With the ACS, income inequity can now been seen longitudinally. The main measure of income inequality available through the census is the use of the Gini Index. The Gini Index is a summary measure of income inequality. As an index, it only has a value of between 0 and 1. A value of "0" would mean that every household had the same exact income; a value of "1" would mean that income was concentrated solely in a single household.
The index does NOT speak about the absolute levels of income - in other words, it doesn't measure how much income exists in a household. It measures the relative distribution of income across all households in an area. So when one area has a higher Gini index than another, nothing can be said about the income levels between the areas. Rather, it would tell you about the distribution of incomes within both areas.
That being understood, what are the regional, state and nation Gini levels over the last decade or so?
More from Herkimer and Oneida Counties Census Data Affiliate
Showing posts with label ACS. Show all posts
Showing posts with label ACS. Show all posts
Wednesday, January 6, 2016
Wednesday, April 4, 2012
County-to-County Migration Flows
The American Community Survey (ACS) and the Puerto Rico Community Survey (PRCS) ask respondents age 1 year and over whether they lived in the same residence 1 year ago. For people who lived in a different residence, the location of their previous residence is collected.
ACS uses a series of monthly samples to produce estimates. Estimates for geographies of population 65,000 or greater are published annually using these monthly samples.
ACS uses a series of monthly samples to produce estimates. Estimates for geographies of population 65,000 or greater are published annually using these monthly samples.
Thursday, March 29, 2012
Census Bureau Releases First Information Since 2000 Census on Moves Between Counties
The U.S. Census Bureau released estimates from the American Community Survey showing how many people migrated from one specific county to another during the course of a year ─ the first such numbers published since these data were collected as part of the 2000 Census.
The ACS compiles data over a five-year period and asks people where they lived one year prior to being surveyed. The first five-year estimates released covers the years from 2005 to 2009.
The 2005-2009 American Community Survey County-to-County Migration Files provide tables for each county in the nation, showing both "inflows" and "outflows."
The ACS compiles data over a five-year period and asks people where they lived one year prior to being surveyed. The first five-year estimates released covers the years from 2005 to 2009.
The 2005-2009 American Community Survey County-to-County Migration Files provide tables for each county in the nation, showing both "inflows" and "outflows."
Tuesday, March 6, 2012
Press release on (the potentially disastrous) Voluntary ACS bill
March 5, 2012
Honorable Trey Gowdy, Chairman
Honorable Danny Davis, Ranking Member
Subcommittee on Health Care, District of Columbia,
Census and National Archives
Committee on Oversight and Government Reform
Washington, DC 20515
Dear Chairman Gowdy and Congressman Davis:
We are writing to express our strong concern about proposals to convert the U.S. Census Bureau’s American Community Survey (ACS) from a mandatory to a voluntary survey. We believe such a change would significantly increase the cost of the ACS; at a time of fiscal constraint, lack of sufficient resources could diminish the quality of ACS data to a point where the information is not useful for a myriad of critical public and private sector purposes. We know that your panel will review this issue at a hearing on March 6, 2012, and respectfully ask that the subcommittee include our letter in the official hearing record.
The Census Project is a non-partisan, ad-hoc, broad-based coalition of census stakeholders. The Project’s participants include data users in the business, housing, civil rights, academic and research, civic participation, child advocate, state and local government, and marketing sectors. Our common purpose is simple: To
educate policymakers and the public about the importance of high quality, cost effective and appropriately comprehensive census data for sound decision-making at all levels of government and in the private and non-profit sectors. (The ACS is part of the decennial census.)
Concerned about respondent burden and the propriety of the questions, Congress directed the Census Bureau to explore the possibility of making the ACS voluntary in 2003. In two reports1 and several more recent analyses, the bureau concluded that mail response rates to a voluntary ACS would drop "dramatically," by more than 20 percentage points. That decline, in turn, would force the bureau to use more costly modes of data collection, such as telephone and door-to-door visits, thereby increasing the cost of the survey by thirty percent ($60 million at the time of the 2003 field test). Congress, in the current fiscal climate, is unlikely to increase funding for the ACS by the amount necessary to overcome low initial response rates, leaving the Census Bureau with insufficient response to produce reliable data for smaller (e.g. rural communities; towns; urban neighborhoods) areas and population groups (e.g. people with disabilities; veterans; immigrant groups). The consequence would be greatly diminished quality of ACS data. The test also showed that the percent of completed interviews (conducted if a household fails to mail back a form) fell significantly if the survey was voluntary, adding to the problem of data reliability.
