ctpp-news January 2003

ctpp-news@mailman.chrispy.net

14 participants
16 discussions

by ed christopher

form: www.census2000.org January 27, 2003 CENSUS NEWS BRIEF 2003 Funding Bill Headed To House-Senate Conference Committee; Domestic Spending Constraints Could Threaten Future of American Community Survey Late last week, the U.S. Senate completed action on an omnibus appropriations bill that funds all non-defense government activities for Fiscal Year 2003 (FY03). House Joint Resolution 2 (H.J. Res. 2) covers eleven of thirteen regular appropriations bills that Congress failed to pass before adjourning last fall, including the Commerce, Justice, and State, The Judiciary and Related Agencies bill. (The Census Bureau is part of the Commerce Department.) The sweeping measure to fund federal agencies for the budget year that began last October 1 now heads to a conference committee, where House and Senate negotiators will try to agree on final spending levels. While the House did not pass its own version of the omnibus bill, House Republican appropriators unveiled a Commerce/Justice/State appropriations bill earlier this month, to indicate their position going into conference. Both the House and Senate have signaled their intent to cap spending for 2010 census planning at last year's level; the Senate allocation was a further reduction from Fiscal Year 2002. Senate Bill Fails To Cover Full ACS Test Program: The Senate-passed version of H.J. Res. 2 allocates $558.9 million for Census Bureau programs and activities, $146.4 million below the President's budget request for the current fiscal year. (The amount includes funds for a 4.1 percent federal civilian employee increase; the President has proposed a 3.1 percent pay increase.) The Periodic Censuses and Programs account ("Periodics"), one of two main funding categories for the Census Bureau, received $385.7 million, $114.6 million less than the Administration's request of $500.3 million. Appropriators noted that an additional $15 million in unspent funds from the previous year (called a "carry-over") would be available for Periodics programs. The Periodics account covers the decennial census and census support operations, including mapping and address list development, as well as other mandated cyclical activities such as the Economic Census. In a more detailed explanation accompanying the funding bill, Senate appropriators set aside roughly $95 million for 2010 census planning, substantially less than the President's request of $214.5 million. Appropriators further recommended that $42.8 million of the total amount be used for "design and planning" and $52.2 million be used for MAF/TIGER improvements, but made no mention of the national Supplementary Survey currently being conducted as part of American Community Survey development. Funding for the 700,00-housing unit Supplementary Survey was $29 million in FY02. The Census Bureau's "re-engineering" plan for 2010 includes three major initiatives: modernizing the Master Address File (MAF) and digital geographic database (the TIGER system); early planning, development, and testing of a "short form-only" census; and nationwide implementation of the American Community Survey (ACS), which would eliminate the need for a long form in future censuses. Senate appropriators separately allocated $27.1 million to continue data collection in the 31 American Community Survey test sites, bringing the total amount available for all 2010 census planning either to $122.1 million, or $137.1 million if the carry-over is applied to this program. The Census Bureau originally hoped to implement the ACS nationwide in FY03, at a cost of about $123 million. House Appropriators Signal Position on FY03 Census Bureau budget: The House of Representatives, meanwhile, will reconvene today after being in recess for two weeks. Unlike the Senate, the House did not consider an omnibus appropriations bill for FY03, but negotiators will go directly to a conference committee to work out a final measure with the Senate. (H.J. Res. 2, which originated in the House, passed that chamber on January 8. However, the bill was a continuing funding resolution to keep federal agencies operating at FY02 levels; the House approved the measure simply to serve as a legislative vehicle for the Senate's omnibus appropriations bill. The House then adjourned for two weeks, while the Senate began consideration of the FY03 funding bill by substituting its appropriations language for the original language of H.J. Res. 2.) On January 8, Rep. Frank Wolf (R-VA), chairman of the Appropriations Subcommittee on Commerce, Justice, State, and The Judiciary, introduced a separate funding measure for FY03 (H.R. 247). While not considered by either the Appropriations Committee or the full House, Chairman Wolf's bill offers a marker for the House's position in negotiations with the Senate. H.R. 247 would allocate $599.5 million for the Census Bureau, $105.8 million below the President's FY03 request. The Periodic Censuses and Programs account would receive $410.3 million, including $143.3 million for 2010 census planning. According to the Census Bureau's Congressional Affairs Office, an unofficial explanation of the Wolf bill, prepared by the Appropriations Committee, further earmarks $57.1 million for the American Community Survey. That amount is comparable to the FY02 funding level