationalities with one or more of the
minimum race and ethnicity categories.
While the minimum category
definitions and detailed categories in
this revision to SPD 15 rely heavily on
the concept of nationality, OMB
recognizes that nationality is one of
several components that contribute to
racial and ethnic identity. The standards
in SPD 15 are intended to facilitate
individual identity to the greatest extent
possible while still enabling the creation
of consistent and comparable data. OMB
specifies in this revision to SPD 15 that
when coding write-in data, agencies
45 Refer to the Working Group’s final report and
its Annex 1 to learn more, available on the Federal
Register, https://www.federalregister.gov/, by
searching for ‘‘OMB–2023–0001’’.
E:\FR\FM\29MRN1.SGM
29MRN1
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 62 / Friday, March 29, 2024 / Notices
must adopt practices that maximize
comparability between data collected on
forms and surveys with and without
write-in fields to ensure the
comparability of race and ethnicity data
across Federal datasets.
Some commenters expressed that SPD
15 is not revised often enough to stay
current with shifts in demography and
identity. In response, OMB commits to
undertaking regular reviews of SPD 15
as described in Section D of this notice.
Some commenters requested the
addition of new minimum categories,
such as a Mediterranean or Italian
category, distinct from the White
category. Other commenters also
requested the addition of specific
checkboxes for a variety of nationalities
not covered in the initial proposals.
OMB’s revisions to SPD 15 add only
one new minimum category, Middle
Eastern or North African, the addition of
which is supported by many years of
research, testing, and stakeholder
engagement. OMB will continue to
monitor SPD 15 for its effectiveness, and
regular reviews will include
consideration of potential new
minimum categories.
Some commenters requested
increasing the maximum characters in
the American Indian or Alaska Native
write-in field. OMB chose not specify in
SPD 15 the length of the write-in fields
or how these data are collected in order
to allow agencies the flexibility to
continue the use of paper forms when
necessary and to adopt new data
collection practices that may minimize
burden, such as using drop-down
menus. When collecting write-in data,
agencies should seek to minimize
burden to respondents and provide as
much space as feasible to support
complete and accurate responses.46
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES
D. Topics for Future Research
The Working Group and OMB
identified several areas that require
further research before the next review
of SPD 15.
1. What data processing procedures,
such as coding, editing, and imputation
practices, maximize the comparability
of data collected across the Federal
Government when using different
combined question formats, for example
between collections with and without
write-in fields.
2. How to encourage respondents to
select multiple race and/or ethnicity
categories when appropriate by
enhancing question design and
46 A comprehensive review of public input can be
found in the Working Group’s Annex 4, available
on the Federal Register, https://www.federal
register.gov/, by searching for ‘‘OMB–2023–0001’’.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:49 Mar 28, 2024
Jkt 262001
inclusive language, for example by
researching methods for ensuring
complete and accurate estimates of
people who identify as Afro-Latino.
3. How to collect high quality and
useful data related to descent from
persons who were enslaved in the
United States, including research on
terminology, question design, data
quality, and willingness to provide
these data.
4. The optimal order of presentation
for minimum categories, including
research on rates of data entry error,
burden, and respondent preference.
5. Collecting race and ethnicity
consistently across different languages
and translations of the question.
6. Evaluating the detailed checkboxes
as demographics shift over time for their
ability to generate useful, high-quality
data.
7. How respondents interpret each of
the SPD 15 categories and definitions,
and the combined race and/or ethnicity
question in general, along with potential
modifications to minimum category
names.
8. How to better align the AIAN
category title with its definition while
preserving data quality, for example by
exploring the use of a more inclusive
title such as ‘‘Indigenous peoples of the
Americas.’’
It is expected that the list of important
research topics to examine before the
next review will grow as agencies begin
implementing these new standards over
the coming years. OMB commits to
establishing an Interagency Committee
on Race and Ethnicity Statistical
Standards, to be convened by the Chief
Statistician of the United States, that
will maintain and carry out a
Government-wide research agenda and
undertake regular reviews of SPD 15.
These reviews will take place on a 10year cycle and will include opportunity
for public input. The review will result
in a recommendation to the Chief
Statistician of the United States as to
whether or not OMB should undertake
a revision of SPD 15. Notwithstanding
this regular review cycle, OMB may
decide at any time to initiate a review
of SPD 15.
Richard L. Revesz,
Administrator, Office of Information and
Regulatory Affairs.
Standards for Maintaining, Collecting,
and Presenting Federal Data on Race
and Ethnicity
This Statistical Policy Directive
provides the standards for maintaining,
collecting, and presenting race and
ethnicity data for all Federal
information collection and reporting
PO 00000
Frm 00076
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
22191
purposes. The categories in these
standards are understood to be sociopolitical constructs and are not an
attempt to define race and ethnicity
biologically or genetically. They are not
to be used as determinants of eligibility
for participation in any Federal
program. The standards do not require
any agency or program to collect race
and ethnicity data; rather they provide
a common language for uniformity and
comparability in the collection and use
of race and ethnicity data by Federal
agencies.
The standards have seven minimum
categories for data on race and ethnicity:
American Indian or Alaska Native,
Asian, Black or African American,
Hispanic or Latino, Middle Eastern or
North African, Native Hawaiian or
Pacific Islander, and White.
1. Categories and Definitions
The minimum categories for data on
race and ethnicity for Federal statistics,
program administrative reporting, and
civil rights compliance reporting are
defined as follows:
American Indian or Alaska Native.
Individuals with origins in any of the
original peoples of North, Central, and
South America, including, for example,
Navajo Nation, Blackfeet Tribe of the
Blackfeet Indian Reservation of
Montana, Native Village of Barrow
Inupiat Traditional Government, Nome
Eskimo Community, Aztec, and Maya.
Asian. Individuals with origins in any
of the original peoples of Central or East
Asia, Southeast Asia, or South Asia,
including, for example, Chinese, Asian
Indian, Filipino, Vietnamese, Korean,
and Japanese.
Black or African American.
Individuals with origins in any of the
Black racial groups of Africa, including,
for example, African American,
Jamaican, Haitian, Nigerian, Ethiopian,
and Somali.
Hispanic or Latino. Includes
individuals of Mexican, Puerto Rican,
Salvadoran, Cuban, Dominican,
Guatemalan, and other Central or South
American or Spanish culture or origin.
Middle Eastern or North African.
Individuals with origins in any of the
original peoples of the Middle East or
North Africa, including, for example,
Lebanese, Iranian, Egyptian, Syrian,
Iraqi, and Israeli.
Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander.
Individuals with origins in any of the
original peoples of Hawaii, Guam,
Samoa, or other Pacific Islands,
including, for example, Native
Hawaiian, Samoan, Chamorro, Tongan,
Fijian, and Marshallese.
White. Individuals with origins in any
of the original peoples of Europe,
E:\FR\FM\29MRN1.SGM
29MRN1
22192
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 62 / Friday, March 29, 2024 / Notices
including, for example, English,
German, Irish, Italian, Polish, and
Scottish.
2. Question Format
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES
Combined question: A combined race
and ethnicity question is required for
both self-response and proxy data
collection. Respondents shall be offered
a single combined race and ethnicity
question that allows them to select one
category or multiple categories. A single
selection will be considered a complete
response (e.g., Hispanic or Latino
respondents are not required to select an
additional category).
Detailed responses: The revised SPD
15 requires the collection of detailed
data on race and ethnicity beyond the
minimum categories, unless an agency
determines that the potential benefit of
the detailed data would not justify the
additional burden to the agency and the
public or the additional risk to privacy
or confidentiality, and therefore
requests an exemption from OIRA. In
those cases, Federal agencies must at
least use the minimum categories and
justify this determination in the
agency’s PRA information collection
review package. In cases where the data
collection is not subject to the
information collection approval process,
a direct request for a variance shall be
made to OMB through the Office of
Information and Regulatory Affairs
(OIRA). Respondents must be offered
the following detailed categories for the
corresponding minimum categories:
Asian: Chinese, Asian Indian,
Filipino, Vietnamese, Korean, and
Japanese, Another group (for example,
Pakistani, Hmong, Afghan, etc.)
Black or African American: African
American, Jamaican, Haitian, Nigerian,
Ethiopian, Somali, Another group (for
example, Trinidadian and Tobagonian,
Ghanian, Congolese, etc.)
Hispanic or Latino: Mexican, Puerto
Rican, Salvadoran, Cuban, Dominican,
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:49 Mar 28, 2024
Jkt 262001
Guatemalan, Another group (for
example, Colombian, Honduran,
Spaniard, etc.)
Middle Eastern or North African:
Lebanese, Iranian, Egyptian, Syrian,
Iraqi, Israeli, Another group (for
example, Moroccan, Yemeni, Kurdish,
etc.)
Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander:
Native Hawaiian, Samoan, Chamorro,
Tongan, Fijian, Marshallese, Another
group (for example, Chuukese, Palauan,
Tahitian, etc.)
White: English, German, Irish, Italian,
Polish, Scottish, Another group (for
example, French, Swedish, Norwegian,
etc.)
Whenever possible, the ‘‘Another
group’’ detail category checkboxes
should be replaced with write-in fields
that allows respondents to self-identify
as shown in Figure 1 below. Providing
a write-in field is especially critical for
the American Indian or Alaska Native
category, which does not have required
detailed categories under these
standards. The instructions for the
write-in boxes should read ‘‘Enter, for
example,’’ followed by the examples
listed in parentheses above. For the
American Indian or Alaska Native
category, the instructions for the writein option should read: ‘‘Enter, for
example, Navajo Nation, Blackfeet Tribe
of the Blackfeet Indian Reservation of
Montana, Native Village of Barrow
Inupiat Traditional Government, Nome
Eskimo Community, Aztec, Maya, etc.’’
Instead of the detailed categories
listed above and shown in Figure 1,
agencies may use the detailed categories
employed by the U.S. Census Bureau’s
most recently fielded American
Community Survey. Any disaggregated
data collected in addition to the detailed
categories presented here (for example,
a drop-down list for the American
Indian or Alaska Native category) must
be organized in such a way that the
PO 00000
Frm 00077
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
additional categories can be aggregated
into the minimum categories. Any other
variation to the detailed categories must
be specifically authorized by the Office
of Management and Budget (OMB)
through the Paperwork Reduction Act
(PRA) information collection approval
process. In those cases where the data
collection is not subject to the
information collection approval process,
a direct request for a variance shall be
made to OMB through the Office of
Information and Regulatory Affairs
(OIRA).
Question instruction. Respondents
shall be offered the option of selecting
one or more racial and ethnic
designations. The question instructions
will vary depending on whether there is
a write-in field or if there are detailed
categories. For questions with detailed
categories and no write-in fields, the
question instructions should read:
‘‘What is your race and/or ethnicity?
Select all that apply.’’ When write-in
fields are provided, the instructions
should read: ‘‘What is your race and/or
ethnicity? Select all that apply and enter
additional details in the spaces below.’’
When collecting only the minimum
categories, the question instructions
should read ‘‘What is your race and/or
ethnicity? Select all that apply.’’
Examples. The following three figures
provide illustrative examples of
question formats that comply with SPD
15. The standards do not specify the
order that responses must be presented,
but agencies typically order the
responses alphabetically, as shown, or
by population size. SPD 15 envisions
that whenever possible agencies will
collect race and ethnicity data with a
question format that includes the
required minimum categories
disaggregated by the required detailed
categories as illustrated in Figure 1.
BILLING CODE 3110–01–P
E:\FR\FM\29MRN1.SGM
29MRN1
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 62 / Friday, March 29, 2024 / Notices
22193
Figure 1. Race and Ethnicity Question with Minimum Categories, Multiple Detailed
Checkboxes, and Write-In Response Areas with Example Groups
What is your race and/or ethnicity?
Select all that apply and enter additional details in the spaces below.
□
American Indian or Alaska Native -
Enter, for example, Navajo Nation,
Blackfeet Tribe of the Blackfeet Indian Reservation of Montana, Native Village of
Barrow lnupiat Traditional Government, Nome Eskimo Community, Aztec, Maya, etc.
D Asian -
Provide details below.
□ Chinese
□ Asian Indian
□ Filipino
□ Vietnamese
□ Korean
□ Japanese
Enter, for example, Pakistani, Hmong, Afghan, etc.
