1998 BRFSS
SUMMARY
QUALITY CONTROL
REPORT

BEHAVIORAL RISK FACTOR SURVEILLANCE SYSTEM
QUALITY CONTROL DOCUMENTATION

This report provides selected statistical indicators which are monitored in the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS) to detect changes in the quality of the data collection procedures used in states.  The value of these indicators is primarily for individual states to identify changes that may occur in their data collection process over time.  When the indicators are below the objectives, it is appropriate to review data collection procedures and determine whether the procedures are optimal.  When there are no evident procedural deficiencies and the quality indicators are stable, not meeting an objective is not an indication of poor quality.  Similarly, it is useful to look at how the indicators differ between states to assess whether data collection procedures are optimal in all states.  However, quality indicators that rank lower in one state than in another do not necessarily mean the quality of the data collection effort is also lower.

Additional tables of quality control indicators include those in   Section 2 comparing demographic characteristics of BRFSS sample data with that of the population for each state, and Section 3  tables showing non-response rates for selected items from the core and module sections.

RESPONSE RATES

The response rate measures the extent to which interviews were completed from among the telephone numbers selected for the sample.  The higher the response rate, the lower the potential will be for bias in the data.

No definitive formula for response rate estimates exists.  The three estimates that are used for BRFSS provide a combination of monitoring information that is useful for program management. The formulas for each, translated into BRFSS call disposition codes (see page 8), are as follows: 

CASRO:  This response rate formula, developed by the Council of American Survey Research Organizations (CASRO), apportions dispositions with unknown eligibility status (ring-no-answer and busy) to dispositions representing eligible respondents in the same proportion as exists among all calls of known status (all other BRFSS call dispositions).  The resulting estimate reflects telephone sampling efficiency as well as the degree of cooperation among eligibles contacted.

01	
(01+02+07+09) +	(01+02+07+09)	x (04 + 10)	
	(01+02+07+09)+ (03+05+06+08+11)		

AAPOR Cooperation Rate One:  This rate is the number of completes divided by the number of identified households contacted that contain a resident 18 years or older.  The resulting measure reflects the cooperation of identified eligibles and is not affected by differences in telephone sampling efficiency.	

01	
01+02+07+08+09+11	

1This percentage is affected by the efficiency of the sampling methodology (i.e., by the number of nonworking and nonresidential dispositions  in the denominator) Comparisons between survey areas with different sampling methods may not be meaningful. Within a survey area, month-to-month and year-to-year changes are important to monitor.

Upper Bound:  The most liberal of response rate formulas, the upper bound calculation includes only refusals, terminations, and completed interviews.  The resulting estimate reflects the cooperation of eligibles contacted and is not affected by differences in telephone sampling efficiency.

01	
01+02+09	

Among Waksberg sampling states, the call-back rules are disregarded during wind-down interviewing (see page 3); therefore, total response rates for an interviewing period will not accurately reflect performance under the call-back rules during regular mode interviewing.  The response rate estimates included in this report have been calculated using only the records dispositioned during regular mode interviewing.

OTHER IMPORTANT QUALITY CONTROL INDICATORS

Survey Efficiency:  The efficiency rate used for BRFSS is the percentage of all numbers called (excluding numbers rejected during Waksberg prescreening) that resulted in completed interviews.  This indicator is directly related to the percent of telephone numbers in the survey area that are assigned to households.  The degree to which interviewers adhere to survey procedures and gain respondent cooperation also affects efficiency.  This percentage should remain static unless there is a change in the phone companies' assignment of phone numbers in the survey area, a change in sampling design, or a substantial change in interviewer performance.

01	
Total Telephone Numbers Used	

Wind-Down:  In order to terminate data collection activities within the allotted time period each month, wind-down procedures (i.e., suspension of the call-back rules) may be necessary with Waksberg sampling.  Wind-down is permitted once 95% of the sample has been completed.  Each interview completed in the wind-down mode should be coded as such.  Generally, if the percentage of wind-down interviews is greater than five percent, the survey supervisor is going into wind-down too early.  The greater the proportion of interviews completed in wind-down mode, the greater the potential for bias in the survey results.  This is because data collected during wind-down are reflective only of those respondents who are easiest to reach.  Respondents who are more difficult to reach may differ significantly from those who are easier to reach.

Refused Interview:  The percentage of refusals of total numbers called in a given interviewing period is an indicator of both interviewer performance and degree of potential bias in the survey data.  Ten percent1 refusals or less is a generally accepted standard.  

Ring-No-Answer:  The percentage of ring-no-answers reflects how many attempts are made and with what time variation on unanswered phone numbers.  The objective for ring-no-answers is 10%1 or less of total numbers called.  States that exceed this percentage may not be following prescribed call-back procedures or may be using this disposition inappropriately as a final disposition for a selected respondent who was not interviewed.

Selected Respondent Not Available During the Interviewing Period:  This disposition is used most often in wind-down and therefore reflects the proportion of calling done during wind-down.  It also reflects the diligence of efforts to contact selected respondents whose availability is limited.  The objective for this disposition is 3%1 or less of total numbers called.  Those states that exceed this percentage may need to extend the number of days they interview during the month.

Line Busy:  This disposition should be infrequent.  The objective is 0.3%1 or less.  A higher percentage than 0.3 may indicate that call-back procedures are not being carefully followed or that this disposition is being used inappropriately as a final disposition for a selected respondent who was not interviewed.

Variation in Cluster Size: Variation in size of clusters in Waksberg-Mitofsky designs is an indirect indicator of how the sampling design was implemented.  Percentages of records with a cluster size of three are shown for states using Waksberg-Mitofsky designs.

Monitoring Capability: BRFSS protocol specifies that systematic, unobtrusive electronic monitoring be a routine and integral part of monthly survey procedures for all interviewers.  Monitoring is considered a valuable tool for training and achieving uniform questionnaire administration, resulting in less bias in the data set.  Monitoring of interviewers can provide quick information on features of the respondent recruitment and questioning process that needs improvement.  Monitoring capability information is shown for all states as of October,1998.

OTHER DATA QUALITY MEASURES

BRFSS is developing a quality profile, which is a compendia of all known information about the quality of the data, including aspects of sampling error, coverage, nonresponse, and other indicators of quality.  Tables in Section 2 present information on the discrepancy between sample data and population estimates for gender, race, and age.  In these tables, the sample data percentage is based upon data weighted by the variable WT1, composed of number of telephones, size of household, and geographic and density stratification.  The rationale for using the weighted data is that the factors which go into it are deliberate features of the sample design.  Thus, any differences between the raw and WT1 percentages are not considered as bias.

Respondent Sex Distribution: Survey samples with a respondent sex distribution that differs substantially from the population distribution in the survey area may produce biased estimates of risk factor prevalences.  A distribution substantially skewed toward females relative to the population surveyed (after adjusting for probability of selection due to number of telephone and number of adults in households) suggests that interviewers may not be interviewing randomly selected respondents.

Respondent Age Distribution: The discrepancy between the percentage in specific age groups in the sample and the corresponding percentage in the population is an indicator of the age bias of the sample.  An age distribution that differs substantially from the population distribution in the survey area may produce biased estimates of risk factor prevalences, particularly since many characteristics of individuals are substantially affected by age.  For example, younger persons tend to be healthier than those who are older.  Such a discrepancy also suggests that interviewers may not be interviewing randomly selected respondents.

Respondent Race Distribution: Survey samples with a respondent race distribution that differs substantially from the population distribution in the survey area may produce biased estimates of risk factor prevalences.  The discrepancy between the percentage White or Black in the sample and the percentage White or Black in the population is an indicator of racial bias of the sample.  The percentage White in the sample is, however, affected by large interstate differences in the protocol for coding the race of Hispanics.  These differences in protocol significantly affect the percentage White in states with large Hispanic populations and can introduce substantial bias in the race-specific risk factor prevalences for these areas.

Item Nonresponse: Item non-response rates from completed interviews for selected items from the core questions have been calculated by state, and are shown in Section 3.  The assumption is that these measures are an indication of overall interviewing and/or coding quality. The percentages shown are based upon the number of responses coded as missing or refused.  On the questionnaire, the code 9 is generally listed as refused, but this code may capture some responses that were supposed to be answered, but for some reason were not, and appeared as a blank or other missing value symbol.  These cases have been coded as 9 in order to meet the constraints of processing CATI and editing programs.  It is important to note that any survey will have natural variation over sample sites; therefore, some variation between states is to be expected.  In evaluating possible measurement error stemming from variation in item missing data rates across states, the goal is to identify outliers in the distribution of the indicators.

BRFSS CALL DISPOSITION CODES

01	Completed interview

02	Refused interview

03	Nonworking number

04	Ring-no-answer

05	Not a private residence

06	No eligible respondent at this number

07	Selected respondent not available during the interviewing period

08	Language barrier

09	Interview terminated within questionnaire

10	Line Busy

11	Respondent unable to communicate due to physical or mental impairment

Interpretation of Summary Statistics

Some of the tables in Section 3 contain Z-scores. Z-scores indicate how many standard deviations values are from the mean, and are one way of assessing the location of a case in a distribution.  Standardization permits comparison of the scores from different distributions (e.g. states).  Observations below the mean have a negative z-score.  As a general guide, z-scores falling outside the -2.0 to 2.0 range can be considered extreme values, and indicate possible problems in the item.

STATUS OF MONITORING SYSTEMS 1998
October 7, 1998
STATE	AUDIO (Y/N)	CATI DISPLAY
(Y/N/NA)	COMMENTS	
AL	Y	N		
AK	N	N		
AZ	N	N		
AR	N	N		
CA	Y	Y		
CO	Y	Y		
CT	Y	Y		
DE	N	NA	Interview from homes.	
DC	N	N		
FL	Y	Y		
GA	Y	Y		
HI	Y	N		
ID	Y	Y		
IL	N	Y		
IN	Y	Y		
IA	Y	Y		
KS	N	NA	Expect to install equipment by 1/98	
KY	Y	N		
LA	N	NA		
ME	N	Y		
MD	Y	Y		
MA	Y	Y		
MI	Y	Y		
MN	N	Y		
MS	Y	Y		
MO	N	N		
MT	Y	N		
NE	Y	Y		
NV	Y	N		
NH	Y	Y		
NJ	Y	Y		
NM	Y	N		
NY	Y	Y		
NC	Y	N		
ND	Y	N	Expect to install video by 1/98	
OH	Y	Y		
OK	N	N		
OR	Y	Y		
PA	Y	Y		
PR	N	N		
RI	Y	Y		
SC	Y	Y		
SD	y	N		
TN	N	N	Ordered	
TX	Y	Y		
UT	Y	N	Expect to install video software in 98	
VT	Y	Y		
VA	Y	Y		
WA	Y	Y		
WV	N	N	Working on video;considering audio.	
WI	Y	Y		
WY	Y	Y		
TOTALS	37 with audio, 30 with audio and video		