Perhaps not surprisingly, cooperation in traditionally low mail response areas (which tend to equate with hard-to-count communities, such as people of color, low income families, and rural households) declined even further when ACS response was voluntary. Interestingly, a significantly higher percentage of traditionally easier-to-count populations, such as non-Hispanic Whites, failed to respond during the mail and telephone phases of the ACS. These findings suggest that the quality of estimates produced from a voluntary ACS would be severely jeopardized for all segments of the population and all types of communities.
The importance of high-quality, objective, and universal ACS data for public and private sector decision-makers cannot be overstated. The federal government alone allocates more than $450 billion annually in program funds to state and local governments based in whole or in part on ACS data.(2) Federal law, directly or indirectly, requires all of the information gathered in the ACS (i.e. Congress requested the data directly, or created a program that relies on data for implementation, enforcement, or monitoring, and the census or ACS are the only sources). We should not jeopardize the fair and wise allocation of limited taxpayer dollars by undermining the only source of reliable data to guide those allocations, not to mention decisions on whether even to continue certain programs.
In addition, the Voting Rights Act relies on ACS data to make determinations under section 203, which requires jurisdictions with a high percentage of people who are not English language proficient to offer bilingual voting materials. Both the government and business sector rely on ACS data to help ensure appropriate employment opportunities for racial minorities, disabled persons, and veterans.
Equally important, businesses of all sizes rely on ACS data every day to make vital decisions about where to locate and expand, what goods and services to offer, the scope of employee training needed, and long term investment opportunities. Nonprofit organizations use the ACS to guide services to those most in need and to measure the success of their programs.
For these reasons, we urge your subcommittee to view any proposal to make the American Community Survey voluntary with great caution. Such a change would have serious adverse consequences that could leave the nation in a precarious decision-making vacuum and hinder its economic recovery and future growth.
Sincerely,
American Association of Public Opinion Research
American Sociological Association
American Statistical Association
Asian American Justice Center, member of Asian American Center for Advancing
Justice
Association of Population Centers
Association of Public Data Users (APDU)
Charlotte (N.C.) Chamber of Commerce
Coalition on Human Needs
Community Action Partnership
Consortium of Social Science Associations
Council for Community & Economic Research (C2ER)
Council of Professional Associations on Federal Statistics
CREW Network
Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights
Marketing Research Association (MRA)
National Association for Business Economics
National Association of Latino Elected and Appointed Officials (NALEO) Educational
Fund
National Congress of American Indians
National Education Association
National Multi Housing Council
North Carolina Housing Finance Agency
Population Association of America
Population Reference Bureau
Prison Policy Initiative
Project Vote
South Asian Americans Leading Together (SAALT)
Southeast Michigan Census Council
1. “Meeting 21st Century Data Needs - Implementing the American Community Survey, Report 3: Testing the Use of Voluntary Methods” (Dec. 2003) (http://www.census.gov/acs/www/Downloads/Report03.pdf) and an update,
“Report 11: Testing Voluntary Methods -- Additional Results” (Dec. 2004)
(http://www.census.gov/acs/www/Downloads/Report11.pdf).
2. Reamer, Andrew, “Surveying for Dollars: The Role of the American Community Survey in the Geographic Distribution of Federal Funds,” The Brookings Institution, July 2010.
