We are pleased to present resources and information on changes in the reporting of race and ethnicity groups to the Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System (IPEDS). These changes conform to the revisions of the standards for classification of federal data on race and ethnicity promulgated by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) in October 1997.

GENERAL INFORMATION AND BACKGROUND

implementation of the new race and ethnicity standards

Implications of the change in Race & Ethnicity reporting standards

Frequently asked Questions

gENERAL
DATA COLLECTION
DATA REPORTING
mAPPING DATA AND RE-SURVEYING
IMPACT OF CHANGES

Online resources

FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS

General

What is the difference between ethnicity and race?
Ethnicity and race often are used interchangeably although such use is incorrect. Ethnicity represents social groups with a shared history, sense of identity, geography, and cultural roots, which may occur despite racial difference. Race represents a population considered distinct based on physical characteristics.

What are the new ethnicity/race categories?
There are two categories for data on ethnicity:
1) Hispanic or Latino or Spanish Origin, and
2) Not Hispanic or Latino or Spanish Origin.

There are five new categories for data on race:
1) American Indian or Alaska Native
2) Asian
3) Black or African American
4) Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander
5) White

How is the “Hispanic or Latino or Spanish Origin” ethnicity category defined?
The term “Hispanic or Latino or Spanish Origin” is defined as a person of Cuban, Mexican, Puerto Rican, South or Central American, or other Spanish culture or origin, regardless of race.

How are the five racial categories defined?
1) American Indian or Alaska Native - A person having origins in any of the original peoples of North and South America (including Central America), and who maintains a tribal affiliation or community attachment.
2) Asian - A person having origins in any of the original peoples of the Far East, Southeast Asia, or the Indian subcontinent including, for example, Cambodia, China, India, Japan, Korea, Malaysia, Pakistan, the Philippine Islands, Thailand, and Vietnam.
3) Black or African American - A person having origins in any of the Black racial groups of Africa.
4) Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander - A person having origins in any of the original peoples of Hawaii, Guam, Samoa, or other Pacific Islands.
5) White - A person having origins in any of the original peoples of Europe, the Middle East, or North Africa.

Who is requiring that changes be made to the collection and reporting of ethnicity/race?
The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) is requiring the changes as issued in its 1997 “Revisions to the Standards for the Classification of Federal Data on Race and Ethnicity” (http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/fedreg/1997standards.html). On October 19, 2007, the U.S. Department of Education posted the "Final Guidance on Maintaining, Collecting, and Reporting Racial and Ethnic Data to the U.S. Department of Education" (http://edocket.access.gpo.gov/2007/pdf/E7-20613.pdf) to implement OMB’s 1997 Standards.

Why were these ethnicity/race changes made?
Responding to growing criticism that the 1977 racial and ethnic standards did not reflect the diversity of the nation’s current population, the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) initiated a comprehensive review in 1993. The review included: 1) organizing a workshop to address the issues by the National Academy of Science, 2) convening four public hearings, and 3) appointing an Interagency Committee for the Review of Racial and Ethnic Standards, which later developed a research agenda and conducted several research studies. The result of the Committee's efforts was a report describing recommended changes with most of those recommendations being accepted by the OMB it its 1997 Standards.

Are other agencies and organizations (e.g., EEOC and NCAA) adopting the same categories?
The recent guidelines only apply to the U.S. Department of Education. Other governmental agencies have adopted similar reporting standards in recent years (all of which are based on the 1997 OMB standards). The EEOC implemented the new standards in 2007, and their reporting/data collection guidelines are slightly different from IPEDS (http://www.eeoc.gov/employers/surveys.html and http://www.eeoc.gov/eeo1/qanda-implementation.html). For information about other specific data collection efforts, the agency or organization conducting the data collection should be contacted directly.

Data Collection

How should postsecondary institutions collect ethnicity/race information from students and employees?
Two questions must be used when collecting ethnicity/race.

1. The first question is whether the respondent is “Hispanic or Latino or Spanish Origin” or “Not Hispanic or Latino or Spanish Origin” (The term “Hispanic or Latino or Spanish Origin” is defined as a person of Cuban, Mexican, Puerto Rican, South or Central American, or other Spanish culture or origin, regardless of race).
2. The second question is whether the respondent is from one or more races from the following list: American Indian or Alaska Native, Asian, Black or African American, Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander, White. Postsecondary institutions cannot use a multi-race category in collecting data from respondents.

Is it mandatory that postsecondary institutions use the two question format to collect ethnicity/ race?
Yes. The two question format must be used in the collection process.

Does the question on ethnicity have to be asked first?
Yes.

 Should all students and employees respond to the second question on race?
Yes. Both questions are to be answered for all respondents regardless of how a student or employee responds to the first question on ethnicity.

