TO: CTPP-News listserv
Now that we've all had time to thoroughly digest the PL 94-171 data file, the Census Bureau will be developing a one-page "Demographic Profile" (DP-1) for all states, counties and places in the US. This Demographic Profile will be based on 100% short form data. It will be released on a flow basis over the next few months.
These one-page profiles will be released in PDF format, and available on American FactFinder. Data files will also be released, either in DBF or ASCII or formats to be determined.
Eventually this Demographic Profile page will be prepared for all (?) census tracts.
Expected release schedule for these Demographic Profiles is May through July (according to the Census Bureau's page) though we should be expecting national data in the next couple of weeks.
Data items included in the Demographic Profile will be fairly simple tabulations, for example: total population by sex; total population by age cohorts (5-yr increments to 85+); total population age 18+ and 65+ by sex; and total population age 21+ and 62+.
This will be the *first* release of detailed Asian (Asian Indian, Chinese, Filipino, Japanese, Vietnamese, Korean, Other Asian), Native Hawaiian/Pac Islander (Hawaiian, Guamanian, Samoan, Other Pacific Islander) and detailed Hispanic/Latino (Mexican, Puerto Rican, Cuban, Other Latino) population.
The Demographic Profile will also have data on number of households and household population; group quarters population (institutional and non-institutional); relationship to householder; family and non-family households; average household size; average family size; vacant housing units; and housing units by owner/renter tenure and average household size by owner/renter tenure.
For a sample of what data will be available you can check out the DRAFT (?) profile format:
When you go to this page, click on "Demographic Profile." It is the second line.
I don't know too much else, but some of us are monitoring the discussions on the State Data Center listserv & talking to Census staff. I don't know if *all* of the "large area" (state, county) data will be released before *any* of the "small area" (city, place, tract) is released. I guess we'll all find out in a month or so!
Again, these DP-1 pages are due out May - July 2001. The detailed SF-1 short form datasets are due out June - September 2001.
Recommend bookmarking the census release schedule at:
Hope this helps! (Census Bureau folk should jump in to correct any glaring errors or omissions! thx)
Chuck Purvis, Metropolitan Transportation Commission,
TRB Urban Data Committee Chair,
& SF Bay Area census analyst for ABAG/MTC Regional Data Center.
Tonight at our census session at the "8th Conference on the Application
of Transportation Planning Methods" Joe Marinucci, Chief of Geographic
Areas Branch in the Geography Division of the Census Bureau noted that
the Bureau was taking steps to extend the comment period on the UAZ
definitional criteria for 30 more days.
He said that it would take about two weeks to get the notice of the
extension out so with the extension and the two week period it will be
more like a 45 day extension. The comments were due back by April
For more information on the UAZ issue see
The Census Bureau is complementing the American FactFinder with a very nice set of comparison tables. These tables were released this past Monday, April 2nd.
These are helpful if you're looking at metropolitan areas, counties and places 100,000+ population ranked by 2000 total population. Tables give 1990 population as well, and also provide tables on areas ranked by population change and percent population change.
You can get these comparison tables by going to American FactFinder at:
Then, click on "Census 2000 Special Tables and Reports"; then, click on "List of Tables" and you're there. Or, try this URL:
(Trying to find Census 2000 data is like an Easter Egg Hunt. You gotta know when to look, and where the good ones are hidden ;-)
Chuck Purvis, MTC
Last December, we sent a message to this listserve to see how many MPOs
would be willing and/or able to assist the Census Bureau in resolving the
most difficult to geocode place of work responses from Census 2000. We
received responses from over a hundred agencies, the vast majority
indicating that they would participate in such a program. Some of you may
remember that a similar activity was planned for the 1990 Census, but the
Bureau never implemented it and no MPOs were given an opportunity to
Based on the number of favorable responses to our December inquiry, I went
forward within the Bureau to try to get approval for this activity for
Census 2000. I spoke with our Policy Office and with our Legal department.
Some questions about confidentiality and Title 13 requirements were raised,
and I was directed to present my case to the Bureau's Disclosure Review
Board (DRB). I submitted a request to the DRB for approval to implement
the program, emphasizing that the information provided to the MPOs would
not be individual responses. Rather, we would group responses from several
people that seemed to represent the same employer or workplace location,
building synthetic responses or what we call "clusters." In effect, the
MPOs would be receiving address information culled from a number of census
In mid-March I received a decision from the Disclosure Review Board. They
turned down my request to implement a program that would allow MPOs to
assist in Census 2000 geocoding. It was felt that the addresses provided
to the MPOs would become a microdata file of working places, and the Census
Bureau does not release such files at the street address level or by
employer name. Therefore, we will not be contacting any of you for
assistance with our geocoding operation.
I would like to thank those of you who responded to our December inquiry; I
appreciate everyone's willingness to devote valuable time and resources to
projects such as this, the TAZ-UP program, and the Workplace Update
program. I look forward to continuing to work with you on our next big
joint project, the Census Transportation Planning Package 2000.
Chief, Journey-to-Work and Migration Statistics Branch
US Census Bureau
This information (probably in revised form) will be sent to the FHWA field offices within the next day. However, I am sending this along to the CTPP listserv to get it out as soon as possible.
