Home/Federal/Federal Register/2024-06469

Notice2024-06469

Revisions to OMB's Statistical Policy Directive No. 15: Standards for Maintaining, Collecting, and Presenting Federal Data on Race and Ethnicity

Primary source

Metadata and text below are from the Federal Register, a public-domain U.S. government work. Always verify the official published version before relying on it for any legal matter.

Published

March 29, 2024

Effective

March 28, 2024

Issuing agencies

Management and Budget Office

Abstract

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.

Full Text

<html>
<head>
<title>Federal Register, Volume 89 Issue 62 (Friday, March 29, 2024)</title>
</head>
<body><pre>
[Federal Register Volume 89, Number 62 (Friday, March 29, 2024)]
[Notices]
[Pages 22182-22196]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [<a href="http://www.gpo.gov">www.gpo.gov</a>]
[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:
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#cd9eb9acb9a4beb9a4aeaca19289a4bfa8aeb9a4bba8be8da2a0afe3a8a2bde3aaa2bb"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="5a092e3b2e33292e33393b36051e33283f392e332c3f291a353738743f352a743d352c">[email&#160;protected]</span></a>.
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: <a href="https://www.federalregister.gov/">https://www.federalregister.gov/</a>, 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 <a href="https://www.statspolicy.gov">https://www.statspolicy.gov</a> under ``Policies'' and on the Working
Group's website: <a href="https://www.spd15revision.gov">https://www.spd15revision.gov</a>.

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: <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#44173025302d37302d2725281b002d362127302d322137042b29266a212b346a232b32"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="6f3c1b0e1b061c1b060c0e03302b061d0a0c1b06190a1c2f00020d410a001f41080019">[email&#160;protected]</span></a>, 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 <a href="https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2023/01/27/2023-01635/initial-proposals-for-updating-ombs-race-and-ethnicity-statistical-standards">https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2023/01/27/2023-01635/initial-proposals-for-updating-ombs-race-and-ethnicity-statistical-standards</a>.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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 <a href="https://www2.census.gov/about/ombraceethnicityitwg/1978-statistical-policy-handbook.pdf">https://www2.census.gov/about/ombraceethnicityitwg/1978-statistical-policy-handbook.pdf</a>.
\5\ 62 FR 58782 (Oct. 20, 1997), available at <a href="https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-1997-10-30/pdf/97-28653.pdf">https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-1997-10-30/pdf/97-28653.pdf</a>.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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 <a href="https://www2.census.gov/about/ombraceethnicityitwg/1978-statistical-policy-handbook.pdf">https://www2.census.gov/about/ombraceethnicityitwg/1978-statistical-policy-handbook.pdf</a>.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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
<a href="https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2017/11/bulletins_b00-02.pdf">https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2017/11/bulletins_b00-02.pdf</a>.
\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 <a href="https://www.esd.whs.mil/Portals/54/Documents/DD/info_collect/files_public/Race%20%20Ethnicity%20Guidance.pdf?ver=2018-11-01-094407-913">https://www.esd.whs.mil/Portals/54/Documents/DD/info_collect/files_public/Race%20%20Ethnicity%20Guidance.pdf?ver=2018-11-01-094407-913</a>.
\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
<a href="https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2022/07/Flexibilities-and-Best-Practices-Under-SPD-15.pdf">https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2022/07/Flexibilities-and-Best-Practices-Under-SPD-15.pdf</a>.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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 <a href="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/">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/</a>.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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 <a href="https://statspolicy.gov">https://statspolicy.gov</a>.
\12\ A list of the 24 Chief Financial Officers Act Agencies is
available at <a href="https://www.cfo.gov/about-the-council/">https://www.cfo.gov/about-the-council/</a>.
\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:
<bullet> whether the minimum reporting categories should be changed
and how to best address detailed race and ethnicity groups in SPD 15;
<bullet> 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
<bullet> 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, <a href="https://www.federalregister.gov/">https://www.federalregister.gov/</a>, 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 <a href="https://www.census.gov/programs-surveys/decennial-census/decade/2020/planning-management/plan/final-analysis/2015nct-race-ethnicity-analysis.html">https://www.census.gov/programs-surveys/decennial-census/decade/2020/planning-management/plan/final-analysis/2015nct-race-ethnicity-analysis.html</a>.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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 (<a href="https://www.spd15revision.gov">https://www.spd15revision.gov</a>), 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 <a href="https://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/briefing-room/2022/08/30/omb-launches-new-public-listening-sessions-on-federal-race-and-ethnicity-standards-revision/">https://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/briefing-room/2022/08/30/omb-launches-new-public-listening-sessions-on-federal-race-and-ethnicity-standards-revision/</a>.
\18\ Initial Proposals for Updating OMB's Race and Ethnicity
Data Standards Docket, <a href="http://Regulations.gov">Regulations.gov</a>, available at <a href="https://www.regulations.gov/docket/OMB-2023-0001/comments">https://www.regulations.gov/docket/OMB-2023-0001/comments</a> (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, <a href="https://www.federalregister.gov/">https://www.federalregister.gov/</a>, 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 <a href="https://www.census.gov/programs-surveys/decennial-census/decade/2010/program-management/cpex/2010-cpex-211.html">https://www.census.gov/programs-surveys/decennial-census/decade/2010/program-management/cpex/2010-cpex-211.html</a>; Jacquelyn Harth, U.S. Census Bureau, 2016 American
Community Survey Content Test: Race and Hispanic Origin (Sept. 19,
2017), available at <a href="https://www.census.gov/library/working-papers/2017/acs/2017_Harth_01.html">https://www.census.gov/library/working-papers/2017/acs/2017_Harth_01.html</a>.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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, <a href="https://www.federalregister.gov/">https://www.federalregister.gov/</a>, 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, <a href="https://www.federalregister.gov/">https://www.federalregister.gov/</a>, 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, <a href="https://www.federalregister.gov/">https://www.federalregister.gov/</a>, 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 <a href="https://wwwn.cdc.gov/qbank/report/Willson_2017_NCHS_MENA.pdf">https://wwwn.cdc.gov/qbank/report/Willson_2017_NCHS_MENA.pdf</a>; 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, <a href="https://www.federalregister.gov/">https://www.federalregister.gov/</a>, 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, <a href="https://www.federalregister.gov/">https://www.federalregister.gov/</a>, 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, <a href="https://www.federalregister.gov/">https://www.federalregister.gov/</a>, 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, <a href="https://www.federalregister.gov/">https://www.federalregister.gov/</a>, 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, <a href="https://www.federalregister.gov/">https://www.federalregister.gov/</a>, by searching
for ``OMB-2023-0001''.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