D Black or African American -
Provide details below.
□ African American
□ Jamaican
□ Haitian
□
□
□ Somali
Nigerian
Ethiopian
Enter, for example, Trinidadian and Tobagonian, Ghanaian, Congolese, etc.
D Hispanic or Latino -
Provide details below.
□ Mexican
□ Puerto Rican
□ Salvadoran
□ Cuban
□ Dominican
□ Guatemalan
Enter, for example, Colombian, Honduran, Spaniard, etc.
D Middle Eastern or North African -
Provide details below.
□ Lebanese
□ Iranian
□ Egyptian
□
□
□
Syrian
Iraqi
Israeli
Enter, for example, Moroccan, Yemeni, Kurdish, etc.
□
Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander -
Provide details below.
□ Native Hawaiian
□ Samoan
□ Chamorro
□ Tongan
□ Fijian
□ Marshallese
Enter, for example, Chuukese, Palauan, Tahitian, etc.
Provide details below.
□
English
□
German
□ Irish
□
Italian
□
Polish
□
Scottish
Enter, for example, French, Swedish, Norwegian, etc.
When an agency receives an OIRA
exemption from collecting detailed data,
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:49 Mar 28, 2024
Jkt 262001
it may use a format that includes only
PO 00000
Frm 00078
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
the minimum categories, as shown in
Figures 2 and 3.
E:\FR\FM\29MRN1.SGM
29MRN1
EN29MR24.000</GPH>
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES
D White -
22194
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 62 / Friday, March 29, 2024 / Notices
Figure 2. Race and Ethnicity Question with Minimum Categories Only and Examples
What is your race and/or ethnicity?
Select all that apply.
□
American Indian or Alaska Native
For example, Navajo Nation, Blackfeet Tribe of the Blackfeet Indian Reservation
of Montana, Native Village of Barrow lnupiat Traditional Government,
Nome Eskimo CommunitY, Aztec, Maya, etc.
□
Asian
For example, Chinese, Asian Indian, Filipino, Vietnamese, Korean, Japanese, etc.
□
Black or African American
For example, African American, Jamaican, Haitian, Nigerian, Ethiopian, Somali, etc.
□
Hispanic or Latino
For example, Mexican, Puerto Rican, Salvadoran, Cuban, Dominican, Guatemalan, etc.
□
Middle Eastern or North African
For example, Lebanese, Iranian, Egyptian, Syrian, Iraqi, Israeli, etc.
□
Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander
For example, Native Hawaiian, Samoan, Chamorro, Tongan, Fijian, Marsha/Iese, etc.
□
White
For example, English, German, Irish, Italian, Polish, Scottish, etc.
Figure 3. Race and Ethnicity Question with Minimum Categories Only
What is your race and/or ethnicity?
American Indian or Alaska Native
□
Asian
□
Black or African American
□
Hispanic or Latino
□
Middle Eastern or North African
□
Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander
□
White
BILLING CODE 3110–01–C
When using the minimum categories
only, the quality of the data and
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:49 Mar 28, 2024
Jkt 262001
consistency with other datasets may be
improved by providing the respondent
with examples as shown in Figure 2.
PO 00000
Frm 00079
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Agencies should provide these
examples when feasible over the
example in Figure 3 without examples.
E:\FR\FM\29MRN1.SGM
29MRN1
EN29MR24.002</GPH>
□
EN29MR24.001</GPH>
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES
Select all that apply.
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 62 / Friday, March 29, 2024 / Notices
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES
3. Data Collection and Editing
Procedures
With respect to collection, the seven
minimum race and ethnicity categories
shall be treated co-equally except if a
program or collection effort focuses on
a specific racial or ethnic group, and
only as approved by OIRA. Collection
forms may not indicate to respondents
that they should interpret some
categories as ethnicities and others as
races, or otherwise indicate conceptual
differences among the minimum
categories.
The mode of data collection may offer
additional options for collecting
detailed data. In electronic modes of
collection, for example, agencies may
use multiple screens to collect detailed
data. The minimum reporting categories
may be collected on an initial screen
and detailed data for each minimum
reporting category the respondent
selected may be collected on follow up
screens, whether through checkboxes,
drop down menus, write-in areas, or
another method.
If detailed race and ethnicity data are
collected in an intervieweradministered setting, the minimum
categories should be asked first, treating
each category as a yes/no question,
followed by the detailed categories
associated with the selected minimum
categories.
The method of data collection has
implications for the quality and fitness
for use of the resulting data. Wherever
possible, race and/or ethnicity data
should be collected through self-report,
where the respondents directly provide
their own race and/or ethnicity. In cases
where self-report is not possible, data
may be collected by proxy reporting,
where a person knowledgeable of
another’s race and/or ethnicity responds
on their behalf; by record matching,
where existing records on an individual
that contain their race and/or ethnicity
are used to supply the information; or
by observer identification, where an
observer uses their best judgement of
the most appropriate race and/or
ethnicity categories in which to report
an individual.
When data are collected through
visual observation, agencies are not
required to collect detailed categories
and are encouraged to instead use the
minimum categories. For statistical
survey reporting, agencies must
maintain records on the mode and
method of data collection, and how
nonresponse or other missing data were
assigned or allocated, and must make
that information available to data users
to allow them to evaluate the utility,
objectivity, and integrity of the data.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:49 Mar 28, 2024
Jkt 262001
Agencies should also maintain and
provide this information for
administrative, grant, and compliancerelated data collections whenever
feasible. Agencies should use the
terminology in this section when
describing the method of collection and
should make it a practice to describe the
method of data collection in any reports
on data collection design or methods.
When coding write-in data, imputing
missing data, or otherwise editing
responses, agencies must adopt
practices that maximize comparability
between data collected on forms and
surveys with and without write-in
fields. Doing so will improve the
comparability of race and ethnicity data
across Federal datasets. For statistical
survey reporting, agencies must
maintain records on data processing
procedures (such as coding, editing, and
imputation practices), and must make
that information available to data users
to allow them to evaluate the utility,
objectivity, and integrity of the data.
Agencies should also maintain and
provide this information for
administrative, grant, and compliance
related data collections whenever
feasible.
4. Presentation of Data on Race and
Ethnicity
The tabulation procedures used by
Federal agencies must result in the
production of as much information on
race and/or ethnicity as possible,
including data on people reporting
multiple categories. However, Federal
agencies must not release race and
ethnicity data if doing so would violate
agency or Federal policies designed to
ensure data quality or protect
respondent privacy or confidentiality.
When data are presented, Federal
agencies are encouraged to use one or
more of the three approaches below.
Approach 1. The alone or in
combination approach combines all
individuals belonging to a particular
racial or ethnic group (whether alone or
in combination with another racial or
ethnic group). For example, a
respondent who reported being both
White and Black or African American
would fall into both the ‘‘White alone or
in combination’’ category and the
‘‘Black or African American alone or in
combination’’ category. This practice
has been in place since the 1997
revision of SPD 15 and is useful if the
goal is capturing all people who might
face a given life experience (e.g.,
increased risk of a disease or
discrimination). Percentages across the
categories sum to greater than 100
percent because the response categories
are not mutually exclusive in this
PO 00000
Frm 00080
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
22195
approach. The following is an example
of the tabulation categories for this
approach:
• American Indian or Alaska Native
alone or in combination
• Asian alone or in combination
• Black or African American alone or in
combination
• Hispanic or Latino alone or in
combination
• Middle Eastern or North African alone
or in combination
• Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander
alone or in combination
• White alone or in combination
Approach 2. The most frequent
multiple responses approach reports as
many possible race and ethnicity
combinations as possible. For example,
an agency could report the seven
minimum race and ethnicity categories
alone, as well as race and ethnicity
combinations meeting a specific
population threshold or combinations of
particular interest, or all observed
combinations of multiple race and
ethnicity groups. The percentages will
sum to 100 percent because the
response categories are mutually
exclusive. The following is an example
of possible tabulation categories for this
approach:
• American Indian or Alaska Native
alone
• Asian alone
• Black or African American alone
• Hispanic or Latino alone
• Middle Eastern or North African alone
• Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander
alone
• White alone
• American Indian or Alaska Native
and Hispanic or Latino
• American Indian or Alaska Native
and White
• Asian and Native Hawaiian or Pacific
Islander
• Asian and White
• Black or African American and
Middle Eastern or North African
• Black or African American and White
• Hispanic or Latino and Black or
African American
• Hispanic or Latino and White
• Middle Eastern or North African and
Asian
• Middle Eastern or North African and
White
• Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander
and Black or African American
• Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander
and White
• All additional Multiracial and/or
Multiethnic groups
Approach 3. The combined
Multiracial and/or Multiethnic approach
presents data for those reporting one of
the seven race and/or ethnicity
E:\FR\FM\29MRN1.SGM
29MRN1
22196
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 62 / Friday, March 29, 2024 / Notices
categories alone, and then combines all
other respondents reporting multiple
race and/or ethnicity categories into an
aggregated Multiracial and/or
Multiethnic category. This approach
will often obscure the specific racial and
ethnic diversity of the population (e.g.,
over half of the population who identify
as American Indian or Alaska Native
and Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander
may be assigned to the Multiracial and/
or Multiethnic group). Therefore,
Federal agencies should use this
approach in conjunction with another
approach (like Approaches 1 or 2) to
comply with the requirement to report
as much information on race and
ethnicity as possible, including data for
respondents who reported more than
one race and/or ethnicity category. The
percentages in this approach will sum to
100 percent because the response
categories are mutually exclusive. The
following illustrates the tabulation
categories used for this approach:
• American Indian or Alaska Native
alone
• Asian alone
• Black or African American alone
• Hispanic or Latino alone
• Middle Eastern or North African alone
• Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander
alone
• White alone
• Multiracial and/or Multiethnic
With respect to tabulation and
presentation, regardless of approach, the
seven minimum race and ethnicity
categories shall be treated co-equally
except if a program or collection effort
focuses on a specific racial or ethnic
group, and as approved by OIRA. When
tabulating and presenting data, agencies
must use a consistent approach across
all categories within a single table. If
categories must be combined in order to
reach sample size thresholds for
reporting, those combinations should be
labeled with the list of combined
categories rather than with ‘‘other.’’
5. Use of the Standards for Record
Keeping and Reporting
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES
a. Statistical Reporting
These standards shall be used for all
Federally sponsored statistical data
collections that include data on race and
ethnicity. Any variation must be
specifically authorized by OIRA through
the PRA information collection approval
process. In those cases where the data
collection is not subject to the
information collection clearance
process, a direct request for a variance
must be made to OIRA.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:49 Mar 28, 2024
Jkt 262001
b. General Program Administrative and
Grant Reporting
public through their websites at the time
of submission to OMB.
These standards shall be used for all
Federal administrative reporting or
record keeping requirements that
include data on race and ethnicity.
Agencies that cannot follow these
standards must request a variance from
OIRA. Variances will be considered if
the agency can demonstrate that it is not
reasonable for the primary reporter to
determine race and ethnicity in terms of
the specified minimum categories, or
that the specific program is directed to
only one or a limited number of races
and ethnicities.
[FR Doc. 2024–06469 Filed 3–28–24; 8:45 am]
c. Civil Rights and Other Compliance
Reporting
These standards must be used by all
Federal agencies for civil rights and
other compliance reporting from the
public and private sectors and all levels
of government. Any variation requiring
less detailed data or data which cannot
be aggregated into the minimum
categories must be specifically approved
by OIRA.
6. Effective Date
The provisions of these standards are
effective March 28, 2024 for all new
record keeping or reporting
requirements that include race and
ethnicity data. All existing record
keeping or reporting requirements
should be made consistent with these
standards through a non-substantive
change request as soon as possible, or at
the time they are submitted for
extension or revision to OIRA under the
PRA, but not later than March 28, 2029.
Within 18 months of publication of
these standards, the Chief Financial
Officers Act Agencies and the U.S.