BRFSS CALL DISPOSITIONS
FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION BY STATE, 1998
State	1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	10	11	TOTAL	
	No	%	No	%	No	%	No	%	No	%	No	%	No	%	No	%	No	%	No	%	No	
%	No	
AK	1989	13.6	915	6.2	6777	46.2	1517	10.3	2094	14.3	32	0.2	409	2.8	38	0.3	14	0.1	859	5.9	30	
0.2	
14674	
AL	2252	18.6	947	7.8	5192	43.0	588	4.9	1938	16.0	43	0.4	674	5.6	15	0.1	48	0.4	244	2.0	144	
1.2	
12085	
AR	3002	15.8	1021	5.4	10003	52.7	2182	11.5	1924	10.1	570	3.0	56	0.3	31	0.2	6	0.0	3	0.0	200	
1.1	
18998	
AZ	1916	14.8	93	0.7	6417	49.7	1773	13.7	1691	13.1	32	0.2	717	5.6	51	0.4	0	0.0	186	1.4	33	
0.3	
12909	
CA	4161	19.9	557	2.7	5905	28.2	3284	15.7	3937	18.8	1380	6.6	1091	5.2	190	0.9	295	1.4	86	0.4	48	
0.2	
20934	
CO	1802	18.1	472	4.7	4357	43.8	313	3.1	2477	24.9	56	0.6	359	3.6	36	0.4	0	0.0	18	0.2	64	
0.6	
9954	
CT	3130	17.9	1637	9.4	7494	42.9	2273	13.0	2681	15.3	16	0.1	35	0.2	145	0.8	12	0.1	0	0.0	49	
0.3	
17472	
DC	1452	9.2	430	2.7	7638	48.2	1749	11.0	4031	25.4	19	0.1	231	1.5	135	0.9	6	0.0	8	0.1	142	
0.9	
15841	
DE	2582	18.0	931	6.5	6572	45.8	1640	11.4	2042	14.2	144	1.0	203	1.4	52	0.4	15	0.1	83	0.6	86	
0.6	
14350	
FL	4724	14.8	5593	17.5	7662	23.9	5727	17.9	5729	17.9	393	1.2	1481	4.6	160	0.5	86	0.3	150	0.5	303	
0.9	
32008	
GA	2375	18.5	1496	11.6	3977	30.9	1380	10.7	2746	21.4	87	0.7	341	2.7	95	0.7	47	0.4	178	1.4	138	
1.1	
12860	
HI	2153	40.6	738	13.9	424	8.0	864	16.3	163	3.1	91	1.7	307	5.8	310	5.8	45	0.8	28	0.5	182	
3.4	
5305	
IA	3654	13.8	689	2.6	17054	64.2	1060	4.0	2740	10.3	8	0.0	946	3.6	56	0.2	8	0.0	15	0.1	318	
1.2	
26548	
ID	4931	18.8	2172	8.3	12549	47.7	1292	4.9	4165	15.8	38	0.1	623	2.4	177	0.7	150	0.6	64	0.2	133	
0.5	
26294	
IL	2880	20.3	1740	12.3	5085	35.8	453	3.2	3101	21.8	57	0.4	560	3.9	130	0.9	18	0.1	0	0.0	170	
1.2	
14194	
IN	2425	19.3	1720	13.7	4974	39.6	657	5.2	2361	18.8	61	0.5	150	1.2	0	0.0	60	0.5	82	0.7	57	
0.5	
12547	
KS	3803	16.3	502	2.1	14955	63.9	1090	4.7	2397	10.2	57	0.2	517	2.2	20	0.1	1	0.0	9	0.0	49	
0.2	
23400	
KY	3718	23.6	887	5.6	7550	47.9	776	4.9	1624	10.3	51	0.3	832	5.3	21	0.1	9	0.1	12	0.1	276	
1.8	
15756	
LA	1656	25.9	470	7.4	1770	27.7	1124	17.6	713	11.2	107	1.7	300	4.7	26	0.4	33	0.5	71	1.1	123	
1.9	
6393	
MA	4944	15.8	3396	10.8	12533	39.9	4701	15.0	5151	16.4	20	0.1	66	0.2	444	1.4	35	0.1	1	0.0	87	
0.3	
31378	
MD	3298	20.5	1080	6.7	6558	40.9	918	5.7	2253	14.0	350	2.2	1254	7.8	65	0.4	43	0.3	109	0.7	122	
0.8	
16050	
ME	1616	15.3	229	2.2	6219	59.0	451	4.3	1246	11.8	226	2.1	457	4.3	22	0.2	7	0.1	19	0.2	46	
0.4	
10538	
MI	2535	16.0	1731	10.9	6757	42.6	1109	7.0	2643	16.7	176	1.1	637	4.0	119	0.8	0	0.0	5	0.0	138	
0.9	
15850	
MN	4224	36.8	319	2.8	3918	34.2	1248	10.9	1097	9.6	80	0.7	383	3.3	46	0.4	10	0.1	69	0.6	71	
0.6	
11465	
MO	3720	24.6	1299	8.6	3990	26.4	2116	14.0	2519	16.7	64	0.4	1005	6.7	26	0.2	46	0.3	166	1.1	153	
1.0	
15104	
MS	2307	23.0	853	8.5	3943	39.3	727	7.3	1609	16.0	75	0.7	229	2.3	15	0.1	54	0.5	86	0.9	129	
1.3	
10027	
MT	1804	30.9	267	4.6	1878	32.1	574	9.8	866	14.8	50	0.9	246	4.2	2	0.0	11	0.2	72	1.2	76	
1.3	
5846	
NC	2402	19.5	744	6.0	5702	46.2	719	5.8	2033	16.5	69	0.6	469	3.8	24	0.2	8	0.1	131	1.1	36	
0.3	
12337	
ND	1803	34.7	232	4.5	1826	35.1	501	9.6	583	11.2	24	0.5	176	3.4	3	0.1	0	0.0	17	0.3	33	
0.6	
5198	
NE	2713	26.8	731	7.2	2654	26.2	1632	16.1	1589	15.7	28	0.3	467	4.6	74	0.7	9	0.1	168	1.7	70	
0.7	
10135	
NH	1499	21.2	518	7.3	1384	19.6	1349	19.1	1216	17.2	107	1.5	779	11.0	33	0.5	8	0.1	95	1.3	73	
1.0	
7061	
NJ	2467	15.0	1501	9.1	6045	36.7	2840	17.2	3313	20.1	14	0.1	41	0.2	198	1.2	18	0.1	0	0.0	39	
0.2	
16476	
NM	3638	18.9	1108	5.7	9670	50.2	999	5.2	3088	16.0	67	0.3	478	2.5	19	0.1	65	0.3	36	0.2	103	
0.5	
19271	
NV	1981	14.3	525	3.8	5827	42.1	1578	11.4	2692	19.5	247	1.8	379	2.7	211	1.5	0	0.0	178	1.3	209	
1.5	
13827	
NY	2527	15.7	1517	9.4	6567	40.7	2465	15.3	2606	16.1	18	0.1	40	0.2	345	2.1	18	0.1	0	0.0	39	
0.2	
16142	
OH	2993	16.7	1296	7.2	7675	42.7	1505	8.4	3241	18.0	24	0.1	930	5.2	33	0.2	26	0.1	122	0.7	125	
0.7	
17970	
OK	2516	17.3	1052	7.2	7483	51.5	1055	7.3	1703	11.7	249	1.7	192	1.3	36	0.2	28	0.2	190	1.3	22	
0.2	
14526	
OR	1818	13.7	1494	11.3	5897	44.5	721	5.4	2632	19.9	29	0.2	362	2.7	48	0.4	76	0.6	63	0.5	112	
0.8	
13252	
PA	3599	19.1	2052	10.9	7928	42.2	2023	10.8	3017	16.1	8	0.0	33	0.2	68	0.4	10	0.1	0	0.0	59	
0.3	
18797	
PR	2813	32.8	321	3.7	3051	35.5	766	8.9	1218	14.2	22	0.3	170	2.0	26	0.3	14	0.2	51	0.6	134	
1.6	
8586	
RI	3602	18.1	2037	10.2	8348	41.9	2385	12.0	3167	15.9	13	0.1	54	0.3	245	1.2	17	0.1	0	0.0	72	
0.4	
19940	
SC	3294	16.5	1497	7.5	9307	46.5	2596	13.0	3146	15.7	15	0.1	40	0.2	25	0.1	8	0.0	2	0.0	82	
0.4	
20012	
SD	2112	31.0	534	7.8	2303	33.8	781	11.5	776	11.4	30	0.4	206	3.0	8	0.1	6	0.1	40	0.6	17	
0.2	
6813	
TN	2944	25.0	1458	12.4	3320	28.1	2404	20.4	1169	9.9	39	0.3	199	1.7	23	0.2	6	0.1	152	1.3	84	
0.7	
11798	
TX	6005	13.7	5617	12.8	18641	42.4	2854	6.5	8217	18.7	97	0.2	1701	3.9	136	0.3	265	0.6	172	0.4	275	
0.6	
43980	
UT	2864	29.3	529	5.4	3046	31.2	1361	13.9	1119	11.5	27	0.3	487	5.0	62	0.6	14	0.1	195	2.0	58	
0.6	
9762	
VA	3506	20.2	1260	7.3	7219	41.6	953	5.5	2991	17.2	114	0.7	651	3.7	213	1.2	0	0.0	273	1.6	190	
1.1	
17370	
VT	3000	14.7	766	3.7	13285	65.0	1328	6.5	1945	9.5	18	0.1	60	0.3	11	0.1	4	0.0	0	0.0	36	
0.2	
20453	
WA	3604	18.5	2226	11.4	6499	33.4	1381	7.1	3960	20.4	222	1.1	770	4.0	233	1.2	118	0.6	191	1.0	238	
1.2	
19442	
WI	2205	21.8	835	8.2	4627	45.7	361	3.6	1791	17.7	109	1.1	96	0.9	0	0.0	29	0.3	33	0.3	40	
0.4	
10126	
WV	2414	33.9	720	10.1	1548	21.7	821	11.5	947	13.3	30	0.4	442	6.2	5	0.1	4	0.1	80	1.1	107	
1.5	
7118	
WY	2434	20.1	951	7.9	5663	46.8	643	5.3	1933	16.0	31	0.3	281	2.3	30	0.2	38	0.3	24	0.2	60	
0.5	
12088	
CUM	149806		63705		337666		77607		126030		5934		23612		4536		1848		4836		5680	
	