 In the ethnicity/race collection process, can postsecondary institutions use the wording “choose all that apply” for the race categories?
No. The wording “select one or more ” must be used for collecting race categories.

Can postsecondary institutions collect ethnicity/race using the same format that will be reported to IPEDS?
No. Ethnicity/race must be collected using the two question format.

Can postsecondary institutions include categories of “Two or More Races”, “Unknown”, and/or “Nonresident Alien” in the collection process?
No. These are valid reporting categories, but they cannot be used in data collection.

Can postsecondary institutions collect additional sub-categories of ethnicity/race not included in the new standards?
Yes, but only if the additional subcategories can be aggregated to the IPEDS reporting categories.

Can postsecondary institutions collect additional sub-categories of ethnicity/race from students and not employees? Or from employees and not students?
Yes, but only if the additional subcategories can be aggregated to the IPEDS reporting categories. The same collection process does not have to be used for everyone (e.g., additional sub-categories can be collected for students, but not employees).

Can postsecondary institutions include a “no response” or “refuse to answer” option on the collection form?
No. The guidelines do not allow for this option.

Can postsecondary institutions ask a student or employee his/her nationality to determine ethnicity/race or “Non-resident alien”?
No. Nationality is not a sufficient proxy for determining ethnicity/race or whether or not an individual is a “Non-resident alien”.

Can postsecondary institutions reorder the race categories in the collection process?
Yes. When collecting data, the race categories can be reordered.

How should students/employees from Brazil or Portugal respond?
The postsecondary institution should provide the ethnicity/race definitions and allow the individual to self-identify.

Can postsecondary institutions provide an explanation for why ethnicity/race information is being collected?
Yes. The Association for Institutional Research (AIR) suggests customized language similar to the sample below in introducing questions.

Colleges and universities are asked by many, including the federal government, accrediting associations, college guides, newspapers, and our own college/university communities, to describe the ethnic/racial backgrounds of our students and employees. In order to respond to these requests, we ask you to answer the following two questions:

Do you consider yourself to be Hispanic/Latino/Spanish Origin?
_ Yes
_ No

In addition, select one or more of the following racial categories to describe yourself:
_ American Indian or Alaska Native
_ Asian
_ Black or African American
_ Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander
_ White

Can postsecondary institutions require students and/or employees to complete the ethnicity/race questions?
No. This information can only be requested.

What should a postsecondary institution do if a respondent does not self-identify ethnicity/race?
Postsecondary institutions must present the data collection form to students and employees to ensure that the individuals had an opportunity to respond. For postsecondary institutions, self-reporting of ethnicity/race by students and employees is the desired method. If the individual does not self-identify, the postsecondary institution should report “Unknown” to IPEDS.

Data Reporting

 How will postsecondary institutions report data under the new ethnicity/race categories?
Postsecondary institutions will be required to report aggregated ethnic and racial data in seven categories:
1) Hispanic/Latino/Spanish Origin of any race

For respondents who are non-Hispanic/Latino/Spanish Origin only,
2) American Indian or Alaska Native,
3) Asian,
4) Black or African American,
5) Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander,
6) White, and
7) Two or more races.

Plus,
8) Non-Resident Alien (of any ethnicity or race), and
9) Ethnicity/Race Unknown (if the respondent does not self identify).

How do postsecondary institutions report a respondent who self-identifies in two or more of the five racial categories?
A respondent who self identifies in two or more of the five racial categories must be reported as “Two or more races” only if the respondent does not self-identify as Hispanic/Latino/Spanish Origin.

If the respondent self-identifies as Hispanic/Latino/Spanish Origin, the postsecondary institution should only report the respondent as Hispanic/Latino/Spanish Origin, and should not report the respondent in any of the five racial categories or the “Two or more races” category.

If a respondent self-identifies as “Hispanic or Latino or Spanish Origin” and self identifies in one or more of the five racial categories, should that respondent be reported to IPEDS as “Two or more races”?
No. If the respondent self-identifies as Hispanic/Latino/Spanish Origin, the postsecondary institution should only report the respondent as Hispanic/Latino/Spanish Origin, and should not report the respondent in any of the five racial categories or the “Two or more races” category.

 If a respondent self-identifies as “Non-Hispanic or Latino or Spanish Origin” and self-identifies in two or more of the five racial categories, should that respondent be reported to IPEDS as “Two or more races” only?
Yes. A respondent who self identifies as “Non-Hispanic or Latino or Spanish Origin” and self-identifies in two or more of the five racial categories must be reported as “Two or more races” only.

How does the postsecondary institution handle non-response of one part of the question, but not both?
If one of the two questions is a response, that part of the information should be used in the reporting of ethnicity/race.

What do postsecondary institutions report to IPEDS if the ethnicity question is not answered, but the race question is answered?
If ethnicity is blank (missing), the postsecondary institution should report any racial information that is provided by the individual.