Equal Employment Opportunity
Commission 47 must submit to OMB,
through their agency Statistical Officials
and in coordination with their agency’s
Chief Data Officer, Evaluation Officer,48
Senior Agency Officials for Privacy, and
other agency officials as appropriate, an
Action Plan on Race and Ethnicity Data
describing how they intend to bring
their agency collections and
publications into compliance with these
standards by March 28, 2029. Agencies
must make these plans available to the
47 The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity
Commission does not currently have a Statistical
Official and should submit their Action Plan
through their Chief Data Officer.
48 These three agency officials make up the Data
Governance Bodies established under OMB M–19–
23, Phase 1 Implementation of the Foundations for
Evidence-Based Policymaking Act of 2018: Learning
Agendas, Personnel, and Planning Guidance (July
10, 2019), available at https://www.whitehouse.gov/
wp-content/uploads/2019/07/m-19-23.pdf.
PO 00000
Frm 00081
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
BILLING CODE 3110–01–P
OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND
BUDGET
Request for Information: Responsible
Procurement of Artificial Intelligence in
Government
Office of Management and
Budget.
ACTION: Request for information:
responsible procurement of artificial
intelligence in government.
AGENCY:
This request for information
on the responsible procurement of
artificial intelligence is being issued
concurrently with the release of the
OMB Memorandum titled Advancing
Governance, Innovation, and Risk
Management for Agency Use of
Artificial Intelligence (the ‘‘AI Mmemo’’). Executive Order 14110, Safe,
Secure, and Trustworthy Development
and Use of Artificial Intelligence,
directed OMB within 180 days of the
issuance of the AI M-memo to develop
an initial means to ensure that agency
contracts for the acquisition of AI
systems and services align with the
guidance provided in the AI M-memo
and advance the other aims identified in
the Advancing American AI Act (‘‘AI
Act’’).
DATES: Responses to this request for
information will be accepted for
consideration until April 29, 2024.
ADDRESSES: Responses must be
submitted electronically through
regulations.gov. Mailed paper
submissions will not be accepted, and
electronic submissions received after
the deadline may not be considered.
Instructions: Federal eRulemaking
Portal: Go to www.regulations.gov to
submit your comments electronically.
Information on how to use
Regulations.gov, including instructions
for accessing agency documents,
submitting comments, and viewing the
docket, is available on the site under
‘‘FAQ’’ (https://www.regulations.gov/
faq).
Privacy Act Statement: OMB is
issuing this request for information
(RFI) pursuant to Executive Order
14110.1 Submission of comments in
response to this RFI is voluntary.
Comments may be used to inform sound
decision-making on topics related to
SUMMARY:
1 E.O. 14110, Executive Order on Safe, Secure,
and Trustworthy Development and Use of Artificial
Intelligence.
E:\FR\FM\29MRN1.SGM
29MRN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 89, Number 62 (Friday, March 29, 2024)]
[Notices]
[Pages 22182-22196]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2024-06469]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND BUDGET
Revisions to OMB's Statistical Policy Directive No. 15: Standards
for Maintaining, Collecting, and Presenting Federal Data on Race and
Ethnicity
AGENCY: Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of
Management and Budget, Executive Office of the President.
ACTION: Notice of decision.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: By this Notice, the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) is
announcing revisions to Statistical Policy Directive No. 15: Standards
for Maintaining, Collecting, and Presenting Federal Data on Race and
Ethnicity (SPD 15). The revised SPD 15 is presented at the end of this
Notice; it replaces and supersedes OMB's 1997 Revisions to the
Standards for the Classification of Federal Data on Race and Ethnicity.
OMB is taking this action to meet its responsibilities to develop and
oversee the implementation of Government-wide principles, policies,
standards, and guidelines concerning the development, presentation, and
dissemination of statistical information. These revisions to SPD 15 are
intended to result in more accurate and useful race and ethnicity data
across the Federal government.
DATES: The provisions of these standards are effective March 28, 2024
for all new record keeping or reporting requirements that include
racial or ethnic information. All existing record keeping or reporting
requirements should be made consistent with these standards through a
non-substantive change request to the Office of Information and
Regulatory Affairs (OIRA), or at any time a collection of information
is submitted to OIRA for approval of either a revision or extension
under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA), as soon as possible,
but not later than March 28, 2029.
ADDRESSES: Please send correspondence about OMB's decisions to: Dr.
Karin Orvis, U.S. Chief Statistician, Office of Information and
Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget, 725 17th St. NW,
Washington, DC 20506, email address:
[email protected].
Electronic Availability: This Federal Register Notice can be found
along with supplemental materials, including the final report of the
Working Group and its six annexes, on the Federal Register: https://www.federalregister.gov/, by searching for ``OMB-2023-0001''.
Additional background materials, including previous OMB standards and
guidance related to the collection of race and ethnicity can be found
at https://www.statspolicy.gov under ``Policies'' and on the Working
Group's website: https://www.spd15revision.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Bob Sivinski, Statistical and Science
Policy, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of
Management and Budget, 725 17th St. NW, Washington, DC 20506; email
address: [email protected], phone number (202) 395-
1205.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
A. Background
Overview of this Notice. Based on the recommendations of the
Federal Interagency Technical Working Group on Race and Ethnicity
Standards (Working Group), SPD 15 is revised to: collect data using a
single combined race and ethnicity question, allowing multiple
responses; add Middle Eastern or North African (MENA) as a minimum
reporting category, separate and distinct from the White category;
require the collection of more detail beyond the minimum race and
ethnicity reporting categories, unless an agency requests and receives
an exemption from OMB's Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs
because the potential benefit of the detailed data would not justify
the additional burden to the agency and the public or the additional
risk to privacy or confidentiality; update terminology in SPD 15; and
require agency Action Plans on Race and Ethnicity Data and timely
compliance with this revision to SPD 15.
[[Page 22183]]
The Supplementary Information in this Notice provides background
information on SPD 15 (Section A); a summary of the review process that
began in the summer of 2022 (Section B); a synopsis of the major
revisions to SPD 15, including discussion of the initial proposals of
the Working Group, public input on the standards including responses to
a January 2023 Federal Register Notice (FRN) \1\ that presented the
initial proposals, the final recommendations from the Working Group to
OMB, and OMB's decisions on revisions to SPD 15 (Section C); and areas
for future research (Section D).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ 88 FR 5375 (Jan. 27, 2023), available at https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2023/01/27/2023-01635/initial-proposals-for-updating-ombs-race-and-ethnicity-statistical-standards.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
OMB's Statistical Policy Directives. To operate efficiently and
effectively, the Nation relies on the flow of objective, credible
statistics to support the decisions of individuals, households,
governments, businesses, and other organizations. As part of its role
as coordinator of the Federal statistical system under the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995, OMB, through the Chief Statistician of the
United States, must ensure the efficiency and effectiveness of the
system as well as the integrity, objectivity, impartiality, utility,
and confidentiality of information collected for statistical
purposes.\2\ This includes developing and overseeing the implementation
of Government-wide principles, policies, standards, and guidelines
concerning the development, presentation, and dissemination of
statistical information.\3\ OMB maintains a set of statistical policy
directives to implement these requirements, and periodically reviews
these directives to ensure they continue to meet their intended
purpose. These reviews are based on input from subject matter experts
and relevant program staff across government, evidence generated by
research and testing, and input from the public.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ 44 U.S.C. 3504(e)(1).
\3\ 44 U.S.C. 3504(e)(3).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
History of SPD 15. OMB initially developed SPD 15 in 1977 in
cooperation with other Federal agencies to provide consistent data on
race and ethnicity throughout the Federal Government, including the
decennial census, household surveys, and Federal administrative
forms.\4\ Initial development of these data standards stemmed in large
part from new Federal responsibilities to enforce civil rights laws.\5\
Since 1977, SPD 15 has been revised one time, resulting in an update in
1997.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ U.S. Dep't of Com., Statistical Policy Handbook 37-38 (May
1978), available at https://www2.census.gov/about/ombraceethnicityitwg/1978-statistical-policy-handbook.pdf.
\5\ 62 FR 58782 (Oct. 20, 1997), available at https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-1997-10-30/pdf/97-28653.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Goals of SPD 15. The goals of SPD 15 remain unchanged: to
ensure the comparability of race and ethnicity across Federal datasets
and to maximize the quality of these data by ensuring the format,
language, and procedures for collecting the data are consistent.\6\ To
achieve these goals, SPD 15 provides a minimum set of categories that
all Federal agencies must use when collecting information on race and
ethnicity, regardless of the collection mechanism, as well as
additional guidance on the collection, compilation, and dissemination
of these data.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ See, e.g., id.; U.S. Dep't of Com., Statistical Policy
Handbook 37-38 (May 1978), available at https://www2.census.gov/about/ombraceethnicityitwg/1978-statistical-policy-handbook.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Defining race and ethnicity. For purposes of SPD 15, the race and
ethnicity categories set forth are sociopolitical constructs and are
not an attempt to define race and ethnicity biologically or
genetically.
Rescissions. Finally, this Notice rescinds the following OMB
guidance: OMB Bulletin No. 00-02--Guidance on Aggregation and
Allocation of Data on Race for Use in Civil Rights Monitoring and
Enforcement (2000); \7\ Provisional Guidance on the Implementation of
the 1997 Standards for Federal Data on Race and Ethnicity (2000); \8\
and Flexibilities and Best Practices for Implementing the Office of
Managements and Budget's 1997 Standards for Maintaining, Collecting,
and Presenting Federal Data on Race and Ethnicity (2022).\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ OMB, Exec. Office of the President, OMB Bulletin No. 00-02--
Guidance on Aggregation and Allocation of Data on Race for Use in
Civil Rights Monitoring and Enforcement (Mar. 9, 2000), available at
https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2017/11/bulletins_b00-02.pdf.
\8\ OMB, Exec. Office of the President, Provisional Guidance on
the Implementation of the 1997 Standards for Data on Race and
Ethnicity (Dec. 15, 2000), available at https://www.esd.whs.mil/Portals/54/Documents/DD/info_collect/files_public/Race%20%20Ethnicity%20Guidance.pdf?ver=2018-11-01-094407-913.
\9\ Flexibilities and Best Practices for Implementing the Office
of Management and Budget's 1997 Standards for Maintaining,
Collecting, and Presenting Federal Data on Race and Ethnicity
(Statistical Policy Directive No. 15) (Jul. 2022), available at
https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2022/07/Flexibilities-and-Best-Practices-Under-SPD-15.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
B. Comprehensive Review Process for SPD 15
Since the 1997 revision to SPD 15, there have been large societal,
political, economic, and demographic shifts in the United States,
including increasing racial and ethnic diversity, a growing number of
people who identify as more than one race or ethnicity, and changing
immigration and migration patterns. Recognizing the critical need for
revisions to SPD 15, OMB announced a formal review in June 2022 with
the goal of updating SPD 15 to better reflect the diversity of the
Nation.\10\ The process to review and revise SPD 15 included four major
phases: (1) OMB established the Working Group; (2) the Working Group
developed initial proposals and sought public input; (3) the Working
Group developed final recommendations for revising SPD 15; and (4) OMB
deliberated and developed the revisions presented in this Notice.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ Karin Orvis, Reviewing and Revising Standards for
Maintaining, Collecting, and Presenting Federal Data on Race and
Ethnicity, The White House (June 15, 2022), available at https://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/briefing-room/2022/06/15/reviewing-and-revising-standards-for-maintaining-collecting-and-presenting-federal-data-on-race-and-ethnicity/.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Establishing the Federal Interagency Technical Working Group on
Race and Ethnicity Standards. Consistent with OMB's established
processes, the Working Group was composed of Federal staff with subject
matter expertise in the collection and use of Federal race and
ethnicity data. The 13 OMB-recognized principal statistical
agencies,\11\ the 24 agencies enumerated by the Chief Financial
Officers Act (CFO Act),\12\ and the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity
Commission (EEOC) were invited to nominate representatives to the
Working Group through their Federal Statistical Officials.\13\ Of the
invitees, 12 principal statistical agencies, 22 Chief Financial
Officers Act agencies, and the EEOC all provided staff to participate
in the Working Group. The Working Group was chaired and co-chaired by
career staff members from OMB and the U.S. Census Bureau, respectively.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\ A list of the 13 principal statistical agencies is
available at https://statspolicy.gov.
\12\ A list of the 24 Chief Financial Officers Act Agencies is
available at https://www.cfo.gov/about-the-council/.