801260	
MED	2648		939		6132		1270		2307		54		370		42		14		66		85	
	
14438	

BRFSS CASRO RESPONSE RATE ESTIMATES*
BY STATE, 1994-1998
	1994	1995	1996	1997	1998	
State	Rate	Rate	Rate	Rate	Rate	
AK	74.6	68.4	62.9	59.5	50.1	
AL	71.0	68.3	69.1	59.6	53.5	
AR	71.9	65.7	62.5	65.9	65.0	
AZ	63.5	65.1	67.1	72.5	59.6	
CA	61.4	52.3	47.9	48.2	57.2	
CO	74.8	77.4	74.4	62.5	66.2	
CT	75.9	65.1	60.4	60.7	56.6	
DC	76.1	76.1	64.1	67.8	60.9	
DE	69.7	68.3	63.5	59.8	60.9	
FL	66.7	54.6	55.8	49.4	32.5	
GA	62.5	77.6	87.1	76.8	49.0	
HI	59.6	48.6	48.6	41.3	55.2	
IA	75.3	73.3	74.9	69.4	66.2	
ID	66.2	66.8	59.6	59.0	59.4	
IL	71.5	61.6	45.6	44.2	53.6	
IN	77.1	78.9	73.2	62.8	52.4	
KS	77.9	73.6	77.5	75.1	75.1	
KY	73.6	72.6	65.5	69.6	64.9	
LA	67.3	67.3	62.7	63.8	54.8	
MA	65.4	60.4	56.6	50.4	49.8	
MD	58.6	60.9	54.6	54.9	54.4	
ME	73.2	70.2	66.0	66.1	66.9	
MI	42.6	56.0	54.6	49.6	48.1	
MN	73.3	78.1	73.6	77.9	75.7	
MO	63.3	59.1	59.5	54.2	52.0	
MS	73.1	75.4	71.3	67.4	61.6	
MT	74.7	77.5	76.5	72.6	68.9	
NC	68.3	69.2	59.3	64.4	61.7	
ND	86.8	84.5	85.6	79.3	73.4	
NE	70.2	67.5	68.0	61.6	56.9	
NH	62.0	59.5	59.3	51.4	42.5	
NJ	67.5	66.9	52.4	51.0	50.7	
NM	53.3	52.5	61.2	62.5	65.1	
NV	76.0	77.4	75.9	71.8	59.9	
NY	60.6	60.2	50.6	51.6	52.2	
OH	66.2	69.5	74.4	61.7	51.9	
OK	71.2	76.2	72.8	72.3	60.7	
OR	65.3	56.9	55.4	53.1	45.6	
PA	66.0	64.1	61.8	58.2	56.4	
PR				88.9	76.7	
RI	73.1	68.7	59.4	54.7	55.5	
SC	76.8	74.5	60.9	58.8	59.2	
SD	79.4	81.2	76.8	70.0	65.0	
TN	65.4	68.7	62.5	60.1	50.1	
TX	57.7	60.2	52.8	45.7	41.2	
UT	79.4	78.5	77.6	71.9	61.8	
VA	60.9	62.3	61.2	59.6	60.2	
VT	72.3	74.5	71.6	71.5	73.2	
WA	64.8	61.4	53.7	52.3	49.3	
WI	74.7	71.9	69.6	69.7	67.0	
WV	77.5	77.5	71.8	65.9	58.9	
WY	66.9	69.2	67.7	63.4	62.1	
MEDIAN	69.9	68.5	63.1	62.5	59.2	
MAX	86.8	84.5	87.1	88.9	76.7	
MIN	42.6	48.6	45.6	41.3	32.5	
*Excluding wind‑down records	

BRFSS UPPER BOUND RESPONSE RATE ESTIMATES*
BY STATE, 1994-1998
State	1994	1995	1996	1997	1998	
	Rate	Rate	Rate	Rate	Rate	
AK	84.7	80.0	75.3	74.4	68.2	
AL	80.0	79.9	80.6	75.2	69.4	
AR	81.4	76.0	73.1	78.7	74.5	
AZ	74.6	73.6	81.9	92.6	95.4	
CA	77.6	70.3	66.9	64.6	83.0	
CO	86.0	86.1	83.2	76.2	79.2	
CT	88.0	78.9	77.7	74.5	65.5	
DC	88.3	88.3	82.1	82.1	76.9	
DE	89.4	89.8	85.1	80.2	73.2	
FL	77.4	77.1	70.0	64.7	45.4	
GA	68.5	83.4	93.5	86.7	60.6	
HI	79.8	82.2	82.2	74.8	73.3	
IA	82.3	86.9	85.7	86.9	84.0	
ID	77.8	76.0	69.8	69.8	68.0	
IL	83.0	73.2	54.1	64.0	62.1	
IN	85.5	86.5	82.5	74.3	57.7	
KS	93.8	89.9	92.5	92.2	88.3	
KY	88.5	87.1	84.1	86.6	80.6	
LA	76.8	77.4	74.6	77.1	76.7	
MA	72.6	69.1	68.2	67.0	59.0	
MD	72.4	75.7	60.1	65.4	74.6	
ME	83.0	83.8	78.2	82.7	87.3	
MI	66.1	80.1	63.6	62.3	59.4	
MN	84.9	92.9	89.0	92.1	92.8	
MO	73.6	68.6	68.6	81.6	73.4	
MS	85.2	85.3	81.2	79.5	71.8	
MT	88.1	88.7	88.6	86.2	86.6	
NC	82.5	86.8	81.8	78.2	76.2	
ND	95.4	95.0	94.4	92.4	88.6	
NE	83.2	80.4	83.7	77.6	78.6	
NH	76.7	78.7	77.3	73.9	74.0	
NJ	86.5	86.7	76.5	73.9	61.9	
NM	61.9	60.5	69.5	76.2	75.6	
NV	86.6	90.4	87.1	86.1	79.1	
NY	74.9	72.4	62.3	67.1	62.2	
OH	79.4	81.4	83.2	76.8	69.4	
OK	75.2	79.2	78.5	79.0	70.0	
OR	76.9	67.9	67.1	64.1	53.7	
PA	70.3	69.0	78.0	73.4	63.6	
PR				92.7	89.4	
RI	78.8	76.9	70.6	70.6	63.7	
SC	84.2	83.9	75.9	85.6	68.6	
SD	90.6	89.0	86.1	80.1	79.6	
TN	77.7	79.7	75.0	72.2	66.8	
TX	73.4	75.6	74.0	67.3	50.5	
UT	87.7	87.4	88.3	87.0	84.1	
VA	76.2	75.9	76.4	75.8	73.6	
VT	88.3	89.3	87.4	86.8	79.6	
WA	73.5	72.0	66.4	65.6	60.6	
WI	78.4	74.5	72.5	73.2	71.8	
WV	85.0	85.0	81.2	78.2	76.9	
WY	81.4	79.5	77.9	74.9	71.1	
MEDIAN	80.7	80.0	78.1	76.8	73.4	
MAX	95.4	95.0	94.4	92.7	95.4	
MIN	61.9	60.5	54.1	62.3	45.4	
*Excluding wind‑down records		

BRFSS EFFICIENCY RATES
BY STATE, 1994-1998
State	1994	1995	1996	1997	1998	
	Rate	Rate	Rate	Rate	Rate	
AK	23.8	22.4	23.7	23.3	13.6	
AL	45.2	40.6	37.0	28.8	18.6	
AR	38.2	35.6	19.8	20.0	15.8	
AZ	33.3	31.5	32.2	32.1	14.8	
CA	36.1	31.5	33.6	30.5	19.9	
CO	31.4	29.0	28.6	29.3	18.1	
CT	49.5	26.3	20.1	20.2	17.9	
DC	29.1	29.1	19.1	22.6	9.2	
DE	40.0	38.8	34.0	29.5	18.0	
FL	36.1	30.3	26.3	23.5	14.8	
GA	29.0	38.2	46.3	40.5	18.5	
HI	22.6	17.9	17.9	32.4	40.6	
IA	39.4	41.1	40.0	38.8	13.8	
ID	27.0	31.5	28.4	24.5	18.8	
IL	27.0	23.6	21.9	21.2	20.3	
IN	39.3	41.6	37.2	26.4	19.3	
KS	60.6	54.3	59.7	59.7	16.3	
KY	30.3	35.4	29.0	33.1	23.6	
LA	35.8	33.6	30.0	27.6	25.9	
MA	35.5	25.1	23.3	17.4	15.8	
MD	28.2	27.5	27.3	25.3	20.5	
ME	36.5	35.4	33.2	32.3	15.3	
MI	21.9	10.4	19.1	17.9	16.0	
MN	40.8	34.5	33.4	34.7	36.8	
MO	28.8	22.7	24.6	23.5	24.6	
MS	37.5	42.5	35.2	35.9	23.0	
MT	35.0	36.0	34.8	31.0	30.9	
NC	29.8	30.7	27.8	27.7	19.5	
ND	44.3	43.6	43.2	38.4	34.7	
NE	29.8	19.3	17.7	19.1	26.8	
NH	25.9	26.4	26.3	24.0	21.2	
NJ	53.8	45.5	16.9	19.5	15.0	
NM	25.8	24.9	27.0	29.3	18.9	
NV	42.7	58.8	54.9	24.9	14.3	
NY	27.5	24.0	21.2	22.7	15.7	
OH	29.6	29.7	28.6	25.8	16.7	
OK	23.6	30.0	25.6	32.4	17.3	
OR	32.4	25.9	21.9	19.8	13.7	
PA	36.3	32.2	20.2	22.6	19.1	
PR				52.2	32.79	
RI	40.7	29.6	25.9	21.9	18.1	
SC	31.6	30.4	26.1	21.7	16.5	
SD	48.5	39.5	37.5	33.5	31.0	
TN	30.1	35.3	30.2	24.7	25.0	
TX	32.4	31.0	30.4	25.5	13.7	
UT	34.7	33.3	34.1	31.3	29.3	
VA	36.1	33.6	18.7	20.1	20.2	
VT	46.3	35.0	19.0	21.1	14.7	
WA	41.2	37.9	22.8	24.4	18.5	
WI	26.8	27.0	24.6	23.1	21.8	
WV	42.1	42.5	41.3	35.9	33.9	
WY	28.7	27.6	29.4	24.9	20.1	
MEDIAN	34.9	31.5	28.1	25.5	18.8	
MAX	60.6	58.8	59.7	59.7	40.6	
MIN	21.9	10.4	16.9	17.4	9.2	