A project of the Communications Consortium Media Center
401 Ninth Street NW, Suite 450, Washington, DC 20004
202.326.8700
www.TheCensusProject.org
Honorable Trey Gowdy, Chairman
Honorable Danny Davis, Ranking Member
Subcommittee on Health Care, District of Columbia,
Census and National Archives
Committee on Oversight and Government Reform
Washington, DC 20515
Dear Chairman Gowdy and Congressman Davis:
We are writing to express our strong concern about proposals to convert the U.S. Census Bureau’s American Community Survey (ACS) from a mandatory to a voluntary survey. We believe such a change would significantly increase the cost of the ACS; at a time of fiscal constraint, lack of sufficient resources could diminish the quality of ACS data to a point where the information is not useful for a myriad of critical public and private sector purposes. We know that your panel will review this issue at a hearing on March 6, 2012, and respectfully ask that the subcommittee include our letter in the official hearing record.
The Census Project is a non-partisan, ad-hoc, broad-based coalition of census stakeholders. The Project’s participants include data users in the business, housing, civil rights, academic and research, civic participation, child advocate, state and local government, and marketing sectors. Our common purpose is simple: To
educate policymakers and the public about the importance of high quality, cost effective and appropriately comprehensive census data for sound decision-making at all levels of government and in the private and non-profit sectors. (The ACS is part of the decennial census.)
Concerned about respondent burden and the propriety of the questions, Congress directed the Census Bureau to explore the possibility of making the ACS voluntary in 2003. In two reports1 and several more recent analyses, the bureau concluded that mail response rates to a voluntary ACS would drop "dramatically," by more than 20 percentage points. That decline, in turn, would force the bureau to use more costly modes of data collection, such as telephone and door-to-door visits, thereby increasing the cost of the survey by thirty percent ($60 million at the time of the 2003 field test). Congress, in the current fiscal climate, is unlikely to increase funding for the ACS by the amount necessary to overcome low initial response rates, leaving the Census Bureau with insufficient response to produce reliable data for smaller (e.g. rural communities; towns; urban neighborhoods) areas and population groups (e.g. people with disabilities; veterans; immigrant groups). The consequence would be greatly diminished quality of ACS data. The test also showed that the percent of completed interviews (conducted if a household fails to mail back a form) fell significantly if the survey was voluntary, adding to the problem of data reliability.
Perhaps not surprisingly, cooperation in traditionally low mail response areas (which tend to equate with hard-to-count communities, such as people of color, low income families, and rural households) declined even further when ACS response was voluntary. Interestingly, a significantly higher percentage of traditionally easier-to-count populations, such as non-Hispanic Whites, failed to respond during the mail and telephone phases of the ACS. These findings suggest that the quality of estimates produced from a voluntary ACS would be severely jeopardized for all segments of the population and all types of communities.
The importance of high-quality, objective, and universal ACS data for public and private sector decision-makers cannot be overstated. The federal government alone allocates more than $450 billion annually in program funds to state and local governments based in whole or in part on ACS data.(2) Federal law, directly or indirectly, requires all of the information gathered in the ACS (i.e. Congress requested the data directly, or created a program that relies on data for implementation, enforcement, or monitoring, and the census or ACS are the only sources). We should not jeopardize the fair and wise allocation of limited taxpayer dollars by undermining the only source of reliable data to guide those allocations, not to mention decisions on whether even to continue certain programs.
In addition, the Voting Rights Act relies on ACS data to make determinations under section 203, which requires jurisdictions with a high percentage of people who are not English language proficient to offer bilingual voting materials. Both the government and business sector rely on ACS data to help ensure appropriate employment opportunities for racial minorities, disabled persons, and veterans.
Equally important, businesses of all sizes rely on ACS data every day to make vital decisions about where to locate and expand, what goods and services to offer, the scope of employee training needed, and long term investment opportunities. Nonprofit organizations use the ACS to guide services to those most in need and to measure the success of their programs.
For these reasons, we urge your subcommittee to view any proposal to make the American Community Survey voluntary with great caution. Such a change would have serious adverse consequences that could leave the nation in a precarious decision-making vacuum and hinder its economic recovery and future growth.