\13\ 5 U.S.C. 314.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
OMB tasked the Working Group with developing a set of
recommendations for improving the quality and usefulness of Federal
race and ethnicity data with a focus on developing recommendations on
topics including, but not limited to:
whether the minimum reporting categories should be changed
and how to best address detailed race and ethnicity groups in SPD 15;
whether updates should be made to the question format,
terminology, and wording of the questions, as well as the
[[Page 22184]]
instructions for respondents and associated guidance; and
whether guidance for the collection and reporting of these
data can be improved, including in instances when self-identification
is not possible.
The Working Group adopted a set of principles to govern their work
(e.g., category changes should be based on sound research; all racial
and ethnic categories should adhere to public law; operational
feasibility should also be considered) consistent with processes used
by the working groups for the original 1977 SPD 15 and the 1997
revision.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\14\ Refer to the Working Group's final report on for additional
details, available on the Federal Register, https://www.federalregister.gov/, by searching for ``OMB-2023-0001''.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Developing Initial Proposals. The Working Group developed initial
proposals for revising SPD 15 by examining existing evidence and
building on the work of a previous interagency working group that
reviewed SPD 15 from 2014 to 2018. The existing evidence included
several large-scale, rigorous studies conducted by the Census Bureau.
The initial set of proposals developed by the Working Group
included collecting race and ethnicity together with a single question;
adding a MENA response category, separate from the White category;
requiring the collection of more detailed data beyond the minimum
categories as a default; and updating SPD 15's terminology,
definitions, and question wording. The Working Group also developed a
set of questions regarding various aspects of the proposals,
implementation issues, and additional topics for public feedback. OMB
published these preliminary proposals and questions in a January 2023
FRN \15\ that provided the public an opportunity to submit comments
from January 27 to April 27, 2023.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\15\ 88 FR 5375.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Developing Final Recommendations. To meet the goal of producing
accurate and useful race and ethnicity data across the Federal
Government, it is important to base SPD 15 on a solid portfolio of
evidence that includes rigorous testing, input from the public on how
individuals prefer to identify, and input from data providers and
users.
In developing their initial and final recommendations, the Working
Group relied heavily on research conducted by Federal agencies over the
last decade, especially the U.S. Census Bureau's 2015 National Content
Test (NCT).\16\ The NCT specifically tested the impact and
effectiveness of using a combined question, adding a MENA category, and
making various revisions to question wording and terminology. The NCT
included a nationally representative sample of 1.2 million housing
units across the United States, including Puerto Rico. Importantly, it
also included a re-interview of approximately 75,000 cases, designed to
generate better understanding of how respondents interpret the
questions and prefer to identify. In addition to pre-existing research
conducted over the last decade, several agencies represented on the
Working Group collaborated to conduct supplementary qualitative and
quantitative research. This additional research helped inform and
improve the Working Group's final recommendations to OMB.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\16\ Kelly Mathews et al., U.S. Census Bureau, 2015 National
Content Test Race and Ethnicity Analysis Report: A New Design for
the 21st Century (Feb. 28, 2017), available at https://www.census.gov/programs-surveys/decennial-census/decade/2020/planning-management/plan/final-analysis/2015nct-race-ethnicity-analysis.html.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In recognition of the importance of public participation in the
revision of SPD 15, obtaining input and feedback from the public played
a key role in the development of the final recommendations. The Working
Group and OMB used a variety of approaches to raise awareness and
encourage input. Outreach efforts included White House blog posts and
social media posts, the creation of a dedicated website for the review
process (https://www.spd15revision.gov), interviews with news outlets,
participation in professional conferences and workshops, and direct
outreach to stakeholders using contact lists maintained by the agencies
participating on the Working Group. In September 2022, the Working
Group began conducting bi-monthly listening sessions with members of
the public, which allowed organizations, advocacy groups, academics,
and the general public to share their perspectives and recommendations
regarding SPD 15.\17\ In March 2023, the Chief Statistician of the
United States, joined by the chair and co-chair of the Working Group,
hosted a series of three virtual public town hall meetings. OMB also
held a Tribal consultation with Tribal leaders and members to discuss
the proposed revisions. As a result of these efforts, members of the
public submitted over 20,000 comments to the FRN,\18\ the Working Group
scheduled 94 separate 30-minute listening sessions, and about 3,350
people joined the virtual town halls where over 200 people spoke to
share their perspectives on SPD 15.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\17\ Karin Orvis, OMB Launches New Public Listening Sessions on
Federal Race and Ethnicity Standards Revision, The White House (Aug.
30, 2022), available at https://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/briefing-room/2022/08/30/omb-launches-new-public-listening-sessions-on-federal-race-and-ethnicity-standards-revision/.
\18\ Initial Proposals for Updating OMB's Race and Ethnicity
Data Standards Docket, Regulations.gov, available at https://www.regulations.gov/docket/OMB-2023-0001/comments (last visited Feb.
15, 2024).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The input from the experts on the Working Group, the strong
existing research base, and the robust participation of the public, all
helped shape the activities of the Working Group, their final
recommendations to OMB, and OMB's final decisions.
C. Revisions to SPD 15
The revised standards presented in the Notice adopt several
revisions intended to improve the quality and usefulness of Federal
race and ethnicity data. This section explains the revisions by:
describing the initial proposals of the Working Group, summarizing
public input, describing the final recommendations of the Working Group
(and how they differed, if at all, from the initial proposals), and
presenting and explaining OMB's decisions.
1. Collect Race and Ethnicity Information Using One Combined Question
Working Group's Initial Proposals. The Working Group initially
proposed that SPD 15 move from two separate questions to a single
combined race and ethnicity question as the required design for self-
reported race and ethnicity information collections. Refer to Section
C, Part 1 of the January 2023 FRN \19\ for additional information about
this initial proposal from the Working Group.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\19\ 88 FR 5379.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Summary of Public Input. Many comments stated the current two
questions structure is confusing to respondents, especially respondents
who identify as Hispanic or Latino and do not identify with the 1997
SPD 15 race categories. Some commenters expressed that the current
format with two separate questions creates an impediment to the
collection of accurate race data on the Hispanic or Latino population.
A common theme was the proposed change would improve the collection of
race data for the Hispanic or Latino population by reducing the number
of responses that leave the race question blank or are classified as
``Some Other Race'' when that option is available.\20\ Some commenters,
while
[[Page 22185]]
generally in support of a combined question, suggested removing the
words ``race'' and ``ethnicity'' from the question stem and emphasizing
that respondents should select all categories that apply to them.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\20\ Under the 1997 standards, data collections by Federal
agencies may not include a Some Other Race (SOR) response category
unless required by statute. Since 2005, the decennial census and
American Community Survey (ACS) are required by law to include a SOR
category, thereby adding a sixth minimum race category for these
collections. The decennial census and ACS are the only information
collections with a statutory requirement for the use of a SOR
category. See Science, State, Justice, Commerce, and Related
Agencies Appropriations Act, 2006, Public Law 109-108, tit. II, 119
Stat. 2290, 2308-09 (2005).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Some comments were opposed to, and expressed concerns about, this
initial proposal. A notable concern was that the new format would lead
to the potential loss of data about Afro-Latino respondents. Some
commenters viewed a combined race and ethnicity question as conflating
two distinct concepts and implying that Hispanic or Latino is a
``race.'' Commenters viewed that a combined question would result in a
large percentage of Afro-Latinos only identifying as Hispanic or
Latino, thereby contributing to an undercount of the Afro-Latino
population. Overall, the majority of comments on the subject expressed
support for using a single combined question and allowing multiple
responses.\21\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\21\ A comprehensive review of public input on this initial
proposal can be found in the Working Group's Annex 4, available on
the Federal Register, https://www.federalregister.gov/, by searching
for ``OMB-2023-0001''.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Working Group's Final Recommendations. The final recommendation to
OMB, consistent with the initial proposal, was to combine the current
separate questions on Hispanic or Latino ethnicity and race into a
single combined race and ethnicity question that allows respondents to
select one or multiple categories, and require the use of this single-
question format for both self-response and proxy response (for example,
when one member of a household responds on behalf of other members).
The final recommendation further specifies that a single selection
would be considered a complete response (e.g., Hispanic or Latino
respondents are not required to select an additional category),
although respondents will be encouraged to provide multiple responses
when appropriate.
The Working Group's final report states that ``[s]ince 1980,
responses to the decennial census in each subsequent decade have shown
increasing non-response to the race question, confusion, and concern
from the public about separate questions on ethnicity and race. . . .
Results from the 2020 Census showed that 43.5 percent of those who
self-identified as Hispanic or Latino either did not report a race or
were classified as `Some Other Race' (SOR) alone (over 23 million
people).'' This increasing non-response and reporting of SOR was one of
the primary indicators to OMB that SPD 15 was no longer providing
options that align with how respondents prefer to identify. The NCT
described in Section B, along with other Census Bureau research
conducted in preparation for the 2020 Census,\22\ found that a combined
question reduced confusion and improved data quality, including
drastically reducing the selection of SOR by Hispanic or Latino
respondents.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\22\ Elizabeth Compton et al., U.S. Census Bureau, 2010 Census
Race and Hispanic Origin Alternative Questionnaire Experiment (Feb.
28, 2013), available at https://www.census.gov/programs-surveys/decennial-census/decade/2010/program-management/cpex/2010-cpex-211.html; Jacquelyn Harth, U.S. Census Bureau, 2016 American
Community Survey Content Test: Race and Hispanic Origin (Sept. 19,
2017), available at https://www.census.gov/library/working-papers/2017/acs/2017_Harth_01.html.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In response to concerns from the Afro-Latino community about the
potential impact of a combined question on population estimates, the
Working Group evaluated several sources of evidence to inform their
recommendations. The NCT compared Afro-Latino population estimates when
using a combined question versus a separate questions format and did
not find a significant difference between the approaches. In fact,
Afro-Latino population estimates were slightly higher when using a
combined question with detailed checkboxes and write-in fields.
Additionally, the Working Group conducted cognitive interviews with
Afro-Latino participants to explore how they identify and how they
interpret questions about race and ethnicity. About half of interview
participants selected only the Hispanic or Latino response category
when shown a combined question, despite selecting both Hispanic or
Latino and Black or African American response categories during
recruitment. These cognitive interviews contributed to the Working
Group's recommendation for future research on collecting data for Afro-
descendent populations.\23\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\23\ Refer to the Working Group's final report and its Annexes 1
and 2 to learn more about the Working Group's research and analysis
that ultimately led to this recommendation, available on the Federal
Register, https://www.federalregister.gov/, by searching for ``OMB-
2023-0001''.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
OMB Decisions. OMB accepts the recommendation to combine the
separate questions on race and ethnicity into a single combined race
and ethnicity question. Because respondents may perceive categories
like Hispanic or Latino or MENA as either a race or ethnicity, the
revised SPD 15 requires agencies to treat the categories equally and
report them as ``race and/or ethnicity'' categories.
OMB's decision on this recommendation reflects the strong evidence
that a combined question format results in higher quality and more
useful data, and provides a format that is clearer and more concise for
respondents while still allowing them to select as many race and/or
ethnicity options that correspond to how they identify. OMB recognizes
that additional research, testing, and stakeholder engagement is needed
to understand how to best encourage the selection of multiple race and/
or ethnicity categories for people who identify as Afro-Latino, and is
prioritizing that research as discussed further in Section D. Finally,
we note here that the revised SPD 15 adopts the Working Group's
recommendation to modify the question instructions to better signal to
respondents that they should select all of the categories that reflect
their identity.
2. Add Middle Eastern or North African as a New Minimum Category
Working Group's Initial Proposals. The Working Group initially
proposed that Middle Eastern or North African be added to SPD 15 as a
new minimum reporting category distinct from all other reporting
categories, and that the definition of the current White reporting
category be edited to remove MENA from its definition. Refer to Section
C, Part 2 of the January 2023 FRN \24\ for additional information about
this initial proposal from the Working Group.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\24\ 88 FR 5379.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Summary of Public Input. Nearly all comments addressing the MENA
category supported the proposal. Commenters expressed that the current
classification of MENA respondents as White does not reflect the
reality of many who are MENA. A few commenters were opposed, either
stating some individuals from the MENA region of the world do consider
themselves to be White or that race and ethnicity data should not be
collected by the Federal Government.