BRFSS AAPOR COOPERATION RATE ONE*
BY STATE, 1994-1998
State	1994	1995	1996	1997	1998	
	Rate	Rate	Rate	Rate	Rate	
AK	71.7	64.5	63.0	60.2	58.6	
AL	75.3	74.4	71.1	61.9	55.2	
AR	71.6	65.7	63.2	67.7	69.6	
AZ	65.1	65.7	75.0	83.6	68.2	
CA	66.5	57.7	55.3	51.1	65.6	
CO	73.5	76.5	75.1	67.8	65.9	
CT	84.9	67.5	64.1	62.9	62.5	
DC	75.4	75.4	61.9	66.2	60.6	
DE	79.3	77.6	74.0	70.4	66.7	
FL	67.2	55.0	58.9	51.8	38.3	
GA	66.5	81.3	91.4	80.7	52.9	
HI	59.0	50.9	50.9	52.4	57.6	
IA	77.6	75.4	76.5	70.0	64.4	
ID	66.7	71.0	62.0	60.1	60.2	
IL	62.7	56.7	46.1	46.8	52.4	
IN	75.7	79.2	73.7	63.2	55.0	
KS	86.7	81.3	85.0	85.3	77.7	
KY	72.4	71.5	66.4	70.9	64.7	
LA	70.4	70.6	65.5	66.2	63.5	
MA	67.0	62.7	59.2	53.4	55.1	
MD	63.9	66.3	55.1	62.2	56.3	
ME	75.1	71.1	67.8	65.9	68.0	
MI	49.0	57.8	55.8	50.5	49.1	
MN	75.2	82.3	81.3	83.8	83.6	
MO	65.7	61.3	60.5	55.9	59.5	
MS	70.3	73.0	71.5	69.3	64.3	
MT	74.4	76.8	76.5	74.3	75.0	
NC	71.8	71.4	71.1	66.4	65.2	
ND	85.8	83.3	86.3	82.5	80.2	
NE	74.4	71.4	74.1	65.8	66.8	
NH	62.2	64.5	63.9	56.0	51.5	
NJ	85.0	84.6	57.7	55.5	57.9	
NM	54.7	55.5	65.0	67.8	67.2	
NV	77.7	79.8	78.0	72.1	59.9	
NY	56.9	53.1	47.4	50.0	56.3	
OH	66.5	71.0	75.1	61.7	55.4	
OK	66.0	73.8	72.2	72.1	65.4	
OR	65.6	56.1	56.5	54.4	46.5	
PA	67.7	66.5	65.5	62.3	61.8	
PR				90.1	80.9	
RI	75.2	69.9	61.4	57.2	59.8	
SC	79.2	79.9	71.6	73.2	66.6	
SD	82.2	82.3	79.4	73.0	73.3	
TN	72.2	73.6	68.6	65.2	62.5	
TX	60.4	63.7	61.5	56.6	42.9	
UT	75.2	76.4	80.8	74.1	71.4	
VA	66.0	62.5	59.9	59.0	60.2	
VT	81.0	81.0	76.2	75.7	77.4	
WA	65.2	63.1	55.3	54.2	50.1	
WI	75.3	72.4	69.8	70.5	68.8	
WV	76.9	77.3	72.4	66.0	65.4	
WY	66.1	71.7	70.5	65.5	64.2	
MEDIAN	71.7	71.4	68.2	65.9	63.5	
MAX	86.7	84.6	91.4	90.1	83.6	
MIN	49.0	50.9	46.1	46.8	38.3	
*Excluding wind‑down records	

BRFSS WIND-DOWN RATES
BY STATE, 1994-1998

State	1994	1995	1996	1997	1998	
	Rate	Rate	Rate	Rate	Rate	
AK	5.9	5.8	6.6	8.7	6.9	
FL	3.0	3.5	2.9	3.6	3.1	
LA	4.3	4.2	3.7	3.9	3.9	
MN	5.5	3.1	1.6	2.0	2.0	
MO	0.0	6.7	5.9	5.3	5.8	
MT	4.4	4.8	4.3	4.5	4.8	
ND	4.1	5.3	4.8	4.8	4.7	
NH	7.7	6.9	6.7	6.9	9.5	
SD	6.1	10.1	7.8	3.8	4.5	
TN	4.7	6.7	7.7	7.1	9.5	
UT	4.9	6.1	4.7	3.9	4.5	
WV	5.3	5.0	5.0	5.0	5.0	
Median	4.8	5.5	4.9	4.6	4.7	
Low	0.0	3.1	1.6	2.0	2.0	
High	7.7	10.1	7.8	8.7	9.5	

TABLE 1: 
PERCENTAGE OF RECORDS WITH A CLUSTER SIZE OF THREE, WAKSBERG STATES, 1994-1998

STATE	1994	1995	1996	1997	1998	MEAN	
Louisiana	97.2%	99.8%	100.0%	100.0%	100.0%	99.4%	
Minnesota 	100.0%	97.3%	93.6%	99.6%	99.9%	98.1%	
North Dakota 	100.0%	100.0%	97.9%	99.7%	99.7%	99.5%	
Montana	95.0%	98.3%	99.7%	99.5%	99.4%	98.4%	
West Virginia	96.2%	98.0%	99.5%	98.7%	97.6%	98.0%	
Tennessee	99.6%	100.0%	99.7%	99.5%	97.3%	99.2%	
South Dakota 	89.3%	94.5%	97.3%	82.2%	97.0%	92.1%	
Missouri	98.9%	83.4%	95.4%	98.6%	95.3%	94.3%	
New Hampshire 	92.1%	93.1%	95.7%	96.5%	94.1%	94.3%	
Utah 	90.6%	96.6%	97.4%	97.5%	93.4%	95.1%	
Florida	98.8%	89.7%	98.8%	99.6%	90.9%	95.6%	

TABLE 2: DISCREPANCY IN PERCENTAGE FEMALE BETWEEN THE WEIGHTED*
SAMPLE DATA AND POPULATION DATA BY STATE, 1994-1998

STATE	1994	1995	1996	1997	1998	MEAN	
Tennessee 	5.0	3.9	7.2	11.0	12.0	7.8	
Alabama 	10.4	8.5	9.7	7.5	11.1	9.4	
Kentucky 	7.5	6.5	7.8	8.5	8.5	7.8	
Missouri 	8.9	7.3	4.6	7.1	8.3	7.2	
Georgia 	3.3	3.0	3.1	3.9	8.2	4.3	
Arkansas 	7.3	4.5	7.7	8.2	8.0	7.1	
Kansas 	3.2	2.1	3.9	7.1	7.9	4.8	
Mississippi 	5.7	4.6	7.9	6.6	7.6	6.5	
Maryland 	3.9	5.4	4.7	2.8	7.3	4.8	
Alaska 	4.7	6.3	6.1	4.7	7.2	5.8	
Oklahoma 	3.8	1.3	2.7	3.5	7.1	3.7	
Nebraska 	7.8	5.2	7.0	7.8	7.1	7.0	
Wyoming 	5.7	6.2	6.5	6.4	7.1	6.4	
Louisiana 	7.5	5.5	5.4	7.5	6.7	6.5	
Oregon 	4.2	4.1	5.0	4.1	6.6	4.8	
New Hampshire 	5.0	4.6	4.0	7.5	6.6	5.5	
Rhode Island 	.	0.5	2.2	4.7	6.5	3.5	
North Carolina 	2.9	5.5	4.7	5.8	6.5	5.1	
District of Columbia 	2.4	.	5.0	7.2	6.4	5.3	
Iowa 	1.7	4.4	4.0	4.5	6.4	4.2	
Florida 	3.9	4.8	6.1	5.3	6.4	5.3	
Texas 	6.9	9.4	8.5	6.2	6.4	7.5	
Hawaii 	5.9	5.0	.	6.4	6.3	5.9	
Puerto Rico 	.	.	5.4	2.5	6.0	4.7	
Idaho 	6.5	7.6	6.2	6.2	6.0	6.5	
Pennsylvania 	3.3	2.0	2.8	6.0	5.8	4.0	
Michigan 	4.9	6.4	4.3	3.7	5.6	5.0	
Connecticut 	8.8	3.6	7.3	6.5	5.6	6.4	
West Virginia 	5.4	7.1	6.9	5.2	5.4	6.0	
Maine 	-0.1	2.5	3.6	1.8	5.4	2.6	
Ohio 	7.3	7.6	5.9	6.7	5.4	6.6	
Utah 	4.2	3.6	2.8	2.2	5.2	3.6	
Arizona 	5.8	9.1	5.2	-0.2	5.1	5.0	
California 	4.5	2.7	5.2	4.7	5.1	4.4	
New Jersey 	7.4	12.6	3.3	7.5	5.1	7.2	
Indiana 	3.4	1.8	3.2	2.1	5.0	3.1	
Delaware 	5.8	8.0	7.1	7.0	5.0	6.6	
New Mexico 	9.2	9.1	7.9	4.9	4.2	7.1	
South Carolina 	2.7	4.9	5.0	8.5	3.9	5.0	
Massachusetts 	4.5	3.6	4.2	5.0	3.8	4.2	
Montana 	5.8	5.4	4.5	4.6	3.8	4.8	
Washington 	3.1	4.4	6.3	5.5	3.8	4.6	
Virginia 	3.7	6.7	8.7	5.5	3.6	5.7	
New York 	4.4	4.5	4.9	5.5	3.4	4.5	
Illinois 	6.0	5.5	6.3	5.4	3.2	5.3	
North Dakota 	2.0	2.9	6.2	2.3	3.0	3.3	
Colorado 	3.6	4.2	3.9	2.5	2.8	3.4	
Nevada 	13.6	11.4	6.5	6.3	2.6	8.1	
South Dakota 	3.9	3.3	3.4	2.8	2.6	3.2	
Vermont 	4.1	5.0	3.2	2.6	2.5	3.5	
Wisconsin 	2.3	1.0	2.6	2.7	2.4	2.2	
Minnesota 	2.4	2.4	2.9	1.3	-0.3	1.8	

* WEIGHTED PROBABILITY OF SELECTION (NUMBER OF PHONES, NUMBER OF ADULTS, AND SELECTION OF TELEPHONE NUMBERS BY STRATUM)

