Ask the Scholar
Document scope · 1 page
Scholar
Ask about this object, its catalog metadata, its source description, or the page inventory.
For page-specific OCR and visual context, open one of the page chats.
Source Description
This file contains:
From: David R. Derge To: H.R. Haldeman RE: Vendor Survey. 8 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 3/22/1971
Scholar Source Context
Document identity
localId
26145729
label
WHSF: Contested, 16-24
core
doc
dtoType
document
citationUrl
pageCount
1
Source metadata
id
26145729
sourceUrl
contentType
document
title
WHSF: Contested, 16-24
description
This file contains:
From: David R. Derge To: H.R. Haldeman RE: Vendor Survey. 8 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 3/22/1971
citationUrl
collections
Richard M. Nixon's Returned Materials Collection
Contested Materials Files
imageCount
1
hasImages
yes
source
import
hasTranscription
no
Source extras
naId
26145729
levelOfDescription
fileUnit
recordType
description
ocrSource
nara-archive
Single page context
seq
1
pageIndex
0
type
document
mediaId
463eb46d700734c2
ocrText
Richard Nixon Presidential Library
Contested Materials Collection
Folder List
Box Number
Folder Number
Document Date
No Date
Subject
Document Type
Document Description
16
24
3/22/1971
Campaign
Memo
From: David R. Derge To: H.R. Haldeman
RE: Vendor Survey. 8 pgs.
Monday, March 07, 2011
Page 1 of 1
RECEIVED MAR 1071
March 22, 1971
MEMORANDUM TO: H. R. HALDEMAN
SUBJECT: VENDOR SURVEY
I. BACKGROUND
All known Republican vendors of survey research were asked to respond
to eighteen questions concerning their capabilities (see Appendix A). A
brief summary of the twelve responses was made by Dr. David R. Derge and
Mr. William Low (see Appendix B). Detailed documentation is available.
II. FINDINGS
Six of the twelve vendors seem to have the demonstrated or promised
capabilities for national political field and/or telephone surveys.
a. Opinion Research Corporation (Princeton, New Jersey)
This company did the survey work for the RNC/Goldwater campaign in
1964 and for the Nixon-Agnew Committee in 1968 under the direction
of Dr. Derge. Since that time it has done five field surveys and
some telephone surveys. They are scheduled to do three national
surveys for the Domestic Council and another national field study
for RNC.
b. Chilton Research (Philadelphia, Pennsylvania)
This company has done more than fifteen national telephone surveys
for RNC and other Republican clients since 1969. While they indicate
the capability of national field surveys and have done these for
non-political clients, we have never used them for field work.
C. Market Opinion Research (Detroit, Michigan)
Political work by this company has been limited to state studies.
They report national studies of a non-political nature. If possible,
this group might be asked to conduct a national field or telephone
survey on a one-time basis for our evaluation.
d. Decision-Making Information (Los Angeles, California)
DMI has been heavily used by A.M.P.A.C. in state and Congressional
district studies and its one national political study may have been
for A.M.P.A.C. It is reported that all DMI stock owned by Spencer -
-2-
Roberts has been recently purchased by DMI. This group has been
dynamic and innovative in its work and development. One of its
clients in the past has been Governor Reagan. DMI might be asked
to do a national field or telephone survey on a one-time basis for
our evaluation.
e. Market Facts (Chicago, Illinois)
This is a large research company which has done some political work,
but has never been used for national political surveys. Its prospectus
is impressive. This group might be asked to do a national field or
telephone survey on a one-time basis for our evaluation.
f. Cambridge Opinion Studies (New York, New York)
This company has done state and Congressional district studies and
reports one national study for Mr. Len Garment. They report capabilities
which would support a national survey effort. This group might be
asked to do a national field or telephone survey on a one-time basis
for our evaluation.
III. RECOMMENDATIONS
a. If a single-vendor strategy is selected, ORC should be that vendor
for most, if not all, political work.
b. If a back-up vendor to ORC as a single vendor is to be developed,
Chilton should be chosen for the telephone surveys and the field
back-up should come from Chilton, MOR, DMI, Market Facts, or Cambridge.
The final decision should come after the back-up firm has been tried
out in an actual survey and its work has been evaluated.