Attached is a document to assist those areas which may want to evaluate what the impact of the proposed definition of Urbanized Areas may be for their area. You will need to know how to use GIS to conduct this evaluation. While we conferred with the Census Bureau staff to assure that these notes are correct, we cannot guarantee them. You will want to print this in COLOR to be able to read the maps. Technical questions should be addressed to ua(a)geo.census.gov. You may also call the Census Bureau Geography Division at 301-457-1099.
Comments to the Federal Register notice (posted at www.census.gov/geo/www/ua/ua_2k.html) are due by April 27, 2001. Comments should be submitted to Director, U.S. Census Bureau, Room 2049, Fedral Building 3, Washington, D.C. 20233-0001.
The FHWA Office of Metropolitan Planning prepared these notes to assist local areas, however, we will not be checking individual areas against these proposed criteria, and will not be able to provide technical assistance in operating ArcView or ArcInfo.
TO: CTPP-News listserv
FR: Chuck Purvis, MTC
RE: PUMA Delineation Program
The following are a series of talking points (from a Census Bureau staff person?) from the March 2001 meeting of the State Data Center network. They describe the upcoming program to delineate the 1 percent and 5 percent Public Use Microdata Areas (PUMAs).
Since this is an open process, I would encourage staff of Metropolitan Planning Organizations to work with their State Data Centers on this program. In many cases, the MPOs are either "affiliate data centers" or "regional data centers" and are already part of the network; but there other MPOs who are new to this census game and should be more involved.
I think one of the challenges in our region will be to open the process to academic PUMS researchers who cherish this dataset as much as we do. I guess my recommendation to the academic researchers is to contact your local MPO or Council of Government to see who's doing what in PUMA definition.
Chuck Purvis, MTC
2000 PUMA Delineation Program
Delineation of 5-percent and 1-percent Public Use Microdata Areas
>100,000 population minimum for the 5-percent PUMAs
>400,000 population minimum for the 1-percent PUMAs
SDC does the delineation themselves
SDC coordinates local delineation
Must be an OPEN PROCESS
90-day period for the initial delineation (June-August 2001)
30-day period for the verification phase (November-December 2001)
5-Percent PUMA Criteria
Delineate PUMAs for entire state
Counties with <100,000 cannot be split
Boundaries follow counties and census tracts or incorporated places >100,000
PUMAs must be contiguous
Comparability with 1990 1% PUMAs
100,000-200,000 in size
1-Percent PUMA Criteria
Aggregations of the 5-percent PUMAs
Same rules and recommendations as the 5-percent PUMAs
400,000-800,000 in size
Census Bureau Provided Material
Invitation Letter and PUMA Guidelines
Census 2000 TIGER/Line Files (90 PUMAs)
Census Tract Outline Maps-Ctys. >100,000
1990 1-Percent PUMA Equivalency File
2000 PUMA Geographic Equivalency File
PUMA Verification Outline Maps
PUMA Verification Equivalency File
Charles L. Purvis, AICP
Senior Transportation Planner/Analyst
Metropolitan Transportation Commission
101 Eighth Street
Oakland, CA 94607-4700
(510) 464-7731 (office)
(510) 464-7848 (fax)
This is an *excellent* web site on census data, with focus on Los Angeles County, by Prof. Dowell Myers and his colleagues at the University of Southern California. The animated maps are fascinating. Great stuff!
Chuck Purvis, MTC
Date: Sat, 31 Mar 2001
From: Dowell Myers <dowell(a)rcf-fs.usc.edu>
Subject: New Website on 2000 Race in California and the US
With release of data on race and Hispanic origin from the 2000 census, we
have set up a new website at USC that provides a full comparison of the 50
states, including details on California and Los Angeles. This site reports
findings from a project on the changing contours of race and Hispanic
origin, Race Contours 2000. (Co-investigators are Dowell Myers, Philip
Ethington, Angela James, and William Frey.)
The site address is: http://www.usc.edu/sppd/census2000
Contents focus on findings from the new multiracial question in the
census, and highlight spatial differences in racial patterns. Graphs compare all 50 states (especially Mississippi and California!).
In California, we have identified a "multiracial belt" in the center of
the state. (It is not in San Francisco.)
Also on the site is an evaluation of where total population growth in
California counties, or growth of specific racial groups, exceeded what
was previously forecast.
Within Los Angeles County, we have posted a unique set of *animated maps* that traces the spread of racial diversity from 1940 to 2000. We call
these maps, displays of growing "racial majorities." The site also
includes measures of exposure and dissimilarity from 1940 to 2000 for four main race-ethnic groups.
Soon to be added is a summary of changes in composition and growing
diversity for specific communities in the Los Angeles area.
Of general interest to all: the site includes a resource of some
importance. "Overlap" is the title of our multi-section user guide to race
and Hispanic origin in Census 2000. The major changes in the 2000 census
necessitate much more careful consideration by all census data users.
We welcome your visit! http://www.usc.edu/sppd/census2000
Director, Master of Planning Program
School of Policy, Planning & Development
301 Lewis Hall Phone: (213) 740-7095
University of Southern California FAX: (213) 821-1466
Los Angeles, CA 90089-0626 Internet: dowell(a)rcf.usc.edu