TABLE 3: DISCREPANCY BETWEEN WEIGHTED*
SAMPLE AND POPULATION BY AGE CATEGORY AND STATE, 1998

STATE	PERCENTAGE POINT DIFFERENCE	
	18-24	25-34	35-44	45-54	55-64	65+	
Alabama	-2.3	-3.4	1.3	1.8	1.7	1.0	
Alaska 	-0.2	-0.9	-1.4	3.9	-0.7	-0.7	
Arizona	-1.6	2.6	-1.8	-0.5	-1.3	2.6	
Arkansas 	-1.9	-0.7	0.8	1.8	1.5	-1.5	
California 	0.3	2.0	0.8	0.8	-1.2	-2.7	
Colorado 	0.8	1.1	-1.7	0.4	0.0	-0.6	
Connecticut 	-1.2	0.8	2.5	0.1	0.4	-2.6	
Delaware 	-2.5	-0.2	0.8	0.8	0.1	0.9	
District of Columbia 	0.0	1.6	-4.1	1.6	-0.8	1.6	
Florida	0.2	-0.2	-0.2	-0.4	1.3	-0.7	
Georgia	-1.4	0.8	0.0	1.5	0.6	-1.4	
Hawaii 	-1.4	0.4	0.9	4.2	-1.3	-2.9	
Idaho 	-1.6	0.7	1.0	1.2	0.5	-1.9	
Illinois 	-0.1	1.1	2.3	1.2	-0.3	-4.1	
Indiana	-1.1	0.6	0.5	2.7	-0.2	-2.5	
Iowa 	-2.2	0.0	2.4	1.2	1.6	-3.0	
Kansas 	-2.8	-0.5	1.3	1.1	-0.4	1.3	
Kentucky 	-2.5	-0.7	0.7	1.2	1.4	-0.1	
Louisiana 	-2.0	-0.9	2.1	1.6	0.1	-0.9	
Maine 	-5.0	0.1	1.5	2.9	1.1	-0.7	
Maryland 	0.9	-0.2	2.7	-1.3	-0.8	-1.4	
Massachusetts 	-1.8	2.9	2.8	0.9	-1.4	-3.3	
Michigan 	0.9	-0.6	3.0	0.6	-1.0	-3.0	
Minnesota 	-2.0	0.6	4.7	0.2	-0.1	-3.4	
Mississippi 	-3.6	-0.8	0.9	1.8	2.0	-0.3	
Missouri 	-2.1	-0.1	1.1	0.9	1.1	-0.8	
Montana	-0.2	-1.2	0.5	1.0	0.8	-0.8	
Nebraska 	-1.8	-2.9	-0.6	1.2	0.3	3.8	
Nevada 	3.3	0.0	2.4	-1.9	-2.2	-1.6	
New Hampshire 	-2.5	-0.8	0.7	2.4	0.3	-0.1	
New Jersey 	-1.5	1.0	0.1	1.7	0.1	-1.4	
New Mexico 	-0.8	-1.0	-0.5	1.9	1.5	-1.1	
New York 	0.8	1.6	1.7	-0.2	-2.1	-1.8	
North Carolina 	-4.3	1.5	1.6	0.5	1.4	-0.8	
North Dakota 	-1.5	-3.0	1.2	2.0	-0.1	1.4	
Ohio 	-2.8	0.4	0.0	1.6	0.3	0.5	
Oklahoma 	-3.4	-1.0	0.0	1.1	-0.1	3.4	
Oregon 	-0.2	2.5	-1.6	2.2	1.6	-4.5	
Pennsylvania 	-0.9	1.7	1.4	0.6	1.1	-3.9	
Rhode Island 	-2.4	2.2	2.1	1.9	0.0	-3.8	
South Carolina 	-1.7	1.3	0.1	1.8	0.4	-2.0	
South Dakota 	-3.1	-2.3	1.2	1.6	0.4	2.2	
Tennessee 	-2.7	-0.9	2.3	1.5	1.2	-1.5	
Texas 	-0.9	-0.5	3.2	0.9	0.1	-2.9	
Utah 	2.8	1.9	-1.9	-1.8	-0.1	-0.8	
Vermont	-4.1	0.2	-0.2	4.2	0.5	-0.6	
Virginia 	-2.3	2.0	1.7	0.4	0.4	-2.3	
Washington 	0.2	0.0	1.9	1.9	0.0	-3.9	
West Virginia 	-2.1	-2.5	2.9	1.9	1.2	-1.4	
Wisconsin 	-2.9	0.3	4.3	0.6	1.6	-3.8	
Wyoming	0.2	-1.7	1.6	1.6	0.2	-1.9	

* WEIGHTED PROBABILITY OF SELECTION(NUMBER OF PHONES, NUMBER OF ADULTS AND SELECTION OF TELEPHONE NUMBERS BY STRATUM) 
BASE FOR SAMPLE PERCENTAGES IS RESPONDENTS WITH AGE NOT MISSING

TABLE 4: DISCREPANCY IN PERCENTAGE WHITE BETWEEN THE WEIGHTED*
SAMPLE DATA AND POPULATION DATA BY STATE, 1997-1998

STATE	1997	1998	MEAN	
District of Columbia 	5.0	6.8	5.9	
Alaska 	-2.9	4.1	0.6	
Indiana 	-1.1	3.1	1.0	
Hawaii 	-0.4	0.9	0.2	
New Mexico 	0.0	0.5	0.3	
Maine 	0.1	0.5	0.3	
Maryland 	-5.1	0.5	-2.3	
New Hampshire 	0.2	0.3	0.2	
Florida 	-1.9	0.2	-0.8	
Georgia 	-1.4	0.0	-0.7	
Idaho 	0.1	-0.2	0.0	
Vermont 	1.0	-0.3	0.4	
Minnesota 	-1.0	-0.3	-0.7	
Rhode Island 	-1.8	-0.3	-1.1	
Colorado 	-1.5	-0.4	-0.9	
Iowa 	-1.0	-0.4	-0.7	
West Virginia 	-1.3	-0.6	-0.9	
Connecticut 	-2.2	-0.6	-1.4	
North Dakota 	-0.8	-0.6	-0.7	
Alabama 	-2.7	-0.6	-1.7	
Kentucky 	-0.3	-0.7	-0.5	
Montana 	-0.8	-1.0	-0.9	
Kansas 	-0.6	-1.0	-0.8	
Virginia 	-3.0	-1.0	-2.0	
Ohio 	1.9	-1.1	0.4	
Missouri 	0.0	-1.1	-0.5	
Wisconsin 	-0.8	-1.2	-1.0	
Utah 	-1.8	-1.3	-1.5	
Massachusetts 	-1.9	-1.4	-1.7	
Wyoming 	-0.4	-1.5	-0.9	
Oregon 	-0.4	-1.5	-1.0	
Arkansas 	-1.1	-1.7	-1.4	
Texas 	0.3	-1.8	-0.8	
South Dakota 	0.1	-1.8	-0.9	
New Jersey 	-3.4	-2.0	-2.7	
Nebraska 	-1.4	-2.1	-1.7	
Pennsylvania 	-1.2	-2.2	-1.7	
Michigan 	-1.9	-2.3	-2.1	
North Carolina 	0.8	-2.4	-0.8	
Washington 	-1.8	-2.6	-2.2	
Tennessee 	-1.2	-2.7	-1.9	
Illinois 	-3.4	-2.9	-3.1	
New York 	-2.7	-3.1	-2.9	
Arizona 	-4.2	-3.2	-3.7	
Nevada 	-1.5	-3.3	-2.4	
Delaware 	-1.8	-3.4	-2.6	
Oklahoma 	-3.3	-3.5	-3.4	
Mississippi 	-2.8	-4.8	-3.8	
South Carolina 	-1.3	-5.4	-3.4	
California 	-5.1	-5.5	-5.3	
Louisiana 	-3.7	-5.5	-4.6	

* WEIGHTED PROBABILITY OF SELECTION (NUMBER OF PHONES, NUMBER OF ADULTS, AND SELECTION OF TELEPHONE NUMBERS BY STRATUM)
BASE FOR SAMPLE PERCENTAGES IS RESPONDENTS WITH WHITE, BLACK, ASIAN/PACIFIC ISLANDER, OR NATIVE AMERICAN/ALASKA NATIVE

TABLE 5: DISCREPANCY IN PERCENTAGE BLACK BETWEEN THE WEIGHTED*
SAMPLE DATA AND POPULATION DATA BY STATE, 1997-1998

STATE	1997	1998	MEAN	
South Carolina 	1.2	5.8	3.5	
Louisiana 	4.2	4.9	4.5	
Mississippi 	2.7	4.5	3.6	
Michigan 	3.0	3.4	3.2	
New York 	2.1	3.2	2.7	
New Jersey 	3.2	2.9	3.0	
Illinois 	3.1	2.8	3.0	
Arkansas 	2.4	2.6	2.5	
Tennessee 	0.9	2.5	1.7	
Delaware 	1.7	2.3	2.0	
North Carolina 	-0.7	2.1	0.7	
Texas 	0.8	2.0	1.4	
Wisconsin 	1.3	1.9	1.6	
Pennsylvania 	1.2	1.9	1.5	
Nevada 	0.9	1.8	1.3	
Massachusetts 	1.3	1.7	1.5	
Hawaii 	0.3	1.7	1.0	
Alaska 	1.1	1.5	1.3	
Nebraska 	1.1	1.4	1.2	
Ohio 	-1.8	1.1	-0.4	
Oregon 	0.6	1.1	0.8	
Colorado 	1.6	1.1	1.3	
Connecticut 	2.7	1.1	1.9	
Washington 	0.7	0.9	0.8	
Alabama 	3.0	0.9	2.0	
California 	2.4	0.9	1.6	
Missouri 	0.1	0.8	0.4	
Arizona 	1.6	0.7	1.1	
Oklahoma 	1.5	0.7	1.1	
Kansas 	-0.3	0.6	0.2	
West Virginia 	1.0	0.5	0.8	
Wyoming 	-0.1	0.4	0.2	
Kentucky 	-0.1	0.4	0.2	
Rhode Island	1.1	0.3	0.7	
Vermont 	-0.2	0.3	0.1	
Utah 	0.4	0.3	0.4	
Iowa 	0.8	0.3	0.5	
North Dakota 	-0.1	0.2	0.1	
Idaho 	0.2	0.2	0.2	
New Mexico 	0.2	0.2	0.2	
Montana 	-0.1	0.1	0.0	
South Dakota 	-0.3	0.0	-0.2	
New Hampshire 	0.2	-0.1	0.0	
Virginia 	3.4	-0.1	1.6	
Maine 	-0.1	-0.3	-0.2	
Minnesota 	0.1	-0.6	-0.2	
Florida 	2.1	-0.7	0.7	
Georgia 	0.8	-0.9	-0.1	
Maryland 	3.9	-1.2	1.4	
Indiana 	2.0	-1.4	0.3	
District of Columbia 	-6.8	-8.5	-7.6	

* WEIGHTED PROBABILITY OF SELECTION (NUMBER OF PHONES, NUMBER OF ADULTS, AND SELECTION OF TELEPHONE NUMBERS BY STRATUM)
BASE FOR SAMPLE PERCENTAGES IS RESPONDENTS WITH WHITE, BLACK, ASIAN/PACIFIC ISLANDER, OR NATIVE AMERICAN/ALASKA NATIVE

TABLE 6: DISCREPANCY IN PERCENTAGE HISPANIC BETWEEN THE WEIGHTED*
SAMPLE DATA AND POPULATION DATA BY STATE, 1997-1998

STATE	1997	1998	MEAN	
Hawaii 	8.1	9.3	8.7	
Colorado 	1.0	3.6	2.3	
New Mexico 	2.4	2.7	2.6	
Texas 	2.1	2.5	2.3	
Alabama 	1.4	2.3	1.9	
Louisiana 	2.1	2.3	2.2	
California 	2.7	2.1	2.4	
Oregon 	-0.4	1.7	0.7	
Arizona 	-1.7	1.7	0.0	
Virginia 	1.2	1.6	1.4	
North Carolina 	1.0	1.4	1.2	
Mississippi 	0.9	1.3	1.1	
Florida 	1.1	1.3	1.2	
Kansas 	1.3	1.3	1.3	
Maine 	0.6	1.2	0.9	
West Virginia 	1.2	1.1	1.2	
Minnesota	1.1	1.1	1.1	
Missouri	0.5	1.0	0.8	
Illinois	1.5	1.0	1.2	
South Carolina	1.0	1.0	1.0	
Montana 	1.4	0.9	1.2	
Indiana 	0.9	0.9	0.9	
Maryland 	-0.9	0.8	0.0	
North Dakota 	0.2	0.8	0.5	
Alaska 	1.2	0.7	1.0	
New Hampshire 	0.3	0.7	0.5	
Tennessee 	0.7	0.5	0.6	
Iowa 	0.6	0.5	0.5	
Michigan 	0.7	0.5	0.6	
Vermont 	1.0	0.5	0.7	
Wyoming 	0.1	0.4	0.3	
Ohio 	0.2	0.4	0.3	
Pennsylvania 	0.1	0.4	0.2	
Arkansas 	2.0	0.4	1.2	
Kentucky 	-0.2	0.3	0.0	
Georgia 	0.3	0.2	0.2	
South Dakota 	1.6	0.1	0.9	
Rhode Island 	-2.3	0.1	-1.1	
Oklahoma 	0.3	-0.2	0.1	
Connecticut 	-0.2	-0.2	-0.2	
Wisconsin 	0.0	-0.3	-0.1	
Utah 	0.8	-0.3	0.3	
Washington 	0.3	-0.4	0.0	
Massachusetts 	-0.5	-0.5	-0.5	
Delaware 	-0.3	-0.7	-0.5	
Nebraska 	-0.3	-1.2	-0.8	
Idaho 	-0.6	-1.9	-1.2	
New Jersey 	-1.9	-2.0	-1.9	
New York 	-4.1	-3.1	-3.6	
District of Columbia 	-4.7	-3.2	-4.0	
Nevada 	-2.5	-3.3	-2.9	