How do postsecondary institutions determine “Non-resident Alien”?
“Non-resident Alien” should be determined through the individual’s Visa type. Postsecondary institutions should not use a response to a citizenship question to make this determination.

When will postsecondary institutions be required to report to IPEDS under the new ethnicity/race categories?
2008-09 and 2009-10 Collection Years: Data can be reported to IPEDS using either the “old” or the “new” ethnicity/race categories.

2010-11 Collection Years: Mandatory year for two IPEDS reports (Fall Enrollment and Human Resources), reporting using new race/ethnicity categories will be required. For the other three related IPEDS reports (Completions, 12-Month Enrollment, and Graduation Rates), reporting with the new categories will remain optional.

2011-12 and Beyond Collection Years: Mandatory years for all IPEDS components; postsecondary institutions will be required to report using only the new race/ethnicity categories.

Although not required, postsecondary institutions already collecting individual-level data in the manner specified by the Department’s guidance are encouraged to immediately begin reporting the data in accordance with the guidance.

During the phase-in years, can different surveys (e.g. EF, HR) use different reporting categories (old vs. new)?
Yes. The collection system can accommodate the use of “old” vs. “new” categories both within individual survey components and between survey components. Once the phase-in has been completed, all surveys will require the use of the new categories only.

During the phase-in years, can different campuses in a system or state use different reporting categories (old vs. new)?
Yes, but it is recommended that a system and/or state phase-in at the same time.

Mapping Data and Re-Surveying

Are postsecondary institutions required to re-survey students and employees prior to the Fall 2010 mandatory implementation of the new standards?
No. Re-surveying is encouraged but not required.

Why should postsecondary institutions map data and/or re-survey?
If a postsecondary institution does not map data, all continuing students and employees will be “Unknown” when the transition to the new standard occurs, unless the institution re-surveys. If the institution re-surveys and has not mapped data first, non-respondents for whom the institution previously had data will be "Unknown."

If mapping data and re-surveying are done, which should be done first?
It is suggested that mapping data be done prior to re-surveying. As part of the re-survey process, an institution can show the student or employees the race/ethnic data currently recorded for them and ask them to update. With that approach, institutions can assume non-respondents do not wish to change their old data. If an institution re-surveys prior to mapping, the institution could be over-writing the respondent’s most recent preferred category with an older one.

Is there a policy or guidance on bridging or mapping data on race and ethnicity under the new standards to historical data?
Yes. The Office of Management and Budget has released a report entitled “The Bridge Report: Tabulation Options for Trend Analysis,” which can be accessed through the following link: http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/inforeg/re_app-ctables.pdf.

How should a state postsecondary data coordinator and/or a postsecondary institution map data collected under the new standards with historical data collected under the old standards?
The Association for Institutional Research (AIR) recommends using the following table. All single-category old codes will map “reasonably” well except the Hawaiians and Pacific Islanders embedded in the current "Asian or Pacific Islander" category will be incorrectly assumed to be Asian.

Do postsecondary institutions have to survey students who have left the institution?
No. Re-surveying is not required for any cohort. Re-surveying dropouts and/or early graduates can be done; however, using mapped data for those who left the institution prior to the transition to the new standards is sufficient for GRS cohorts, particularly since many of their addresses (e-mail or otherwise) may no longer be valid.

Should postsecondary institutions use the data collected in the re-survey process to update race/ethnicity for the GRS cohorts who entered prior to the transition to the new standards?
No. The Association for Institutional Research suggests that institutions map old categories to new ones for the cohorts that matriculated before the transition but do not over-write those data with re-surveyed data because not all students will have had an opportunity to be re-surveyed (e.g., students who dropped out or graduated before the re-survey).

Impact of Changes

What are the potential impacts of these changes?
Admissions, financial aid, and human resources forms (both hard copy and on-line) will have to be changed to conform to the new standards.

State and institutional databases may need to be restructured and programmed to support multiple ethnic/race categories for each individual. Additionally, computer programs used to generate reports related to ethnicity/race may need to be modified these new data structures and new reporting formats.

The count for each reporting category will change; trend analysis will have less significance for a few years.

The count for each race potentially could drop from prior years as individuals are re-classified as Hispanic/Latino or as “Two or more races.”

How will these changes impact trend data?
The count for each race potentially could drop from prior years as individuals are re-classified as Hispanic/Latino or as “Two or more races.” Additionally, such reclassification potentially may increase the counts for Hispanic/Latino from prior years.

How much of my time will this require ?
This could require a substantial amount of time, so starting early is recommended. Programming, paper and web-based forms, and reporting formats are all likely to change. Coordination with campuses and other state agencies will be required. A plan for communicating the impact on reports should be developed and distributed to those who use these data.