Many commenters also provided feedback about which groups should be
considered MENA or have a checkbox under the MENA category, commenting
that it was important for groups such as Armenians, Somalis, and
Sudanese to be part of any MENA category. Overall, the vast majority of
comments expressed
[[Page 22186]]
support for adding a MENA minimum category, separate and distinct from
White.\25\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\25\ A comprehensive review of public input on this initial
proposal can be found in the Working Group's Annex 4, available on
the Federal Register, https://www.federalregister.gov/, by searching
for ``OMB-2023-0001''.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Working Group's Final Recommendations. The Working Group's final
recommendation was not changed from the initial proposal: ``Add MENA as
a new minimum reporting category distinct from all other reporting
categories. Revise the definition for the White category to remove
references to MENA, and classify and tabulate MENA responses under the
new MENA category.'' \26\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\26\ Refer to the Working Group's final report and its Annex 1
to learn more about the Working Group's research and analysis that
ultimately led to this recommendation, available on the Federal
Register, https://www.federalregister.gov/, by searching for ``OMB-
2023-0001''.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
OMB Decisions. OMB accepts the recommendation to create a new
minimum reporting category for MENA separate and distinct from the
White category, and to revise the White category definition
accordingly.
MENA groups and members of the public generally have long voiced
the need for a separate MENA minimum category. The 1997 revision to SPD
15 also identified MENA as a topic for further research because there
was a lack of public consensus on how to define the category (e.g.,
shared language, geography) at the time.\27\ Since then, Federal
agencies have conducted research and stakeholder outreach showing broad
public support for the use of the term ``Middle Eastern or North
African,'' and that MENA respondents understand the use of the category
and select it when available.\28\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\27\ 62 FR 58787.
\28\ Stephanie Wilson & Sheba K. Dunston, Nat'l Ctr. for Health
Stat., Ctrs. for Disease Control & Prevention, Cognitive Interview
Evaluation of the Revised Race Question, with Special Emphasis on
the Newly Proposed Middle Eastern/North African Response Option
(2017), available at https://wwwn.cdc.gov/qbank/report/Willson_2017_NCHS_MENA.pdf; Kelly Mathews, supra note 16.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Described further in Part 3 below and consistent with the existing
minimum categories, the detailed checkboxes and definition examples for
the MENA category were selected to represent the largest population
groups in the United States as reported by the 2020 Census. Although
several commenters expressed interest in explicitly including Armenian,
Somali, or Sudanese, the 2015 NCT found that most respondents who
identify as Armenian, Somali, and Sudanese did not select MENA when it
was offered.\29\ Additional research is needed on these groups to
monitor their preferred identification.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\29\ In NCT test panels that did not include a MENA category,
Armenian respondents chose the White category 90.8% of the time and
Some Other Race 9.6% of the time, Somali respondents chose the Black
or African American category 96.2% of the time, and Sudanese
respondents chose the Black or African American category 98.4% of
the time.
In NCT test panels that did include a MENA category, Armenian
respondents chose the White category 79.0% of the time, the MENA
category 12.6% of the time, and Some Other Race 9.3% of the time;
Somali respondents chose the Black or African American category
94.2% of the time, Some Other Race 4.8% of the time, and the MENA
category 0.0% of the time; Sudanese respondents chose the Black or
African American category 87.2% of the time and MENA 8.0% of the
time.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
3. Require the Collection of Detailed Race and Ethnicity Categories as
a Default
Working Group's Initial Proposals. The Working Group initially
proposed requiring data collection of specific detailed data beyond the
minimum categories, unless an agency determines the potential benefit
of the detailed data would not justify the additional burden to the
agency and the public or the additional risk to privacy or
confidentiality and the agency requests and receives an exemption from
OIRA. In those cases, agencies must at least use SPD 15's minimum
categories. In any circumstance, agencies are encouraged to collect and
provide more granular data than the minimum categories.
The specific detailed checkboxes shown in the January 2023 FRN
represent the six largest population groups in the United States within
each minimum category, based on responses to the 2010 Census. The
exception to this rule is the six checkboxes shown for the MENA
category, which represent the two largest Arab nationalities in the
United States from the Middle East (Lebanese and Syrian), the two
largest Arab nationalities in the United States from North Africa
(Egyptian and Moroccan), and the two largest non-Arab nationalities in
the United States from the MENA region (Iranian and Israeli). Refer to
Section C, Part 3 of the January 2023 FRN \30\ for additional
information about this initial proposal from the Working Group.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\30\ 88 FR 5380.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Summary of Public Input. Comments supporting this proposal cited
the diverse experiences of groups within each minimum reporting
category. In particular, a number of health organizations expressed the
importance of having data available for detailed groups to measure
differences in healthcare outcomes. There were also comments advocating
for flexibility in SPD 15 to allow for changes in the specific detailed
categories used as new demographic data of the United States become
available. Some urged that Federal agencies should be allowed to adapt
the detailed categories based on their data collection needs and
contexts, while others urged strict requirements for all agencies out
of concern that any flexibility could be misused.
A few commenters were opposed, expressing concerns with the burden
on Federal agencies, the risks to data privacy and disclosure for small
population groups, and burden on respondents. Overall, the majority of
comments expressed support for requiring the collection of more detail
beyond the minimum categories as a default, but allowing agencies to
determine what additional data to collect in order to best meet program
and stakeholder needs.\31\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\31\ A comprehensive review of public input on this initial
proposal can be found in the Working Group's Annex 4, available on
the Federal Register, https://www.federalregister.gov/, by searching
for ``OMB-2023-0001''.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Working Group's Final Recommendations. The final recommendation of
the Working Group differed from the initial proposal in the January
2023 FRN, reflecting input from Federal agencies concerned about the
lack of flexibility. The Working Group's final recommendation was to
require the collection of data on race and ethnicity with greater
detail beyond the minimum reporting categories as a default, but to
allow agencies flexibility to determine what additional data to collect
to best meet program and stakeholder needs, provided the detailed data
aggregate into the minimum reporting categories, and subject to OIRA
approval. In cases where agencies determine the additional burden would
outweigh the potential benefits of collecting detailed data, Federal
agencies may seek approval from OIRA to use the minimum reporting
categories. In any circumstance, SPD 15 should encourage to collect and
provide more granular data than the minimum reporting categories.\32\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\32\ Refer to the Working Group's final report and its Annex 1
to learn more about the Working Group's research and analysis that
ultimately led to this recommendation, available on the Federal
Register, https://www.federalregister.gov/, by searching for``OMB-
2023-0001''.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
OMB Decisions. OMB accepts the recommendation to require the
collection of more detailed data as a default. However, the intent of
SPD 15 to produce consistent and comparable data is best served by
providing a common framework for the collection of detailed data,
rather than allowing each agency to determine what additional detail to
collect. Therefore, agencies are required to collect the detailed
[[Page 22187]]
categories described in this Notice as a default. These detailed
categories were selected to represent the largest population groups
within the minimum categories, according to the results of the 2020
Census. Selecting the largest groups by United States population
prioritizes the utility of the data by maximizing the sample sizes.
Small sample sizes are often the primary barrier to publication of data
for specific groups; small samples decrease precision, make it harder
to identify differences between groups, and increase privacy risk.
OMB recognizes racial and ethnic identities and terminology are
continuously changing and SPD 15 needs to balance the need for
consistency with the ability to adapt to change and meet specific
program needs. An agency may submit a request to OIRA for an exemption
to the requirement to collect more detailed data beyond the minimum
categories if the agency determines that the potential benefit of the
detailed data would not justify the additional burden to the agency and
the public or the additional risk to privacy or confidentiality.
Agencies may also submit a request to OIRA for a variance to the
detailed categories if they determine that collecting different
detailed data categories than the ones listed in SPD 15 provides more
useful or accurate data for the collection's specific context and
intended uses. Any variances in detailed data collection must be able
to be aggregated up to the required minimum categories. OIRA will
review agency requests for exceptions and variances, and they will only
be approved if they contain sufficient justification. Finally, due to
the extensive testing done in the context of the American Community
Survey, agencies may collect the detailed categories used on the most
recent version of that survey, should they differ from the detailed
categories listed in SPD 15, without further justification.
4. Updates to Terminology in SPD 15
Working Group's Initial Proposals. The Working Group initially
proposed SPD 15 remove certain terms or phrases in the minimum category
definitions: ``Negro'' from the Black or African American definition;
``Far East'' from the Asian definition, replacing with ``East Asian;''
``Other'' from Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander; and ``who
maintain tribal affiliation or community attachment'' from the American
Indian or Alaska Native (AIAN) definition.
The FRN also proposed: (1) correcting ``Cuban'' from being listed
twice in the minimum category definition for Hispanic or Latino; (2)
changing the AIAN minimum category description to: ``The category
`American Indian or Alaska Native' includes all individuals who
identify with any of the original peoples of North, Central, and South
America;'' (3) discontinuing the use of the terms ``majority'' and
``minority;'' (4) using ``race'' and ``ethnicity'' as part of the
question stem, e.g., ``What is < your/name's > race or ethnicity?;''
and (5) updating the current instructions of ``Mark one or more'' and
``Select one or more'' to ``Mark all that apply'' and ``Select all that
apply.'' Refer to Section C, Part 4 of the January 2023 FRN \33\ for
additional information about this initial proposal from the Working
Group.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\33\ 88 FR 5382.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Summary of Public Input. Comments generally demonstrated support
for these proposals. The removal of the phrase ``who maintain tribal
affiliation or community attachment'' was supported by several key
organizations including the National Congress of American Indians. Some
commenters called for greater clarity in which geographic areas would
be referenced in the Asian definition. Comments from organizations that
work with Central Asian populations in the United States explicitly
requested ``Central Asia'' be included in the Asian definition. A
number of public comments supported the replacement of the term ``Far
East'' in the Asian definition and the removal of the term ``Other''
from the Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander definition. Among
those who submitted comments about SPD 15 terminology, the majority
agreed with the proposal to remove ``Negro'' from the Black or African
American definition; however, some comments asked to retain the term,
citing its long history on government records such as birth
certificates and prior decennial census records.\34\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\34\ A comprehensive review of public input on this initial
proposal can be found in the Working Group's Annex 4, available on
the Federal Register, https://www.federalregister.gov/, by searching
for ``OMB-2023-0001''.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Working Group's Final Recommendations. The Working Group refined
their initial proposals based on public comment and delivered the
following recommendations to OMB to update terminology in SPD 15.\35\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\35\ Refer also to the Working Group's final report and its
Annex 1 to learn more about the Working Group's research and
analysis that ultimately led to these recommendations, available on
the Federal Register, https://www.federalregister.gov/, by searching
for ``OMB-2023-0001''.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
(a) Remove ``majority'' and ``minority'' terminology, except when
statistically accurate and used for statistical descriptions or when
legal requirements call for use of the terms.
(b) Use ``race and/or ethnicity'' in the question stem.
(c) Use instructions that emphasize reporting multiple categories
is allowed (and encouraged), regardless of whether minimum or detailed
reporting categories are collected. Explicit instructions that the
respondent can select all that apply AND provide detailed reporting is
helpful. For example:
i. In a self-administered instrument collecting the minimum
reporting categories: ``Select all that apply. Note, you may report
more than one group.''
ii. In a self-administered instrument collecting detailed
categories: ``Select all that apply and enter additional details in the
spaces below. Note, you may report more than one group.''
(d) Use ``Multiracial and/or Multiethnic'' in tabulations to
represent people who identify with multiple minimum reporting
categories.
(e) Provide balance for definitions and use six example groups to
illustrate the breadth and diversity of the category. In addition, make
the following updates to the race and ethnicity definitions:
i. Remove the phrase ``who maintains tribal affiliation or
community attachment'' in the AIAN definition.
ii. Change ``(including Central America)'' to having ``Central
America'' listed co-equally with North and South America in the AIAN
definition.
iii. Replace ``Far East'' with ``Central or East Asia'' and
``Indian Subcontinent'' with ``South Asia'' in the Asian definition.
iv. Remove ``Negro'' from the Black or African American definition.
v. Correct ``Cuban'' being listed twice in the Hispanic or Latino
definition.
vi. Remove ``. . . regardless of race. The term `Spanish origin'
can be used in addition to `Hispanic or Latino' '' from the Hispanic or
Latino definition.
vii. Remove ``Other'' from the ``Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific
Islander'' category title.