* WEIGHTED PROBABILITY OF SELECTION (NUMBER OF PHONES, NUMBER OF ADULTS,
  AND SELECTION OF TELEPHONE NUMBERS     BY STRATUM)
BASE FOR SAMPLE PERCENTAGES IS RESPONDENTS WITH HISPANIC ORIGIN NOT MISSING

TABLE 7: PERCENT OF HISPANICS CODED OTHER RACE BY STATE, 1997-1998

STATE	1997	1998	MEAN	
	HISPANICS	HISPANICS		
	RACE = OTHER	RACE = OTHER		
	%	%		
Arizona 	27.5	54.9	41.2	
Nevada 	50.5	52.2	51.3	
Nebraska 	46.8	44.3	45.5	
New York 	21.2	42.1	31.6	
Kansas 	17.9	40.6	29.3	
Connecticut 	23.5	39.8	31.6	
Massachusetts 	33.3	39.8	36.6	
Maryland 	20.5	39.6	30.0	
New Jersey 	35.0	36.5	35.7	
Virginia 	15.4	35.0	25.2	
New Mexico 	54.3	34.1	44.2	
Michigan 	32.3	32.3	32.3	
Oklahoma 	27.8	31.7	29.7	
Rhode Island	32.7	31.4	32.0	
South Dakota 	19.1	30.4	24.8	
Texas 	61.4	30.3	45.8	
Pennsylvania 	22.2	29.2	25.7	
Ohio 	17.1	29.1	23.1	
Wyoming 	43.9	26.2	35.1	
Georgia 	31.4	25.4	28.4	
Minnesota 	19.3	23.8	21.5	
Colorado 	37.6	23.3	30.4	
Oregon 	50.0	20.9	35.4	
Missouri 	37.5	20.0	28.8	
Indiana 	35.8	18.6	27.2	
North Carolina 	26.8	18.0	22.4	
Hawaii 	26.3	16.4	21.4	
Idaho 	41.8	16.4	29.1	
Louisiana 	21.4	16.0	18.7	
Montana 	13.6	15.9	14.8	
New Hampshire 	20.0	14.8	17.4	
District of Columbia 	17.1	14.5	15.8	
Iowa 	18.8	14.1	16.4	
Wisconsin 	35.1	14.0	24.5	
Kentucky 	15.4	13.8	14.6	
South Carolina 	33.3	13.1	23.2	
Mississippi 	15.4	12.0	13.7	
Alabama 	14.6	10.5	12.6	
Illinois 	0.4	10.5	5.5	
Delaware 	15.7	10.0	12.8	
Tennessee 	10.6	9.1	9.9	
Utah 	28.9	8.1	18.5	
North Dakota 	15.4	7.1	11.3	
Washington 	6.6	6.5	6.5	
Alaska 	7.6	6.3	7.0	
California 	0.0	5.4	2.7	
Vermont 	9.6	4.4	7.0	
Arkansas 	0.0	3.8	1.9	
Florida 	5.0	3.2	4.1	
Maine 	5.9	0.0	2.9	
West Virginia 	5.0	0.0	2.5	
STATE	%	%	MEAN	

BASE FOR PERCENTAGES IS RESPONDENTS WITH HISPANIC ORIGIN EQUAL TO ONE

TABLE 8: PERCENT COMPLETED INTERVIEWS MISSING INCOME2 BY STATE, 1998

STATE	PERCENT*	Z-SCORE	N	
Arizona 	25.4	3.1	486	
Oklahoma 	20.4	2.2	512	
Maryland 	19.6	2.0	647	
New York 	19.5	2.0	492	
Connecticut 	16.6	1.5	520	
Pennsylvania 	16.2	1.4	583	
Rhode Island	16.1	1.4	580	
New Jersey 	15.2	1.2	375	
Tennessee 	14.5	1.1	428	
Massachusetts 	14.4	1.1	710	
South Carolina 	14.3	1.1	471	
Montana 	12.0	0.6	216	
Vermont 	11.1	0.5	332	
Kansas 	10.9	0.4	415	
Arkansas 	10.5	0.4	315	
North Carolina 	10.4	0.4	250	
Delaware 	9.5	0.2	246	
Washington 	9.5	0.2	341	
Kentucky 	9.0	0.1	334	
Ohio 	7.9	-0.1	235	
West Virginia 	7.5	-0.2	182	
Nebraska 	7.5	-0.2	203	
Missouri 	7.2	-0.2	267	
Florida 	6.8	-0.3	322	
Indiana 	6.8	-0.3	165	
Michigan 	6.6	-0.3	168	
New Hampshire 	6.6	-0.3	99	
Virginia 	6.1	-0.4	214	
Louisiana 	6.0	-0.4	100	
South Dakota 	6.0	-0.4	127	
Hawaii 	6.0	-0.5	129	
Maine 	5.7	-0.5	92	
Nevada 	5.7	-0.5	112	
Alabama 	5.3	-0.6	119	
Illinois 	5.2	-0.6	150	
Mississippi 	5.0	-0.6	116	
Iowa 	4.8	-0.7	177	
Utah 	4.6	-0.7	132	
Georgia 	4.5	-0.7	107	
Wisconsin 	4.4	-0.7	98	
New Mexico 	4.2	-0.8	151	
California 	4.1	-0.8	171	
Oregon 	4.0	-0.8	73	
Idaho 	4.0	-0.8	196	
Colorado 	3.9	-0.8	71	
Texas 	3.8	-0.9	226	
Wyoming 	3.5	-0.9	86	
Alaska 	3.4	-0.9	68	
North Dakota 	2.9	-1.0	53	
Minnesota 	2.6	-1.1	108	
District of Columbia 	1.8	-1.2	26	
Puerto Rico 	0.9	-1.4	25	

* WEIGHTED PROBABILITY OF SELECTION (NUMBER OF PHONES, NUMBER OF ADULTS, AND SELECTION OF TELEPHONE NUMBERS    BY STRATUM)

TABLE 9: PERCENT COMPLETED INTERVIEWS MISSING AGE BY STATE, 1998

STATE	PERCENT*	Z-SCORE	N	
New York 	1.5	3.2	38	
Connecticut 	1.5	3.2	47	
Massachusetts 	1.2	2.3	60	
New Jersey 	1.1	1.9	26	
Vermont 	1.0	1.6	29	
Rhode Island	0.8	1.1	29	
Pennsylvania 	0.8	1.1	28	
New Hampshire 	0.7	0.9	11	
Arkansas 	0.7	0.7	20	
Virginia 	0.6	0.6	22	
Louisiana 	0.6	0.6	10	
Kansas 	0.6	0.5	22	
District of Columbia 	0.6	0.4	8	
Tennessee 	0.5	0.4	16	
Hawaii 	0.5	0.3	11	
South Carolina 	0.5	0.2	16	
Maryland 	0.5	0.2	16	
Utah 	0.4	0.0	12	
Alaska 	0.4	0.0	8	
South Dakota 	0.4	-0.1	8	
North Carolina 	0.4	-0.1	9	
Colorado 	0.3	-0.2	6	
Nebraska 	0.3	-0.2	9	
Alabama 	0.3	-0.3	7	
Georgia 	0.3	-0.3	7	
West Virginia 	0.3	-0.3	7	
Indiana 	0.3	-0.3	7	
Michigan 	0.3	-0.4	7	
Wisconsin 	0.3	-0.4	6	
Missouri 	0.3	-0.4	10	
Texas 	0.3	-0.5	15	
Maine 	0.2	-0.5	4	
Florida 	0.2	-0.5	11	
Idaho 	0.2	-0.5	11	
Mississippi 	0.2	-0.5	5	
Arizona 	0.2	-0.6	4	
Nevada 	0.2	-0.6	4	
Ohio 	0.2	-0.6	6	
Oklahoma 	0.2	-0.6	5	
New Mexico 	0.2	-0.6	7	
Montana 	0.2	-0.7	3	
Oregon 	0.2	-0.7	3	
Illinois 	0.1	-0.8	4	
Washington 	0.1	-0.8	5	
Iowa 	0.1	-0.8	5	
Wyoming 	0.1	-0.8	3	
Kentucky 	0.1	-0.9	4	
Puerto Rico 	0.1	-1.0	2	
Minnesota	0.0	-1.0	2	
Delaware 	0.0	-1.1	1	
California 	0.0	-1.2	0	
North Dakota 	0.0	-1.2	0	

* WEIGHTED PROBABILITY OF SELECTION (NUMBER OF PHONES, NUMBER OF ADULTS, AND SELECTION OF TELEPHONE NUMBERS BY STRATUM)

TABLE 10: PERCENT COMPLETED INTERVIEWS MISSING EDUCATION  BY STATE, 1998

STATE	PERCENT*	Z-SCORE	N	
Arkansas 	1.4	4.7	41	
Connecticut 	0.7	1.7	21	
North Carolina 	0.6	1.5	15	
Maryland 	0.6	1.3	19	
New York 	0.6	1.2	14	
Ohio 	0.5	1.1	16	
New Jersey 	0.5	1.1	13	
Massachusetts 	0.5	1.1	26	
Nebraska 	0.5	1.1	14	
New Hampshire 	0.5	0.8	7	
Kansas 	0.4	0.5	15	
Pennsylvania 	0.4	0.5	14	
Tennessee 	0.4	0.4	11	
Mississippi 	0.3	0.3	8	
Vermont 	0.3	0.3	10	
Washington 	0.3	0.3	12	
Virginia 	0.3	0.2	11	
Arizona 	0.3	0.2	6	
California 	0.3	0.1	12	
Rhode Island	0.3	0.0	10	
District of Columbia 	0.3	0.0	4	
Georgia 	0.3	-0.1	6	
Alaska 	0.3	-0.1	5	
Kentucky 	0.2	-0.1	9	
Oklahoma 	0.2	-0.1	6	
Indiana 	0.2	-0.3	5	
Florida 	0.2	-0.3	9	
South Dakota 	0.2	-0.4	4	
Maine 	0.2	-0.4	3	
South Carolina 	0.2	-0.4	6	
Wisconsin 	0.2	-0.4	4	
Alabama 	0.2	-0.4	4	
Utah 	0.2	-0.4	5	
Iowa 	0.2	-0.5	6	
Michigan 	0.2	-0.5	4	
Nevada 	0.2	-0.5	3	
Puerto Rico 	0.1	-0.6	4	
West Virginia 	0.1	-0.6	3	
Minnesota 	0.1	-0.7	5	
Delaware 	0.1	-0.7	3	
Hawaii 	0.1	-0.8	2	
Wyoming 	0.1	-0.8	2	
Idaho 	0.1	-0.8	4	
Missouri 	0.1	-0.8	3	
Illinois 	0.1	-0.9	2	
Louisiana 	0.1	-0.9	1	
Montana 	0.1	-0.9	1	
New Mexico 	0.1	-0.9	2	
North Dakota 	0.1	-0.9	1	
Texas 	0.0	-1.0	2	
Colorado 	0.0	-1.2	0	
Oregon 	0.0	-1.2	0	