Sincerely,
American Association of Public Opinion Research
American Sociological Association
American Statistical Association
Asian American Justice Center, member of Asian American Center for Advancing
Justice
Association of Population Centers
Association of Public Data Users (APDU)
Charlotte (N.C.) Chamber of Commerce
Coalition on Human Needs
Community Action Partnership
Consortium of Social Science Associations
Council for Community & Economic Research (C2ER)
Council of Professional Associations on Federal Statistics
CREW Network
Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights
Marketing Research Association (MRA)
National Association for Business Economics
National Association of Latino Elected and Appointed Officials (NALEO) Educational
Fund
National Congress of American Indians
National Education Association
National Multi Housing Council
North Carolina Housing Finance Agency
Population Association of America
Population Reference Bureau
Prison Policy Initiative
Project Vote
South Asian Americans Leading Together (SAALT)
Southeast Michigan Census Council
1. “Meeting 21st Century Data Needs - Implementing the American Community Survey, Report 3: Testing the Use of Voluntary Methods” (Dec. 2003) (http://www.census.gov/acs/www/Downloads/Report03.pdf) and an update,
“Report 11: Testing Voluntary Methods -- Additional Results” (Dec. 2004)
(http://www.census.gov/acs/www/Downloads/Report11.pdf).
2. Reamer, Andrew, “Surveying for Dollars: The Role of the American Community Survey in the Geographic Distribution of Federal Funds,” The Brookings Institution, July 2010.
A project of the Communications Consortium Media Center
401 Ninth Street NW, Suite 450, Washington, DC 20004
202.326.8700
www.TheCensusProject.org
Friday, September 23, 2011
Census Bureau Releases 2010 ACS Single Year Estimates
Topics Include Commuting, Education, Income, Health Insurance and More
The U.S. Census Bureau released findings from the 2010 American Community Survey (ACS), the most relied-on source for up-to-date socioeconomic information every year. The release covers more than 40 topics, such as educational attainment, income, health insurance coverage, occupation, language spoken at home, nativity, ancestry and selected monthly homeowner costs.
The estimates are available in detailed tables for the nation, all 50 states, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, every congressional district, every metropolitan area, and all counties and places with populations of 65,000 or more. See the Census Bureau’s American FactFinder database to find statistics for your area. Selected high-level highlights can be found here [PDF].
One illustration of the extent of information available on one
of the major topics covered is the commute to work. According to the data, average travel time for workers 16 and older inched up from 25.1 minutes in 2009 to 25.3 minutes in 2010. The percentage who drove to work alone increased from 76.1 percent in 2009 to 76.6 percent in 2010. Conversely, the percentage who carpooled declined from 10.0 percent to 9.7 percent and the percentage taking public transportation slipped from 5.0 percent to 4.9 percent. Another 4.3 percent worked at home and 2.8 percent walked to work. About 1.7 percent commuted to work in other ways, including commuting by bicycle (731,286), motorcycle (266,777) and taxicab (151,247).
Average travel time to work was highest in Maryland (31.8 minutes), followed by New York (31.3 minutes). North Dakota and South Dakota had the shortest travel times, at 16.1 minutes and 16.8 minutes, respectively. Not coincidentally, Maryland also had the second-highest percentage of workers with jobs outside their county of residence (47.0 percent), behind only Virginia (51.3 percent). New Jersey (45.7 percent) and Georgia (41.6 percent) followed Maryland.
Detailed Report on Commuting
Also released was Commuting in the United States: 2009[PDF], a report that provides additional layers of analysis about commuting patterns for the nation and metro areas. Based on the 2009 ACS, the analysis gives a historical perspective of the nation’s commuting patterns. It also looks at how our commutes differ based on how we get to work, when we leave for work and how long it takes us. It further analyzes commutes based on a host of demographic characteristics, including race and Hispanic origin, occupation, gender, place of birth and other variables.
According to the report:
The recent rise in mean travel time to work is nothing new. In 1980, the first time the Census collected such information, average travel time was just under 22 minutes, then increased to about 25 minutes in 2000, where it remained in 2009.
In 2009, workers who carpooled took longer to get to work than those who drove alone; the difference was largest for those who departed in the midnight to 4:59 a.m. period, where average travel time for carpool commuters was 45.1 minutes, compared with 30.8 minutes for workers who drove alone.
Those who worked in production, transportation and material moving occupations were more likely to depart for work between midnight and 4:59 a.m. than any other occupational category (10.5 percent). At 1.9 percent, those in managerial, professional and related occupations had the lowest percentage of departures during this time period.