C. Another possibility would be ORC as the single vendor for field work
and Chilton as the single vendor for telephone surveys.
d. Another approach could be used if preliminary surveys are conducted
in battleground states in 1971. All six vendors could be tested and
evaluated by state surveys and their capabilities for satisfactory
work determined.
e. If a multi-vendor strategy is selected, the following distribution
could be made of work described in my November 17, 1970 memorandum
to H. R. Haldeman:
1. "A. I. Rapid response telephone surveys". Pass around to all six
vendors claiming this capability.
2. A. II. Studies of public perception of the President as an individual
and head of state". ORC has the contract for the first of these.
If a follow-up is done in 6-9 months one of the other five vendors
could be tried out.
-3-
3. "A. III. Issue studies". I understand Domestic Council is
using ORC for these.
4. "A. IV. Data base for campaign simulation program". Any of
the six vendors could be used.
5. "A. V. Battleground state studies". These could be divided
among the six vendors according to their past experiences in
the selected states. Standard questionnaires and reporting
formats would be imperative and careful coordination by Dr.
Derge or someone else would be necessary.
6. "A. VI. Study of beliefs about the political parties, the
political process, politicians, and political participation".
Any of the six vendors could be used.
7. "A. VII. Instant research for the Presidential election". I
recommend either ORC or Chilton.
IV. CONCLUSIONS
My personal recommendation is the single-vendor strategy or the single-
vendor-with-back-up strategy. Management problems are reduced, past findings
are more easily interfaced with current findings, and there are fewer chances
for slip-ups. This means ORC as single-vendor or a combination of ORC and
Chilton. Other vendors could be utilized on an experimental basis as the
opportunities arise, for example, in preliminary studies of battleground
states in 1971. In any event, the strategy chosen should be subject to constant
review and changed when indicated.
DaudR.Dirge
APPENDIX A
1. How long has your firm been in business?
2. How large is it in terms of total billings? What proportion of your firm's
work is in the area of political research? What is the nature of the firm's
non-political research work in terms of both volume and stability?
3. How many professional staff members does your firm have? Please give names
and biographical information for major personnel.
4. How many full-time employees do you have?
5. Is your firm fully integrated in terms of ability to handle all phases of
a study from beginning to end using only its own personnel.
Sampling
Data Processing
Interviewing
Printing
Coding
Art Work
Analysis
6. Does your firm have the capability of conducting nationwide studies or does
it specialize in local or regional work? Please give specific examples of
nationwide surveys and statewide surveys completed in the last two years with
references who can be contacted about the firm's work.
7. Does your firm have a large staff of interviewers on whom it maintains continuing
records or does it rely on local supervisors or other interviewing organizations
to provide interviewers? What is the normal number of interviewers assigned
to each supervisor?
8. How much effort, if any, does your firm devote to maintenance and upgrading
of its field interviewing force? Is there a person or persons on the firm's
staff who is responsible for interviewer recruitment and training on a
full-time basis?
9. Does your firm have the capability of conducting probability sampling studies
or does it rely only on loosely structured quota sampling?
10. Does your firm routinely validate a proportion of interviewers' work with
greater than routine validation for new interviewers, suspicious cases, etc.?
11. Does your firm use a series of quality controls to detect errors in coding, key
punching, tabulation, etc.? How stringent are these controls? What are they?
12. Are all reports, tables, etc., checked for accuracy and validity before the
results of a study are delivered to your client?
13. Does your firm have a record of on-time delivery of useful research data in
large-scale studies with short deadlines? What is your usual lead time (from
receipt of instrument to delivery of report) for national field surveys? For
state surveys? For telephone surveys on the national and the state level?
-2-
14. Does your firm have a reputation for integrity and for keeping all research
findings and client information completely confidential?
15. Is it your firm's policy to work for candidates of both parties?
16. What new research techniques has your firm developed or adopted specifically
for use in political research?
17. What in-house capability does your firm have for rapid turnaround national
telephone surveys?
18. Will your firm's overall research program include enough regular national
surveys so that a partial survey (1-10 items) can be purchased on a piggyback
arrangement?