<bullet> 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;
<bullet> 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;
<bullet> The need for tools to support bridging, or combining data
collected under different versions of SPD 15;
<bullet> 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;
<bullet> 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?
<bullet> 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;
<bullet> The importance of guidance on flexibility and best
practices on how to tabulate detailed categories based on the
population or sample size; and
<bullet> 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, <a href="https://www.federalregister.gov/">https://www.federalregister.gov/</a>, 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, <a href="https://www.federalregister.gov/">https://www.federalregister.gov/</a>, 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, <a href="https://www.federalregister.gov/">https://www.federalregister.gov/</a>, 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, <a href="https://www.federalregister.gov/">https://www.federalregister.gov/</a>, 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, <a href="https://www.federalregister.gov/">https://www.federalregister.gov/</a>, 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, <a href="https://www.federalregister.gov/">https://www.federalregister.gov/</a>, 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, <a href="https://www.federalregister.gov/">https://www.federalregister.gov/</a>, 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:

<bullet> American Indian or Alaska Native alone or in combination
<bullet> Asian alone or in combination
<bullet> Black or African American alone or in combination
<bullet> Hispanic or Latino alone or in combination
<bullet> Middle Eastern or North African alone or in combination
<bullet> Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander alone or in combination
<bullet> 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:

<bullet> American Indian or Alaska Native alone
<bullet> Asian alone
<bullet> Black or African American alone
<bullet> Hispanic or Latino alone
<bullet> Middle Eastern or North African alone
<bullet> Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander alone
<bullet> White alone
<bullet> American Indian or Alaska Native and Hispanic or Latino
<bullet> American Indian or Alaska Native and White
<bullet> Asian and Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander
<bullet> Asian and White
<bullet> Black or African American and Middle Eastern or North African
<bullet> Black or African American and White
<bullet> Hispanic or Latino and Black or African American
<bullet> Hispanic or Latino and White
<bullet> Middle Eastern or North African and Asian
<bullet> Middle Eastern or North African and White
<bullet> Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander and Black or African
American
<bullet> Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander and White
<bullet> 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:

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 <a href="https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2019/07/m-19-23.pdf">https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2019/07/m-19-23.pdf</a>.

[FR Doc. 2024-06469 Filed 3-28-24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3110-01-P

</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>

View on FederalRegister.gov →Plain-text source

Indexed from Federal Register on March 29, 2024.

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.