OMB Decisions. OMB accepts the Working Group's final
recommendations for revising the terminology in SPD 15, including the
recommendations for revisions to the question stem and minimum category
definitions, with the following two exceptions. First, in regards to
recommendation (c) above, OMB does not include the phrase ``Note, you
may report more than one group'' in the required question instructions.
Additional testing conducted after the Working Group delivered their
final recommendations found that including this phrase had the opposite
of the
[[Page 22188]]
intended effect and resulted in a sizeable decrease in the number of
respondents selecting multiple responses. Encouraging multiple
responses whenever appropriate is critical to measuring the
completeness and complexity of racial and ethnic identity. The revised
standards require the use of the following question instructions:
``What is your race and/or ethnicity? Select all that apply and enter
additional details in the spaces below.'' Section D of this notice,
which identifies OMB's priority areas for future research, includes the
following research topic: how to encourage respondents to select
multiple race and/or ethnicity categories when appropriate by enhancing
question design and inclusive language.
Second, in regards to recommendation (e) above, to align better
with the other category definitions, as well as the previous
definition, the revised SPD 15 adopts the following definition for the
Hispanic or Latino category: ``Hispanic or Latino. Includes individuals
of Mexican, Puerto Rican, Salvadoran, Cuban, Dominican, Guatemalan, and
other Central or South American or Spanish culture or origin.''
Consistent with the Working Group's recommendations, the revised
category definitions list six example groups reflecting the largest
population groups in the United States according to the 2020 Census.
These revisions will bring the terminology in SPD 15 more up to
date, will more clearly explain that respondents should select more
than one category when appropriate, and greatly increase the
consistency and clarity of the minimum category definitions.
5. Implementation Guidance
Working Group's Initial Proposals. The Working Group requested
public input on how to best implement revisions to SPD 15. It listed
several related issues including dates agencies must meet as they
incorporate revisions; statistical methods to connect data produced
from previous and revised collection formats; approaches for collecting
race and ethnicity information by proxy when self-identification is not
possible; approaches for reporting data for respondents who select more
than one race or ethnicity; obtaining OIRA approval under the PRA to
revise existing collections; and best practices for communicating SPD
15 revisions to stakeholders. Refer to Section C, Part 5 of the January
2023 FRN \36\ for additional information about the Working Group's
request for public input.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\36\ 88 FR 5383.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Summary of Public Input. OMB received fewer public comments on the
implementation issues than on the previous initial proposals. Public
input on these issues included statements on the following topics: \37\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\37\ A comprehensive review of public input on this initial
proposal can be found in the Working Group's Annex 4, available on
the Federal Register, https://www.federalregister.gov/, by searching
for ``OMB-2023-0001''.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The importance of establishing a specific time Federal
agencies would need to come into compliance with the revised SPD 15,
and generally supporting the inclusion of an implementation timeline in
the revised SPD 15;
Concerns about data consistency when data are collected
using the 1997 revision versus the current revision, whether across
different data sets or within the same data set when data are collected
over time;
The need for tools to support bridging, or combining data
collected under different versions of SPD 15;
Support for requiring agencies to transparently describe
how data were collected or generated and how nonresponse or other
missing data were assigned or allocated when data were not collected
via self-report;
Questions about tabulation under a revised SPD 15,
including:
[cir] Will those of Hispanic or Latino origin continue to be
treated differently in civil rights reporting? \38\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\38\ Currently most civil rights reporting in practice (not by
SPD 15 guidance) is tabulated such that Hispanic or Latino responses
supersede any race response. Hispanic or Latino responses are
tabulated separately and race is only tabulated and reported for
non-Hispanic or Latino respondents. Office of Management and Budget,
supra note 8.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
[cir] How will multiple race and ethnicity responses be tabulated?
[cir] What will be the best practices and flexibilities for
tabulating detailed data?
Concern about individuals that select multiple response
categories being grouped into one ``multiple race or ethnicity''
category, resulting in respondents with very different racial and
ethnic identities being placed into the same category and in less
information being released about the population's diversity;
The importance of guidance on flexibility and best
practices on how to tabulate detailed categories based on the
population or sample size; and
The limitations of proxy or observational data and the
importance of clearly acknowledging those limitations. Several
expressed how these forms of data collection are inherently biased.
Some comments requested training, guidance, or technical assistance for
how and when to use these methods and how to analyze resulting data.
Some noted observational data collection is not necessarily of lesser
value in some circumstances than self-identification, but instead
measures a different concept and provides answers to a different set of
questions that may be of interest (e.g., discrimination resulting from
perceived race). Overall, the majority of public comments on the
subject leaned toward prohibiting the collection of race and ethnicity
by proxy.
Working Group's Final Recommendations. Based on public input and
further discussions with Federal agencies, the Working Group developed
five final recommendations related to implementation.\39\ The first set
includes two recommendations on planning and timing, and the second set
includes three recommendations on how to improve collection and
reporting practices for race and ethnicity data.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\39\ Refer to the Working Group's final report and its Annex 3
to learn more about the Working Group's research and analysis that
ultimately led to these recommendations, available on the Federal
Register, https://www.federalregister.gov/, by searching for ``OMB-
2023-0001''.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Recommendations on implementation and timing.
(a) Require an Action Plan on Race and Ethnicity Data within 12
months of the publication of a revised SPD 15. Encourage Federal
agencies to use these action plans to make a unified plan to comply
with SPD 15, identify potential risks, and inform stakeholders of these
plans. OMB should encourage agencies to share this information
publicly. Statistical agencies may still create their own action plan
alongside the unified department plan to provide more detail on various
data collection efforts and dissemination plans.
(b) Existing Federal agency-conducted or -sponsored data collection
efforts that include data on race and ethnicity shall be made
consistent with the revised SPD 15 within four years of its
publication. New Federal data collections that include data on race and
ethnicity will adhere to the revised SPD 15 immediately.
Recommendations for improving the collection and reporting
practices for race and ethnicity data.
(c) When the collection of race and ethnicity is done through
visual observation, require the use of the minimum reporting categories
but do not require the collection of detailed race and ethnicity.
Respondent self-identification should be facilitated to the greatest
extent possible.
[[Page 22189]]
(d) When data are not self-reported, encourage agencies to
transparently describe how the data were collected or generated, and
how nonresponse or other missing data were assigned or allocated.
Federal agencies and researchers should make it a practice to identify
when data collections of race and ethnicity are intentionally designed
to collect proxy responses, observational data, or employ a combination
of self-identification, visual observation, and other collection
methods.
(e) With respect to tabulation, require that the seven minimum race
and ethnicity reporting categories be treated co-equally, by not using
different tabulation approaches or rules for different categories in
the same table. Additionally, require that tabulation procedures used
by Federal agencies result in the production of as much information on
race and ethnicity as possible, including data on people reporting more
than one race and/or ethnicity. However, Federal agencies shall not
present data on detailed categories and specific Multiracial and/or
Multiethnic populations if doing so would compromise data quality or
respondent privacy.
OMB Decisions.
(a) OMB accepts this recommendation to require an Action Plan on
Race and Ethnicity Data with the following modifications: Based on
input from Federal agencies, each agency's Action Plan on Race and
Ethnicity Data is required within 18 months of publication of this
Notice, rather than the recommended 12 months. This will provide more
time for agencies to coordinate across programs and engage stakeholders
and data providers to submit a more specific Action Plan to OMB.
Agencies do not need to wait for their Action Plans to be complete to
start implementing the revisions wherever possible. To improve
transparency, agencies must make their Action Plans publicly available
upon submission to OMB.
(b) OMB accepts this recommendation to create a deadline for
implementation with the following modification: Based on input from
Federal agencies, the deadline for compliance with this revised SPD 15
is five years after the publication of this Notice, rather than the
recommended four years. Most programs will be able to, and should,
implement revisions sooner than the five-year deadline for compliance.
Certain programs that involve interconnected data across multiple
agencies or offices, or that rely on data collected and provided by
non-Federal entities, may take longer to implement than programs like
statistical surveys, but all programs are required to bring their
collections into compliance within the five-year implementation period.
OIRA will use the PRA review process to ensure that agencies adopt
these revisions in a timely manner.
(c) OMB accepts without modification this recommendation to exempt
data collected through visual observation from requirements to collect
detailed data. The revised SPD 15 further specifies that wherever
possible, race and ethnicity data should be collected through self-
report.
(d) OMB accepts this recommendation to encourage agencies to
transparently describe race and ethnicity data with the following
modifications: For statistical survey reporting, agencies are required,
rather than encouraged, to transparently describe whether race and
ethnicity data are self-reported or collected by proxy, along with any
imputation or coding procedures. With respect to other agency products,
agencies are strongly encouraged to provide this information whenever
possible. OIRA will continue to review agency PRA requests to ensure
that race and ethnicity data are collected by self-report whenever
possible.
(e) OMB accepts this recommendation to require agencies to treat
the race and ethnicity categories co-equally with the following
clarifications: With respect to collection, the seven minimum race and
ethnicity categories shall be treated co-equally, except if a program
or collection effort focuses on a specific racial or ethnic group, as
approved by OIRA. Collection forms may not indicate to respondents that
they should interpret some categories as ethnicities and others as
races, or otherwise indicate conceptual differences among the minimum
categories. Similarly, with respect to tabulation and presentation, the
seven minimum race and ethnicity categories shall also be treated co-
equally, which means that when tabulating and presenting data, agencies
may not use different tabulation approaches or rules for different
categories within the same table. Again, an exception may be granted,
if a program or collection effort focuses on a specific racial or
ethnic group, as approved by OIRA.
6. Additional Topics
Section C, Part 5 of the January 2023 FRN \40\ posed several
additional questions for the public. This section presents public input
on these topics, as well as any associated recommendations from the
Working Group and OMB's decisions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\40\ 88 FR 5383.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Order of Minimum Categories
Summary of Public Input. The 1997 revision of SPD 15 does not
dictate the order in which the minimum categories are displayed.
Agencies generally order alphabetically or by population size; however,
both approaches have received criticism. The Working Group asked what
order, alphabetical or by population size, is preferred and why; or
what alternative approach would be recommended. The comments addressing
this subject agreed on ordering alphabetically, as this seemed the
easiest way to order the categories and would be the least likely to be
perceived as motivated by non-statistical preferences.\41\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\41\ A comprehensive review of public input on this question can
be found in the Working Group's Annex 4, available on the Federal
Register, https://www.federalregister.gov/, by searching for ``OMB-
2023-0001''.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Working Group's Final Recommendation. The Working Group did not
make a recommendation on this topic, citing insufficient research.
Members of the Working Group raised concerns that alphabetical ordering
could lead to measurement error if respondents scanning the question
quickly see the term ``American'' in the AIAN category and mistakenly
select that category to indicate American identity, even if they do not
identify as American Indian or Alaska Native.
OMB Decision. OMB concurs with the Working Group's determination
that there is not sufficient evidence at this time to justify requiring
a specific ordering for presentation, and SPD 15 will continue to
provide agencies flexibility on how to order the response categories on
information collections so that future research can inform the optimal
approach to ordering response options. Note that all examples in this
revision to SPD 15 will be shown with alphabetically-ordered minimum
response categories.
Terms for Minimum Categories
Summary of Public Input. The FRN asked for suggestions for
different terms for any of the current minimum race and ethnicity
categories. There were no prominent themes for such specific changes.