APPENDIX B: SURVEY OF REPUBLICAN SURVEY VENDORS (ALPHABETICALLY)
LEWIS
MARKET
SURVEY
BUCCI
CAMBRIDGE
CENTRAL
CHILTON
D.M.I.
DORR
BOWLES
FACTS
M.O.R.
O.R.C
PREMACK
RESEARCH SCL
1.
Years in
business
9
6
34
14
2
2
11
25
4
33
9
6 months
2. Total
est,
less than
billings
no ans.
$600,000
$600,000
$3 mil.
$1 mil,
$100,000
no ans.
$7.8 mil.
$700,000
$7 mil
$1 mil.
no ans
Political
est,
billings
no ans.
$240,000
$180,000
$150,000
$500,000
$ 30,000
no ans.
$224,000
$175,000
$700,000
30-40%
no ans.
3.
Professional
2
staff
listed
11
9
40
15
2
5
45
12
90
9
5
4. Total
full-time
employees
no ans.
16
30
100
30
no ans.
no ans,
290
45
211
47
5
5.
Start to
yes
finish
except
capability
data
in-house
no
no
yes
yes
yes
no
no ans.
yes
yes
yes
process.
no
6. National
capability
claims
yes
claimed
cap. --
but
no past
no
claimed
1 natl.
Field
no
yes
yes
yes
yes
no
experi-
yes
pol.
yes
but
capty.
ence
studies
doubtful
doubtful
Telephone
no
yes
yes
yes
yes
no
yes
yet
yes
LEWIS
MARKET
SURVEY
BUCCI
CAMBRIDGE
CENTRAL
CHILTON
D.M.I.
DORR
BOWLES
FACTS
M. O.R.
O.R.C.
PREMACK
SURVEY SC1.
7. Field
interview
staff &
procedure
doubtful
yes
yes
yes
yes
doubtful
doubtful
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
appear
satisfactory
8.
Satisfactory
program to
yes
maintain &
no
yes
staff
yes
yes
no ans.
no
yes
yes
yes
no ans.
no
upgrade inter-
only
viewers
9.
Capability
yes
for
but
probability
no
yes
most pol.
yes
yes
Mass,
yes
yes
yes
yes
no ans.
yes
sampling
not based
only
on probl.
sampling
10. Always
yes
yes
validate
no ans.
yes
yes
yes
no %
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
no %
yes
interviewers'
30%
15%
10%
given
15%
10%
15%
15-25%
10%
given
10-20%
work
11. Satisfactory
no
quality con-
key
trol on coding,
punch
key punching,
no ans.
yes
limited
yes
yes
no ans.
yes
yes
yes
yes
no ans.
yes
& tabulating
control
12. Always validate
reports &
tables
no ans.
yes
yes
yes
yes
no ans.
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
LEWIS
MARKET
SURVEY
BUCCI
CAMBRIDGE
CENTRAL
CHILTON
D,M,I,
DORR
BOWLES
FACTS
M.O.R.
ORC
PREMACK
RESEARCH SCL
13. Lead time for:
National field
no ans,
2 wks.
2-4wks,
6wks
3-7 wks
none
4-10wks
6 wks.
4-5wks
8-12wks
surveys
Mass,
National Phone
only
2-4 days
1-3 days
4 days
3 days
4-5 days
1-6wks
surveys
no ans.
3 days
none
none
State Field
surveys
no ans.
5 days
2-4wks.
6 wks
3-7 wks
4 wks
3-6 wks
3 wks.
4-5wks
2days
6-8 wks.
Mass.
(doubtful)
State Phone
only
surveys
no ans.
3 days
none
2-4 days
1-3 days
none
4 days
4-5 days
1-6 wks
3 days
non-
15. Work for
95%
yes
partisan
GOP only
no
yes
GOP
yes
yes
to
no ans,
no
yes
yes
never
yes
date
opposing
cand.
16. Claim to have
yes
new techniques
yes
yes
no
yes
yes
no
no
yes
yes
4 days
yes
yes
17. In-house
capability
planned
yes
for natl.
for
every
phone surveys
no
yes
none
yes
June
no
no
yes
yes
2
doubtful
no
1971
months
18. Purchase of
piggy-back
no
yes
questions
no
no
natl.
yes
yes
no ans,
no
yes
irregular
yes
no
possible
basis