Mean travel time to work varied by nativity status: 28.1 minutes for foreign-born workers compared with 24.9 minutes for those who were native-born. Hispanic workers had the longest mean travel time when carpooling (29.0 minutes) and the shortest time for public transportation usage (46.0 minutes).
American Community Survey Brief Series
In addition, the Census Bureau released today a set of four separate briefs based on the 2010 ACS. These short reports supplement detailed tables with additional analysis on four key topics. These include:
Health insurance coverage
Employment ratios
Household income
Foreign-born from Latin America and the Caribbean
More than a dozen additional briefs will be released in monthly waves through the end of the year.
More about the American Community Survey (ACS)
As a complete count of the population, the 2010 Census results are critical for people who need to know how many people live in the United States and where they live. The ACS statistics, on the other hand, are based on a sample survey of the nation conducted over the course of the 2010 calendar year and describe how we live by providing estimates of key social, economic and housing characteristics.
In October, the Census Bureau will release a set of ACS statistics covering all areas with populations of 20,000 or more, based on data collected between 2008 and 2010. A third set of ACS statistics, available for all geographic areas regardless of population size, down to the block group level, will be released in December; these estimates will cover 2006-2010.
Methodology
As is the case with all surveys, statistics from sample surveys are subject to sampling and nonsampling error. All comparisons made in the reports have been tested and found to be statistically significant at the 90 percent confidence level, unless otherwise noted. Please consult the tables for specific margins of error. For more information, go here.
Changes in survey design from year to year can affect results. See http://www.census.gov/acs/www/data_documentation/2010_release/ this for more information on changes affecting the 2010 statistics. See http://www.census.gov/acs/www/guidance_for_data_users/comparing_2010/ this for guidance on comparing 2010 ACS statistics with previous years and the 2000 Census.
Special Note
The Census Bureau released all of the 2010 ACS 1-year estimates on Thursday, September 22. Due to a technical issue, a limited number of products for smaller geographic areas are not available through American FactFinder at this time. However, all Detailed Tables are accessible in the ACS Summary File, through the Census Bureau’s FTP site.
Working with the ACS Summary File requires computer expertise. Technical documentation is available here [PDF]. Data users who are not able to access the Summary File can contact the American Community Survey Office (301-763-1405, acso.users.support@census.gov).
The U.S. Census Bureau released findings from the 2010 American Community Survey (ACS), the most relied-on source for up-to-date socioeconomic information every year. The release covers more than 40 topics, such as educational attainment, income, health insurance coverage, occupation, language spoken at home, nativity, ancestry and selected monthly homeowner costs.
The estimates are available in detailed tables for the nation, all 50 states, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, every congressional district, every metropolitan area, and all counties and places with populations of 65,000 or more. See the Census Bureau’s American FactFinder database to find statistics for your area. Selected high-level highlights can be found here [PDF].
One illustration of the extent of information available on one
of the major topics covered is the commute to work. According to the data, average travel time for workers 16 and older inched up from 25.1 minutes in 2009 to 25.3 minutes in 2010. The percentage who drove to work alone increased from 76.1 percent in 2009 to 76.6 percent in 2010. Conversely, the percentage who carpooled declined from 10.0 percent to 9.7 percent and the percentage taking public transportation slipped from 5.0 percent to 4.9 percent. Another 4.3 percent worked at home and 2.8 percent walked to work. About 1.7 percent commuted to work in other ways, including commuting by bicycle (731,286), motorcycle (266,777) and taxicab (151,247).
Average travel time to work was highest in Maryland (31.8 minutes), followed by New York (31.3 minutes). North Dakota and South Dakota had the shortest travel times, at 16.1 minutes and 16.8 minutes, respectively. Not coincidentally, Maryland also had the second-highest percentage of workers with jobs outside their county of residence (47.0 percent), behind only Virginia (51.3 percent). New Jersey (45.7 percent) and Georgia (41.6 percent) followed Maryland.