Input from the public included requests to add Caribbean and Sub-
Saharan African minimum response categories, separate from African
American; retire the use of the term ``African American;'' broaden the
AIAN category title to signal inclusion of all indigenous people of the
Americas; remove ``color'' words in category titles
[[Page 22190]]
(i.e., Black and White) and replace with regional terms; create South
Asian and Southeast Asian minimum response categories; and add
categories related to contextualized Hispanic or Latino heritage, such
as Mestizo, Afro-Latino, or Trigue[ntilde]o.\42\ A comprehensive review
of public input on this question can be found in the Working Group's
Annex 4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\42\ A comprehensive review of public input on this question can
be found in the Working Group's Annex 4, available on the Federal
Register, https://www.federalregister.gov/, by searching for ``OMB-
2023-0001''.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Working Group's Final Recommendation. The Working Group recommends
preserving the existing minimum category titles in SPD 15, but also
recommends future research, stakeholder engagement, and consultation on
legal requirements to explore whether the names of minimum categories
should be revised and, if so, how.\43\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\43\ Refer to the Working Group's final report and its Annexes 1
and 5 to learn more, available on the Federal Register, https://www.federalregister.gov/, by searching for ``OMB-2023-0001''.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
OMB Decision. OMB concurs with these recommendations and will
maintain existing category titles. Continuity in the category titles
supports more consistent and comparable data over time. Therefore, the
only changes to the minimum category titles will be the addition of the
MENA category and the removal of ``Other'' from the ``Native Hawaiian
and Other Pacific Islander'' category title. With regard to concerns
with the AIAN category title, OMB recognizes the need for further
research and reiterates the importance of ensuring that major revisions
to the question format, such as substantially changing a category
title, are based on rigorous research and public input to avoid
inadvertently affecting population estimates, creating breaks in
series, or confusing respondents. OMB also notes that SPD 15 is not
intended to measure Tribal enrollment or the status of Tribes. The
revisions to the category definition are intended to improve estimates
of the AIAN population in Federal statistics, and are not intended to
in any way diminish or otherwise affect the political relationship
between the sovereign Tribes and the Federal Government.
Collecting Data Related to Descent From Persons Who Were Enslaved in
the United States
Summary of Public Input. The FRN asked, ``How can Federal surveys
or forms collect data related to descent from enslaved peoples
originally from the African continent? For example, when collecting and
coding responses, what term best describes this population group (e.g.,
is the preferred term `American Descendants of Slavery,' `American
Freedmen,' or something else)? How should this group be defined? Should
it be collected as a detailed group within the `Black or African
American' minimum category, or through a separate question or other
approach?''
The majority of the public input on this subject expressed support
for adding a category or question to identify descendants of persons
enslaved in the United States. There was support for terms including:
Foundational Black American, American Descendant of Slavery, American
Freedman or Freedman, Black American, African-American, and Negro or
American Negro; however, there was disagreement about which term is
preferred. Commenters described the importance of collecting these data
and the value for data users and policymakers, pointed to existing
research that shows differences in outcome measures, like income and
wealth, and stated that descendants of persons who were enslaved in the
United States are ethnically distinct from African immigrants.
Other commenters, including civil rights groups, opposed the
collection of these data. Commenters expressed concern about the
difficulty of verifying that identification is accurate, the usefulness
or necessity of the data, the exclusion of other groups of historically
enslaved people, and the creation of confusion that could make the
Black or African American community harder to count. Related, there was
also concern about potential harm to the full and accurate count of the
Black or African American population, particularly Black or African
American immigrants. The comments noted the lack of in-depth research
and engagement with the diverse Black or African American community on
terminology, definition, and data collection and coding protocol, as
well as implications on the counts of other Black or African American
diasporic populations.\44\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\44\ A comprehensive review of public input on this question can
be found in the Working Group's Annex 4, available on the Federal
Register, https://www.federalregister.gov/, by searching for ``OMB-
2023-0001''.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Working Group's Final Recommendation. The Working Group did not
recommend disaggregation of the Black or African American category by
descent from persons who were enslaved in the United States. They
identified the disaggregation of Black or African American population
groups as a priority area for future research and noted that additional
stakeholder engagement is also needed.\45\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\45\ Refer to the Working Group's final report and its Annex 1
to learn more, available on the Federal Register, https://www.federalregister.gov/, by searching for ``OMB-2023-0001''.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
OMB Decision. OMB concurs with this recommendation and the Working
Group's determination that further research is needed. Individuals and
civil rights groups disagreed on whether or how to implement this
potential revision. We note that the revised SPD 15 does not prohibit
agencies from asking additional questions related to race, ethnicity,
ancestry, or other related concepts, including descent from persons who
were enslaved in the United States. We also note that the revised SPD
15 maintains the long-standing position that the race and/or ethnicity
categories are not to be used as determinants of eligibility for
participation in any Federal program.
Additional Comments Not Covered Above
Finally, the Working Group and OMB welcomed other comments and
suggestions on any other ways SPD 15 could be revised to produce more
accurate and useful data.
Some comments suggested adding a box for people to choose not to
identify. OMB maintains the current practice of not allowing agencies
to provide a specific response option for ``prefer not to respond,'' in
order to maximize the quality, usefulness, and consistency of Federal
race and ethnicity data. We note that with very few exceptions,
provision of race and ethnicity information is voluntary for
respondents.
Other commenters asked OMB to revise the category definitions to
include an exhaustive list of nationalities and their associations with
the minimum categories for use in coding write-in responses. Aligned
with the Working Group's recommendations on category definitions, OMB's
revisions do not establish an exhaustive coding list that associates
all possible nationalities with one or more of the minimum race and
ethnicity categories. While the minimum category definitions and
detailed categories in this revision to SPD 15 rely heavily on the
concept of nationality, OMB recognizes that nationality is one of
several components that contribute to racial and ethnic identity. The
standards in SPD 15 are intended to facilitate individual identity to
the greatest extent possible while still enabling the creation of
consistent and comparable data. OMB specifies in this revision to SPD
15 that when coding write-in data, agencies
[[Page 22191]]
must adopt practices that maximize comparability between data collected
on forms and surveys with and without write-in fields to ensure the
comparability of race and ethnicity data across Federal datasets.
Some commenters expressed that SPD 15 is not revised often enough
to stay current with shifts in demography and identity. In response,
OMB commits to undertaking regular reviews of SPD 15 as described in
Section D of this notice.
Some commenters requested the addition of new minimum categories,
such as a Mediterranean or Italian category, distinct from the White
category. Other commenters also requested the addition of specific
checkboxes for a variety of nationalities not covered in the initial
proposals.
OMB's revisions to SPD 15 add only one new minimum category, Middle
Eastern or North African, the addition of which is supported by many
years of research, testing, and stakeholder engagement. OMB will
continue to monitor SPD 15 for its effectiveness, and regular reviews
will include consideration of potential new minimum categories.
Some commenters requested increasing the maximum characters in the
American Indian or Alaska Native write-in field. OMB chose not specify
in SPD 15 the length of the write-in fields or how these data are
collected in order to allow agencies the flexibility to continue the
use of paper forms when necessary and to adopt new data collection
practices that may minimize burden, such as using drop-down menus. When
collecting write-in data, agencies should seek to minimize burden to
respondents and provide as much space as feasible to support complete
and accurate responses.\46\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\46\ A comprehensive review of public input can be found in the
Working Group's Annex 4, available on the Federal Register, https://www.federalregister.gov/, by searching for ``OMB-2023-0001''.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
D. Topics for Future Research
The Working Group and OMB identified several areas that require
further research before the next review of SPD 15.
1. What data processing procedures, such as coding, editing, and
imputation practices, maximize the comparability of data collected
across the Federal Government when using different combined question
formats, for example between collections with and without write-in
fields.
2. How to encourage respondents to select multiple race and/or
ethnicity categories when appropriate by enhancing question design and
inclusive language, for example by researching methods for ensuring
complete and accurate estimates of people who identify as Afro-Latino.
3. How to collect high quality and useful data related to descent
from persons who were enslaved in the United States, including research
on terminology, question design, data quality, and willingness to
provide these data.
4. The optimal order of presentation for minimum categories,
including research on rates of data entry error, burden, and respondent
preference.
5. Collecting race and ethnicity consistently across different
languages and translations of the question.
6. Evaluating the detailed checkboxes as demographics shift over
time for their ability to generate useful, high-quality data.
7. How respondents interpret each of the SPD 15 categories and
definitions, and the combined race and/or ethnicity question in
general, along with potential modifications to minimum category names.
8. How to better align the AIAN category title with its definition
while preserving data quality, for example by exploring the use of a
more inclusive title such as ``Indigenous peoples of the Americas.''
It is expected that the list of important research topics to
examine before the next review will grow as agencies begin implementing
these new standards over the coming years. OMB commits to establishing
an Interagency Committee on Race and Ethnicity Statistical Standards,
to be convened by the Chief Statistician of the United States, that
will maintain and carry out a Government-wide research agenda and
undertake regular reviews of SPD 15. These reviews will take place on a
10-year cycle and will include opportunity for public input. The review
will result in a recommendation to the Chief Statistician of the United
States as to whether or not OMB should undertake a revision of SPD 15.
Notwithstanding this regular review cycle, OMB may decide at any time
to initiate a review of SPD 15.
Richard L. Revesz,
Administrator, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs.
Standards for Maintaining, Collecting, and Presenting Federal Data on
Race and Ethnicity
This Statistical Policy Directive provides the standards for
maintaining, collecting, and presenting race and ethnicity data for all
Federal information collection and reporting purposes. The categories
in these standards are understood to be socio-political constructs and
are not an attempt to define race and ethnicity biologically or
genetically. They are not to be used as determinants of eligibility for
participation in any Federal program. The standards do not require any
agency or program to collect race and ethnicity data; rather they
provide a common language for uniformity and comparability in the
collection and use of race and ethnicity data by Federal agencies.
The standards have seven minimum categories for data on race and
ethnicity: American Indian or Alaska Native, Asian, Black or African
American, Hispanic or Latino, Middle Eastern or North African, Native
Hawaiian or Pacific Islander, and White.
1. Categories and Definitions
The minimum categories for data on race and ethnicity for Federal
statistics, program administrative reporting, and civil rights
compliance reporting are defined as follows:
American Indian or Alaska Native. Individuals with origins in any
of the original peoples of North, Central, and South America,
including, for example, Navajo Nation, Blackfeet Tribe of the Blackfeet
Indian Reservation of Montana, Native Village of Barrow Inupiat
Traditional Government, Nome Eskimo Community, Aztec, and Maya.
Asian. Individuals with origins in any of the original peoples of
Central or East Asia, Southeast Asia, or South Asia, including, for
example, Chinese, Asian Indian, Filipino, Vietnamese, Korean, and
Japanese.
Black or African American. Individuals with origins in any of the
Black racial groups of Africa, including, for example, African
American, Jamaican, Haitian, Nigerian, Ethiopian, and Somali.
Hispanic or Latino. Includes individuals of Mexican, Puerto Rican,
Salvadoran, Cuban, Dominican, Guatemalan, and other Central or South
American or Spanish culture or origin.
Middle Eastern or North African. Individuals with origins in any of
the original peoples of the Middle East or North Africa, including, for
example, Lebanese, Iranian, Egyptian, Syrian, Iraqi, and Israeli.
Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander. Individuals with origins in
any of the original peoples of Hawaii, Guam, Samoa, or other Pacific
Islands, including, for example, Native Hawaiian, Samoan, Chamorro,
Tongan, Fijian, and Marshallese.
White. Individuals with origins in any of the original peoples of
Europe,
[[Page 22192]]
including, for example, English, German, Irish, Italian, Polish, and
Scottish.
2. Question Format
Combined question: A combined race and ethnicity question is
required for both self-response and proxy data collection. Respondents
shall be offered a single combined race and ethnicity question that
allows them to select one category or multiple categories. A single
selection will be considered a complete response (e.g., Hispanic or
Latino respondents are not required to select an additional category).
Detailed responses: The revised SPD 15 requires the collection of
detailed data on race and ethnicity beyond the minimum categories,
unless an agency determines that the potential benefit of the detailed
data would not justify the additional burden to the agency and the
public or the additional risk to privacy or confidentiality, and
therefore requests an exemption from OIRA. In those cases, Federal
agencies must at least use the minimum categories and justify this
determination in the agency's PRA information collection review
package. In cases where the data collection is not subject to the
information collection approval process, a direct request for a
variance shall be made to OMB through the Office of Information and
Regulatory Affairs (OIRA). Respondents must be offered the following
detailed categories for the corresponding minimum categories:
Asian: Chinese, Asian Indian, Filipino, Vietnamese, Korean, and
Japanese, Another group (for example, Pakistani, Hmong, Afghan, etc.)