* WEIGHTED PROBABILITY OF SELECTION (NUMBER OF PHONES, NUMBER OF ADULTS, AND SELECTION OF TELEPHONE NUMBERS    BY STRATUM)

TABLE 11: PERCENT COMPLETED INTERVIEWS MISSING WEIGHT BY STATE, 1998

STATE	PERCENT*	Z-SCORE	N	
New Jersey 	4.3	2.3	105	
Massachusetts 	4.1	2.1	201	
Connecticut 	3.9	1.9	123	
Arkansas 	3.9	1.9	116	
Kansas 	3.5	1.5	133	
Washington 	3.4	1.4	122	
New York 	3.2	1.2	81	
Vermont 	3.2	1.2	95	
Rhode Island	3.1	1.1	111	
Pennsylvania 	3.1	1.1	110	
North Carolina 	3.0	1.1	73	
Ohio 	2.9	0.9	86	
South Carolina 	2.6	0.6	85	
New Hampshire 	2.5	0.6	38	
Oklahoma 	2.5	0.5	63	
Tennessee 	2.4	0.5	72	
Nevada 	2.4	0.4	47	
Maine 	2.3	0.3	37	
Nebraska 	2.3	0.3	62	
Montana 	2.2	0.2	40	
Maryland 	2.1	0.1	69	
Louisiana 	2.1	0.1	34	
Virginia 	2.0	0.0	70	
Mississippi 	2.0	0.0	46	
Kentucky 	2.0	0.0	73	
Delaware 	1.9	0.0	50	
Alabama 	1.8	-0.2	41	
Alaska 	1.8	-0.2	35	
Michigan 	1.7	-0.2	44	
Utah 	1.6	-0.4	45	
West Virginia 	1.5	-0.4	37	
Florida 	1.5	-0.5	71	
California 	1.4	-0.5	60	
Georgia 	1.4	-0.6	33	
Idaho 	1.4	-0.6	68	
Illinois 	1.4	-0.6	39	
Arizona 	1.3	-0.7	25	
Missouri 	1.3	-0.7	47	
North Dakota 	1.2	-0.8	22	
Oregon 	1.2	-0.8	21	
Iowa 	1.1	-0.8	42	
South Dakota 	1.1	-0.8	24	
Minnesota 	1.1	-0.9	46	
Indiana 	1.0	-0.9	25	
Wyoming 	1.0	-1.0	24	
New Mexico 	0.9	-1.0	34	
Wisconsin 	0.9	-1.1	19	
Texas 	0.8	-1.2	48	
Hawaii 	0.7	-1.2	16	
District of Columbia 	0.6	-1.4	8	
Colorado 	0.5	-1.5	9	
Puerto Rico 	0.0	-1.9	1	

* WEIGHTED PROBABILITY OF SELECTION (NUMBER OF PHONES, NUMBER OF ADULTS, AND SELECTION OF TELEPHONE NUMBER BY STRATUM)

TABLE 12: PERCENT COMPLETED INTERVIEWS MISSING ORACE (ORIGINAL RACE)
BY STATE, 1998

STATE	PERCENT*	Z-SCORE	N	
Ohio 	0.7	4.1	21	
District of Columbia 	0.6	3.1	8	
New Hampshire 	0.5	3.0	8	
Michigan 	0.5	2.6	12	
Mississippi 	0.2	1.0	5	
Utah 	0.2	0.9	6	
Alabama 	0.2	0.7	4	
Louisiana 	0.1	0.4	2	
Iowa 	0.1	0.3	4	
Kentucky 	0.1	0.3	4	
West Virginia 	0.1	0.1	2	
Alaska 	0.0	-0.4	0	
Arizona 	0.0	-0.4	0	
Arkansas 	0.0	-0.4	0	
California 	0.0	-0.4	0	
Colorado 	0.0	-0.4	0	
Connecticut 	0.0	-0.4	0	
Delaware 	0.0	-0.4	0	
Florida 	0.0	-0.4	0	
Georgia 	0.0	-0.4	0	
Hawaii 	0.0	-0.4	0	
Idaho 	0.0	-0.4	0	
Illinois 	0.0	-0.4	0	
Indiana 	0.0	-0.4	0	
Kansas 	0.0	-0.4	0	
Maine 	0.0	-0.4	0	
Maryland 	0.0	-0.4	0	
Massachusetts 	0.0	-0.4	0	
Minnesota 	0.0	-0.4	0	
Missouri 	0.0	-0.4	0	
Montana 	0.0	-0.4	0	
Nebraska 	0.0	-0.4	0	
Nevada 	0.0	-0.4	0	
New Jersey 	0.0	-0.4	0	
New Mexico 	0.0	-0.4	0	
New York 	0.0	-0.4	0	
North Carolina 	0.0	-0.4	0	
North Dakota 	0.0	-0.4	0	
Oklahoma 	0.0	-0.4	0	
Oregon 	0.0	-0.4	0	
Pennsylvania 	0.0	-0.4	0	
Puerto Rico 	0.0	-0.4	0	
Rhode Island	0.0	-0.4	0	
South Carolina 	0.0	-0.4	0	
South Dakota 	0.0	-0.4	0	
Tennessee 	0.0	-0.4	0	
Texas 	0.0	-0.4	0	
Vermont 	0.0	-0.4	0	
Virginia 	0.0	-0.4	0	
Washington 	0.0	-0.4	0	
Wisconsin 	0.0	-0.4	0	
Wyoming 	0.0	-0.4	0	

* WEIGHTED PROBABILITY OF SELECTION (NUMBER OF PHONES, NUMBER OF ADULTS, AND SELECTION OF TELEPHONE NUMBERS BY STRATUM)

TABLE 13: PERCENT COMPLETED INTERVIEWS MISSING NUMHHOLD BY STATE, 1998

STATE	PERCENT*	Z-SCORE	N	
Arkansas	1.8	4.1	54	
California	1.2	2.4	49	
North Carolina	1.0	2.0	25	
Mississippi	1.0	1.7	22	
Michigan	0.8	1.3	20	
Kansas	0.7	1.0	27	
Massachusetts	0.6	0.9	32	
New York	0.6	0.8	16	
New Jersey	0.6	0.8	15	
Connecticut	0.6	0.7	18	
Ohio	0.6	0.6	17	
New Hampshire	0.5	0.6	8	
Maryland	0.5	0.5	17	
Alaska	0.5	0.5	10	
Pennsylvania	0.5	0.5	18	
Georgia	0.5	0.4	11	
Indiana	0.5	0.3	11	
Rhode Island	0.4	0.3	16	
New Mexico	0.4	0.2	15	
Vermont	0.4	0.2	12	
Washington	0.4	0.1	14	
Tennessee	0.4	0.1	11	
South Carolina	0.4	0.1	12	
Wisconsin	0.3	-0.1	7	
Florida	0.2	-0.4	9	
Maine	0.2	-0.4	3	
Nebraska	0.2	-0.4	5	
Colorado	0.2	-0.5	3	
West Virginia	0.2	-0.5	4	
Kentucky	0.2	-0.5	6	
South Dakota	0.1	-0.5	3	
Utah	0.1	-0.5	4	
Alabama	0.1	-0.6	3	
Iowa	0.1	-0.6	4	
Nevada	0.1	-0.7	2	
District of Columbia	0.1	-0.7	1	
Illinois	0.1	-0.7	2	
Louisiana	0.1	-0.8	1	
Virginia	0.1	-0.8	2	
Montana	0.1	-0.8	1	
North Dakota	0.1	-0.8	1	
Missouri	0.1	-0.8	2	
Hawaii	0.0	-0.8	1	
Wyoming	0.0	-0.8	1	
Oklahoma	0.0	-0.8	1	
Delaware	0.0	-0.8	1	
Minnesota	0.0	-0.9	1	
Idaho	0.0	-0.9	1	
Arizona	0.0	-0.9	0	
Oregon	0.0	-0.9	0	
Puerto Rico	0.0	-0.9	0	
Texas	0.0	-0.9	0	

* WEIGHTED PROBABILITY OF SELECTION (NUMBER OF PHONES, NUMBER OF ADULTS, AND SELECTION OF TELEPHONE NUMBERS BY STRATUM)

TABLE 14: PERCENT COMPLETED INTERVIEWS MISSING NUMPHONS BY STATE, 1998

STATE	PERCENT*	Z-SCORE	N	
Vermont 	2.0	2.9	6	
Michigan 	1.9	2.7	8	
Indiana 	1.6	2.1	4	
Washington 	1.4	1.7	9	
New Mexico 	1.2	1.5	5	
Puerto Rico 	1.2	1.3	1	
Maryland 	1.1	1.2	8	
Alaska 	1.0	1.1	4	
Pennsylvania 	1.0	1.0	5	
Alabama 	0.9	0.9	3	
Arkansas 	0.9	0.8	3	
Kansas 	0.8	0.7	4	
Connecticut 	0.8	0.6	4	
Hawaii 	0.8	0.5	2	
South Carolina 	0.8	0.5	3	
Georgia 	0.8	0.5	3	
Massachusetts 	0.8	0.5	6	
New Jersey 	0.7	0.4	5	
North Dakota 	0.7	0.3	1	
Florida 	0.5	0.0	4	
Rhode Island	0.5	0.0	2	
Oregon 	0.5	-0.1	1	
Louisiana 	0.4	-0.2	1	
Texas 	0.4	-0.2	4	
Wisconsin 	0.4	-0.2	1	
Utah 	0.4	-0.3	2	
Idaho 	0.4	-0.3	2	
Virginia 	0.3	-0.3	2	
Tennessee 	0.3	-0.3	1	
Delaware 	0.3	-0.4	1	
New York 	0.3	-0.4	1	
Nevada 	0.2	-0.5	1	
Illinois 	0.2	-0.5	1	
California 	0.1	-0.7	1	
Arizona 	0.0	-0.9	0	
Colorado 	0.0	-0.9	0	
District of Columbia 	0.0	-0.9	0	
Iowa 	0.0	-0.9	0	
Kentucky 	0.0	-0.9	0	
Maine 	0.0	-0.9	0	
Minnesota 	0.0	-0.9	0	
Mississippi 	0.0	-0.9	0	
Missouri 	0.0	-0.9	0	
Montana 	0.0	-0.9	0	
Nebraska 	0.0	-0.9	0	
New Hampshire 	0.0	-0.9	0	
North Carolina 	0.0	-0.9	0	
Ohio 	0.0	-0.9	0	
Oklahoma 	0.0	-0.9	0	
South Dakota 	0.0	-0.9	0	
West Virginia 	0.0	-0.9	0	
Wyoming 	0.0	-0.9	0	