Detailed Report on Commuting
Also released was Commuting in the United States: 2009[PDF], a report that provides additional layers of analysis about commuting patterns for the nation and metro areas. Based on the 2009 ACS, the analysis gives a historical perspective of the nation’s commuting patterns. It also looks at how our commutes differ based on how we get to work, when we leave for work and how long it takes us. It further analyzes commutes based on a host of demographic characteristics, including race and Hispanic origin, occupation, gender, place of birth and other variables.
According to the report:
The recent rise in mean travel time to work is nothing new. In 1980, the first time the Census collected such information, average travel time was just under 22 minutes, then increased to about 25 minutes in 2000, where it remained in 2009.
In 2009, workers who carpooled took longer to get to work than those who drove alone; the difference was largest for those who departed in the midnight to 4:59 a.m. period, where average travel time for carpool commuters was 45.1 minutes, compared with 30.8 minutes for workers who drove alone.
Those who worked in production, transportation and material moving occupations were more likely to depart for work between midnight and 4:59 a.m. than any other occupational category (10.5 percent). At 1.9 percent, those in managerial, professional and related occupations had the lowest percentage of departures during this time period.
Mean travel time to work varied by nativity status: 28.1 minutes for foreign-born workers compared with 24.9 minutes for those who were native-born. Hispanic workers had the longest mean travel time when carpooling (29.0 minutes) and the shortest time for public transportation usage (46.0 minutes).
American Community Survey Brief Series
In addition, the Census Bureau released today a set of four separate briefs based on the 2010 ACS. These short reports supplement detailed tables with additional analysis on four key topics. These include:
Health insurance coverage
Employment ratios
Household income
Foreign-born from Latin America and the Caribbean
More than a dozen additional briefs will be released in monthly waves through the end of the year.
More about the American Community Survey (ACS)
As a complete count of the population, the 2010 Census results are critical for people who need to know how many people live in the United States and where they live. The ACS statistics, on the other hand, are based on a sample survey of the nation conducted over the course of the 2010 calendar year and describe how we live by providing estimates of key social, economic and housing characteristics.
In October, the Census Bureau will release a set of ACS statistics covering all areas with populations of 20,000 or more, based on data collected between 2008 and 2010. A third set of ACS statistics, available for all geographic areas regardless of population size, down to the block group level, will be released in December; these estimates will cover 2006-2010.
Methodology
As is the case with all surveys, statistics from sample surveys are subject to sampling and nonsampling error. All comparisons made in the reports have been tested and found to be statistically significant at the 90 percent confidence level, unless otherwise noted. Please consult the tables for specific margins of error. For more information, go here.
Changes in survey design from year to year can affect results. See http://www.census.gov/acs/www/data_documentation/2010_release/ this for more information on changes affecting the 2010 statistics. See http://www.census.gov/acs/www/guidance_for_data_users/comparing_2010/ this for guidance on comparing 2010 ACS statistics with previous years and the 2000 Census.
Special Note
The Census Bureau released all of the 2010 ACS 1-year estimates on Thursday, September 22. Due to a technical issue, a limited number of products for smaller geographic areas are not available through American FactFinder at this time. However, all Detailed Tables are accessible in the ACS Summary File, through the Census Bureau’s FTP site.
Working with the ACS Summary File requires computer expertise. Technical documentation is available here [PDF]. Data users who are not able to access the Summary File can contact the American Community Survey Office (301-763-1405, acso.users.support@census.gov).
Thursday, January 20, 2011
5-Year Release Details
The 2005-2009 ACS 5-year estimates are available in multiple ways:
Most tables are available on American FactFinder—Census Bureau’s online data access tool
•Most detailed tables*
•All data and narrative profiles
•All subject tables
•All geographic comparison tables & thematic maps
•Estimates available to the Census Tract level
*The list of detailed tables not available on American FactFinder are listed here
ACS Summary File
Most tables are available on American FactFinder—Census Bureau’s online data access tool
•Most detailed tables*
•All data and narrative profiles
•All subject tables
•All geographic comparison tables & thematic maps
•Estimates available to the Census Tract level
*The list of detailed tables not available on American FactFinder are listed here
ACS Summary File
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)