Black or African American: African American, Jamaican, Haitian,
Nigerian, Ethiopian, Somali, Another group (for example, Trinidadian
and Tobagonian, Ghanian, Congolese, etc.)
Hispanic or Latino: Mexican, Puerto Rican, Salvadoran, Cuban,
Dominican, Guatemalan, Another group (for example, Colombian, Honduran,
Spaniard, etc.)
Middle Eastern or North African: Lebanese, Iranian, Egyptian,
Syrian, Iraqi, Israeli, Another group (for example, Moroccan, Yemeni,
Kurdish, etc.)
Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander: Native Hawaiian, Samoan,
Chamorro, Tongan, Fijian, Marshallese, Another group (for example,
Chuukese, Palauan, Tahitian, etc.)
White: English, German, Irish, Italian, Polish, Scottish, Another
group (for example, French, Swedish, Norwegian, etc.)
Whenever possible, the ``Another group'' detail category checkboxes
should be replaced with write-in fields that allows respondents to
self-identify as shown in Figure 1 below. Providing a write-in field is
especially critical for the American Indian or Alaska Native category,
which does not have required detailed categories under these standards.
The instructions for the write-in boxes should read ``Enter, for
example,'' followed by the examples listed in parentheses above. For
the American Indian or Alaska Native category, the instructions for the
write-in option should read: ``Enter, for example, Navajo Nation,
Blackfeet Tribe of the Blackfeet Indian Reservation of Montana, Native
Village of Barrow Inupiat Traditional Government, Nome Eskimo
Community, Aztec, Maya, etc.''
Instead of the detailed categories listed above and shown in Figure
1, agencies may use the detailed categories employed by the U.S. Census
Bureau's most recently fielded American Community Survey. Any
disaggregated data collected in addition to the detailed categories
presented here (for example, a drop-down list for the American Indian
or Alaska Native category) must be organized in such a way that the
additional categories can be aggregated into the minimum categories.
Any other variation to the detailed categories must be specifically
authorized by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) through the
Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) information collection approval process.
In those cases where the data collection is not subject to the
information collection approval process, a direct request for a
variance shall be made to OMB through the Office of Information and
Regulatory Affairs (OIRA).
Question instruction. Respondents shall be offered the option of
selecting one or more racial and ethnic designations. The question
instructions will vary depending on whether there is a write-in field
or if there are detailed categories. For questions with detailed
categories and no write-in fields, the question instructions should
read: ``What is your race and/or ethnicity? Select all that apply.''
When write-in fields are provided, the instructions should read: ``What
is your race and/or ethnicity? Select all that apply and enter
additional details in the spaces below.'' When collecting only the
minimum categories, the question instructions should read ``What is
your race and/or ethnicity? Select all that apply.''
Examples. The following three figures provide illustrative examples
of question formats that comply with SPD 15. The standards do not
specify the order that responses must be presented, but agencies
typically order the responses alphabetically, as shown, or by
population size. SPD 15 envisions that whenever possible agencies will
collect race and ethnicity data with a question format that includes
the required minimum categories disaggregated by the required detailed
categories as illustrated in Figure 1.
BILLING CODE 3110-01-P
[[Page 22193]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN29MR24.000
When an agency receives an OIRA exemption from collecting detailed
data, it may use a format that includes only the minimum categories, as
shown in Figures 2 and 3.
[[Page 22194]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN29MR24.001
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN29MR24.002
BILLING CODE 3110-01-C
When using the minimum categories only, the quality of the data and
consistency with other datasets may be improved by providing the
respondent with examples as shown in Figure 2. Agencies should provide
these examples when feasible over the example in Figure 3 without
examples.
[[Page 22195]]
3. Data Collection and Editing Procedures
With respect to collection, the seven minimum race and ethnicity
categories shall be treated co-equally except if a program or
collection effort focuses on a specific racial or ethnic group, and
only as approved by OIRA. Collection forms may not indicate to
respondents that they should interpret some categories as ethnicities
and others as races, or otherwise indicate conceptual differences among
the minimum categories.
The mode of data collection may offer additional options for
collecting detailed data. In electronic modes of collection, for
example, agencies may use multiple screens to collect detailed data.
The minimum reporting categories may be collected on an initial screen
and detailed data for each minimum reporting category the respondent
selected may be collected on follow up screens, whether through
checkboxes, drop down menus, write-in areas, or another method.
If detailed race and ethnicity data are collected in an
interviewer-administered setting, the minimum categories should be
asked first, treating each category as a yes/no question, followed by
the detailed categories associated with the selected minimum
categories.
The method of data collection has implications for the quality and
fitness for use of the resulting data. Wherever possible, race and/or
ethnicity data should be collected through self-report, where the
respondents directly provide their own race and/or ethnicity. In cases
where self-report is not possible, data may be collected by proxy
reporting, where a person knowledgeable of another's race and/or
ethnicity responds on their behalf; by record matching, where existing
records on an individual that contain their race and/or ethnicity are
used to supply the information; or by observer identification, where an
observer uses their best judgement of the most appropriate race and/or
ethnicity categories in which to report an individual.
When data are collected through visual observation, agencies are
not required to collect detailed categories and are encouraged to
instead use the minimum categories. For statistical survey reporting,
agencies must maintain records on the mode and method of data
collection, and how nonresponse or other missing data were assigned or
allocated, and must make that information available to data users to
allow them to evaluate the utility, objectivity, and integrity of the
data. Agencies should also maintain and provide this information for
administrative, grant, and compliance-related data collections whenever
feasible. Agencies should use the terminology in this section when
describing the method of collection and should make it a practice to
describe the method of data collection in any reports on data
collection design or methods.
When coding write-in data, imputing missing data, or otherwise
editing responses, agencies must adopt practices that maximize
comparability between data collected on forms and surveys with and
without write-in fields. Doing so will improve the comparability of
race and ethnicity data across Federal datasets. For statistical survey
reporting, agencies must maintain records on data processing procedures
(such as coding, editing, and imputation practices), and must make that
information available to data users to allow them to evaluate the
utility, objectivity, and integrity of the data. Agencies should also
maintain and provide this information for administrative, grant, and
compliance related data collections whenever feasible.
4. Presentation of Data on Race and Ethnicity
The tabulation procedures used by Federal agencies must result in
the production of as much information on race and/or ethnicity as
possible, including data on people reporting multiple categories.
However, Federal agencies must not release race and ethnicity data if
doing so would violate agency or Federal policies designed to ensure
data quality or protect respondent privacy or confidentiality. When
data are presented, Federal agencies are encouraged to use one or more
of the three approaches below.
Approach 1. The alone or in combination approach combines all
individuals belonging to a particular racial or ethnic group (whether
alone or in combination with another racial or ethnic group). For
example, a respondent who reported being both White and Black or
African American would fall into both the ``White alone or in
combination'' category and the ``Black or African American alone or in
combination'' category. This practice has been in place since the 1997
revision of SPD 15 and is useful if the goal is capturing all people
who might face a given life experience (e.g., increased risk of a
disease or discrimination). Percentages across the categories sum to
greater than 100 percent because the response categories are not
mutually exclusive in this approach. The following is an example of the
tabulation categories for this approach:
American Indian or Alaska Native alone or in combination
Asian alone or in combination
Black or African American alone or in combination
Hispanic or Latino alone or in combination
Middle Eastern or North African alone or in combination
Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander alone or in combination
White alone or in combination
Approach 2. The most frequent multiple responses approach reports
as many possible race and ethnicity combinations as possible. For
example, an agency could report the seven minimum race and ethnicity
categories alone, as well as race and ethnicity combinations meeting a
specific population threshold or combinations of particular interest,
or all observed combinations of multiple race and ethnicity groups. The
percentages will sum to 100 percent because the response categories are
mutually exclusive. The following is an example of possible tabulation
categories for this approach:
American Indian or Alaska Native alone
Asian alone
Black or African American alone
Hispanic or Latino alone
Middle Eastern or North African alone
Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander alone
White alone
American Indian or Alaska Native and Hispanic or Latino
American Indian or Alaska Native and White
Asian and Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander
Asian and White
Black or African American and Middle Eastern or North African
Black or African American and White
Hispanic or Latino and Black or African American
Hispanic or Latino and White
Middle Eastern or North African and Asian
Middle Eastern or North African and White
Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander and Black or African
American
Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander and White
All additional Multiracial and/or Multiethnic groups
Approach 3. The combined Multiracial and/or Multiethnic approach
presents data for those reporting one of the seven race and/or
ethnicity
[[Page 22196]]
categories alone, and then combines all other respondents reporting
multiple race and/or ethnicity categories into an aggregated
Multiracial and/or Multiethnic category. This approach will often
obscure the specific racial and ethnic diversity of the population
(e.g., over half of the population who identify as American Indian or
Alaska Native and Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander may be assigned
to the Multiracial and/or Multiethnic group). Therefore, Federal
agencies should use this approach in conjunction with another approach
(like Approaches 1 or 2) to comply with the requirement to report as
much information on race and ethnicity as possible, including data for
respondents who reported more than one race and/or ethnicity category.
The percentages in this approach will sum to 100 percent because the
response categories are mutually exclusive. The following illustrates
the tabulation categories used for this approach:
American Indian or Alaska Native alone
Asian alone
Black or African American alone
Hispanic or Latino alone
Middle Eastern or North African alone
Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander alone
White alone
Multiracial and/or Multiethnic
With respect to tabulation and presentation, regardless of
approach, the seven minimum race and ethnicity categories shall be
treated co-equally except if a program or collection effort focuses on
a specific racial or ethnic group, and as approved by OIRA. When
tabulating and presenting data, agencies must use a consistent approach
across all categories within a single table. If categories must be
combined in order to reach sample size thresholds for reporting, those
combinations should be labeled with the list of combined categories
rather than with ``other.''
5. Use of the Standards for Record Keeping and Reporting
a. Statistical Reporting
These standards shall be used for all Federally sponsored
statistical data collections that include data on race and ethnicity.
Any variation must be specifically authorized by OIRA through the PRA
information collection approval process. In those cases where the data
collection is not subject to the information collection clearance
process, a direct request for a variance must be made to OIRA.
b. General Program Administrative and Grant Reporting
These standards shall be used for all Federal administrative
reporting or record keeping requirements that include data on race and
ethnicity. Agencies that cannot follow these standards must request a
variance from OIRA. Variances will be considered if the agency can
demonstrate that it is not reasonable for the primary reporter to
determine race and ethnicity in terms of the specified minimum
categories, or that the specific program is directed to only one or a
limited number of races and ethnicities.
c. Civil Rights and Other Compliance Reporting
These standards must be used by all Federal agencies for civil
rights and other compliance reporting from the public and private
sectors and all levels of government. Any variation requiring less
detailed data or data which cannot be aggregated into the minimum
categories must be specifically approved by OIRA.
6. Effective Date
The provisions of these standards are effective March 28, 2024 for
all new record keeping or reporting requirements that include race and
ethnicity data. All existing record keeping or reporting requirements
should be made consistent with these standards through a non-
substantive change request as soon as possible, or at the time they are
submitted for extension or revision to OIRA under the PRA, but not
later than March 28, 2029.
Within 18 months of publication of these standards, the Chief
Financial Officers Act Agencies and the U.S. Equal Employment
Opportunity Commission \47\ must submit to OMB, through their agency
Statistical Officials and in coordination with their agency's Chief
Data Officer, Evaluation Officer,\48\ Senior Agency Officials for
Privacy, and other agency officials as appropriate, an Action Plan on
Race and Ethnicity Data describing how they intend to bring their
agency collections and publications into compliance with these
standards by March 28, 2029. Agencies must make these plans available
to the public through their websites at the time of submission to OMB.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\47\ The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission does not
currently have a Statistical Official and should submit their Action
Plan through their Chief Data Officer.
\48\ These three agency officials make up the Data Governance
Bodies established under OMB M-19-23, Phase 1 Implementation of the
Foundations for Evidence-Based Policymaking Act of 2018: Learning
Agendas, Personnel, and Planning Guidance (July 10, 2019), available
at https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2019/07/m-19-23.pdf.
[FR Doc. 2024-06469 Filed 3-28-24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3110-01-P