* WEIGHTED PROBABILITY OF SELECTION (NUMBER OF PHONES, NUMBER OF ADULTS, AND SELECTION OF TELEPHONE NUMBERS BY STRATUM)

TABLE 15: PERCENT COMPLETED INTERVIEWS MISSING GETHIV BY STATE, 1998

STATE	PERCENT*	Z-SCORE	N	
Arkansas 	5.1	3.8	119	
New Hampshire 	3.8	2.5	46	
Tennessee 	3.2	1.9	75	
Connecticut 	2.8	1.6	70	
New York 	2.7	1.5	55	
New Jersey 	2.3	1.2	47	
North Carolina 	2.3	1.2	44	
Kansas 	2.2	1.0	62	
Massachusetts 	2.1	0.9	86	
Nebraska 	2.0	0.9	40	
Rhode Island	1.9	0.8	56	
Iowa 	1.7	0.6	49	
Kentucky 	1.5	0.4	45	
Mississippi 	1.5	0.3	27	
Colorado 	1.4	0.3	22	
Pennsylvania 	1.2	0.0	34	
Florida 	1.2	0.0	41	
Alaska 	1.2	0.0	21	
Vermont 	1.2	0.0	28	
Georgia 	1.1	-0.1	22	
South Carolina 	1.1	-0.1	30	
South Dakota 	1.0	-0.1	16	
New Mexico 	1.0	-0.1	30	
Washington 	1.0	-0.2	30	
Ohio 	1.0	-0.2	22	
Maine 	1.0	-0.2	12	
Maryland 	0.8	-0.4	21	
Virginia 	0.7	-0.4	21	
Alabama 	0.7	-0.5	12	
Wisconsin 	0.7	-0.5	12	
Hawaii 	0.6	-0.5	11	
Missouri 	0.6	-0.6	16	
Indiana 	0.6	-0.6	11	
West Virginia 	0.5	-0.6	10	
Michigan 	0.5	-0.6	11	
District of Columbia 	0.5	-0.6	6	
Illinois 	0.5	-0.6	12	
Delaware 	0.4	-0.7	9	
North Dakota 	0.4	-0.7	6	
Montana 	0.4	-0.7	6	
Utah 	0.4	-0.7	10	
Louisiana 	0.4	-0.8	5	
Nevada 	0.4	-0.8	6	
Minnesota 	0.3	-0.8	10	
Oregon 	0.3	-0.9	4	
Texas 	0.2	-0.9	12	
Wyoming 	0.1	-1.0	3	
Oklahoma 	0.1	-1.0	2	
Puerto Rico 	0.1	-1.0	2	
Idaho 	0.1	-1.0	3	
Arizona 	0.1	-1.1	1	

* WEIGHTED PROBABILITY OF SELECTION (NUMBER OF PHONES, NUMBER OF ADULTS, AND SELECTION OF TELEPHONE NUMBERS BY STRATUM)

TABLE 16: PERCENT COMPLETED INTERVIEWS MISSING HADPAP BY STATE, 1998

STATE	PERCENT*	Z-SCORE	N	
New Hampshire 	3.3	3.4	29	
Arkansas 	3.1	3.1	58	
Connecticut 	2.0	1.7	37	
Massachusetts 	1.9	1.6	57	
Kansas 	1.6	1.2	38	
Iowa 	1.6	1.2	36	
California 	1.6	1.1	37	
North Carolina 	1.6	1.0	23	
Pennsylvania 	1.5	1.0	33	
New Jersey 	1.5	1.0	22	
New York 	1.4	0.8	20	
Nebraska 	1.3	0.7	22	
Vermont 	1.3	0.7	22	
Mississippi 	1.1	0.5	16	
Rhode Island	1.1	0.4	23	
Kentucky 	1.0	0.3	24	
Ohio 	1.0	0.3	18	
Colorado 	0.8	0.0	8	
Maryland 	0.8	0.0	16	
Tennessee 	0.8	0.0	15	
Indiana 	0.8	0.0	11	
Missouri 	0.7	-0.1	16	
South Carolina 	0.7	-0.1	13	
Georgia 	0.7	-0.1	10	
South Dakota 	0.7	-0.1	8	
Michigan 	0.5	-0.3	8	
Washington 	0.5	-0.4	10	
Wisconsin 	0.5	-0.4	6	
Alaska 	0.5	-0.4	5	
Alabama 	0.4	-0.5	6	
Florida 	0.4	-0.5	11	
New Mexico 	0.4	-0.5	8	
District of Columbia 	0.3	-0.6	3	
Maine 	0.3	-0.6	3	
Utah 	0.3	-0.6	5	
Louisiana 	0.3	-0.6	3	
Virginia 	0.3	-0.6	6	
Nevada 	0.3	-0.7	3	
West Virginia 	0.3	-0.7	4	
Montana 	0.2	-0.8	2	
Delaware 	0.2	-0.8	3	
Arizona 	0.2	-0.8	2	
Illinois 	0.2	-0.8	3	
Oregon 	0.1	-0.9	1	
Minnesota 	0.1	-0.9	2	
Hawaii 	0.1	-0.9	1	
Idaho 	0.0	-1.0	1	
North Dakota 	0.0	-1.0	0	
Oklahoma 	0.0	-1.0	0	
Puerto Rico 	0.0	-1.0	0	
Texas 	0.0	-1.0	0	
Wyoming 	0.0	-1.0	0	

* WEIGHTED PROBABILITY OF SELECTION (NUMBER OF PHONES, NUMBER OF ADULTS, AND SELECTION OF TELEPHONE NUMBERS BY STRATUM)

TABLE 17: PERCENT COMPLETED INTERVIEWS MISSING PROFEXAM BY STATE, 1998

STATE	PERCENT*	Z-SCORE	N	
New Hampshire 	3.2	3.4	28	
Arkansas 	3.1	3.3	58	
Connecticut 	1.9	1.6	35	
Massachusetts 	1.8	1.5	53	
California 	1.6	1.3	38	
Iowa 	1.6	1.2	35	
New Jersey 	1.6	1.2	23	
Pennsylvania 	1.4	1.0	31	
Kansas 	1.4	1.0	33	
North Carolina 	1.3	0.8	19	
Vermont 	1.2	0.7	21	
Nebraska 	1.2	0.7	20	
New York 	1.1	0.5	16	
Mississippi 	1.0	0.5	15	
Rhode Island	1.0	0.4	22	
Ohio 	0.9	0.3	17	
Kentucky 	0.9	0.3	22	
Colorado 	0.9	0.3	9	
Missouri 	0.8	0.1	18	
Tennessee 	0.7	-0.1	13	
Georgia 	0.7	-0.1	10	
Indiana 	0.6	-0.1	9	
South Dakota 	0.6	-0.2	7	
Alaska 	0.6	-0.2	6	
Maryland 	0.6	-0.2	11	
South Carolina 	0.5	-0.3	10	
Michigan 	0.5	-0.3	7	
Washington 	0.4	-0.4	9	
New Mexico 	0.4	-0.5	8	
Nevada 	0.4	-0.5	4	
West Virginia 	0.3	-0.5	5	
Utah 	0.3	-0.6	5	
Florida 	0.3	-0.6	8	
Alabama 	0.3	-0.6	4	
Wisconsin 	0.2	-0.6	3	
Illinois 	0.2	-0.7	4	
District of Columbia 	0.2	-0.7	2	
Maine 	0.2	-0.7	2	
Delaware 	0.2	-0.7	3	
Arizona 	0.2	-0.7	2	
Hawaii 	0.2	-0.8	2	
Virginia 	0.1	-0.8	3	
Louisiana 	0.1	-0.9	1	
Montana 	0.1	-0.9	1	
Oregon 	0.1	-0.9	1	
Minnesota 	0.1	-0.9	2	
Wyoming 	0.1	-0.9	1	
Texas 	0.0	-0.9	1	
Idaho 	0.0	-1.0	0	
North Dakota 	0.0	-1.0	0	
Oklahoma 	0.0	-1.0	0	
Puerto Rico 	0.0	-1.0	0	

* WEIGHTED PROBABILITY OF SELECTION (NUMBER OF PHONES, NUMBER OF ADULTS, AND SELECTION OF TELEPHONE NUMBERS BY STRATUM)

TABLE 18: PERCENT COMPLETED INTERVIEWS MISSING HADMAM BY STATE, 1998

STATE	PERCENT*	Z-SCORE	N	
New Hampshire 	3.1	3.6	27	
Arkansas 	3.0	3.5	56	
Iowa 	1.6	1.4	35	
Connecticut 	1.6	1.4	29	
California 	1.5	1.3	35	
Massachusetts 	1.4	1.2	42	
North Carolina 	1.3	1.0	19	
Pennsylvania 	1.2	0.9	27	
New Jersey 	1.2	0.9	18	
Kansas 	1.2	0.9	28	
Vermont 	1.0	0.6	17	
Mississippi 	0.9	0.4	13	
New York 	0.9	0.4	13	
Kentucky 	0.8	0.4	20	
Nebraska 	0.8	0.4	14	
Ohio 	0.8	0.3	15	
Colorado 	0.8	0.3	8	
Tennessee 	0.7	0.1	13	
Rhode Island	0.6	0.1	14	
Georgia 	0.6	0.0	9	
Indiana 	0.6	-0.1	8	
Missouri 	0.5	-0.1	12	
Maryland 	0.5	-0.2	9	
South Dakota 	0.4	-0.3	5	
South Carolina 	0.4	-0.3	8	
Washington 	0.4	-0.3	8	
Alaska 	0.4	-0.3	4	
Florida 	0.3	-0.5	8	
Nevada 	0.3	-0.5	3	
West Virginia 	0.3	-0.5	4	
Utah 	0.2	-0.5	4	
Illinois 	0.2	-0.5	4	
Alabama 	0.2	-0.6	3	
Michigan 	0.2	-0.6	3	
New Mexico 	0.2	-0.6	4	
Wisconsin 	0.2	-0.6	2	
Delaware 	0.1	-0.7	2	
District of Columbia 	0.1	-0.7	1	
Maine 	0.1	-0.7	1	
Louisiana 	0.1	-0.7	1	
Virginia 	0.1	-0.7	2	
Oregon 	0.1	-0.7	1	
Minnesota 	0.1	-0.7	2	
Arizona 	0.0	-0.9	0	
Hawaii 	0.0	-0.9	0	
Idaho 	0.0	-0.9	0	
Montana 	0.0	-0.9	0	
North Dakota 	0.0	-0.9	0	
Oklahoma 	0.0	-0.9	0	
Puerto Rico 	0.0	-0.9	0	
Texas 	0.0	-0.9	0	
Wyoming 	0.0	-0.9	0	

* WEIGHTED PROBABILITY OF SELECTION (NUMBER OF PHONES, NUMBER OF ADULTS, AND SELECTION OF TELEPHONE NUMBERS BY STRATUM)