for the 31 ACS test sites and the national Supplementary Survey combined. The unofficial report indicates that $1 million of ACS funding should be used to evaluate the effects of voluntary response to the survey. The Census Bureau considers the ACS to be part of the decennial census, for which response is mandatory by law. It believes voluntary ACS response would increase costs and diminish data quality. However, key members of the Census Bureau's oversight committee have questioned the need for mandatory response to the ACS, in light of public concerns about privacy. Until Congress passes and the President signs the catch-all FY03 appropriations bill, the Census Bureau and other non-defense federal agencies will continue to operate under Fiscal Year 2002 spending levels. The current Continuing Budget Resolution, the eighth such stop-gap funding measure since FY03 began last fall, runs out on January 31. Congress would pass another Continuing Resolution if the House and Senate do not agree on a final omnibus funding bill by that date. The following chart compares relevant "line items" for the Census Bureau going into conference on the FY03 funding bill, based on the best available information about current funding levels and the House and Senate positions. All amounts are in millions of dollars and rounded to the nearest hundred thousand. FY02 FY03 FY03: FY03: (Actual)Request House Position Senate Position (Budget Authority) Census Bureau $544.8** $705.3 $599.5 $558.9 Periodic Censuses & Programs $375.4 $500.3 $410.3 $385.7 2010 Census Planning (total) $92.1= $214.5 $143.3 $95.0 2010: ACS $56.1= $121.2 $57.1 $27.1 2010: MAF/TIGER imprvmnts $15.0 $51.4 Unknown $52.2 2010: Design & planning $21.0 $41.9 Unknown $42.8 *Current budget request figures are modestly lower than those set forth in the budget justification submitted to Congress in February 2002, for reasons that are not entirely clear to the editor. **Included $54 million in carry-over funds from previous year. =Includes $27.1 million from the Continuous Measurement line item, which funded the 31 ACS test sites, and $29 million for the Supplementary Survey. President To Unveil 2004 Budget Request Next Week: President Bush is tentatively scheduled to send his Fiscal Year 2004 (FY04) budget request to Congress the week of February 3. No details about the Census Bureau's budget request for the fiscal year beginning October 1, 2003, are available yet. However, senior White House officials have said publicly that the Administration's plan will hold discretionary federal spending to a four percent increase, with most of the additional spending going to homeland security and defense. Budgetary constraints could spell particular trouble for 2010 census planning. In the normal ten-year development and implementation cycle for a decennial census, funding demands are at their lowest in the "03" year, and then increase as the Census Bureau carries out field tests for several years, a dress rehearsal (in the "08" year), final address list compilation, and other critical preparations. Furthermore, full implementation of the American Community Survey in FY04 would require more than double the funding the Census Bureau is likely to receive for FY03. While other "Periodic" programs, such as the Economic Census, will need less money in FY04 than in FY03, the leap from test mode to full, ongoing implementation of the ACS in budgetary terms is daunting in the current economic climate. Census News Briefs are prepared by Terri Ann Lowenthal, an independent consultant in Washington, DC. Please direct questions about the information in this News Brief to Ms. Lowenthal at 202/484-2270 or by e-mail at <terriann2k(a)aol.com>. Thank you to the Communications Consortium Media Center for posting the News Briefs on the Census 2000 Initiative web site, at www.census2000.org. Please feel free to circulate this information to colleagues and other interested individuals.

21 years, 10 months

CTPP2000 Update -- Delays in Releasing Part 1

by phillip.a.salopek＠census.gov

We are behind schedule on the release of the Part 1 data (by place of residence) for CTPP 2000. Data release did not begin in December as we said it would, and it is clear now that it will not begin in January either. Release may begin by the end of February but I can't guarantee that date yet as there are still too many unknowns. Here's where we stand. The programs are all written to tabulate the data, and we are on our fifth iteration of the complete Part 1 datasets in the tabulate/review/correct process for our test states. We recently added one table to Part 1 but have been held up from going into full final production by a policy issue that has cropped up here in the Census Bureau. This is unfortunate timing, since if we had released the data in December as planned we might have gotten it out before the policy issue arose. The issue affects other census products in addition to the CTPP, but we do not have a time table for when it will be resolved. This is a high priority topic here, though, so I am hoping it will be resolved in the next two weeks. We just completed our first review of the browsing, mapping, and exporting software that will be used to access CTPP 2000 data (CTPP Access Tool --CAT). We sent our comments to the two vendors late today so they can begin incorporating the fixes. There are several bugs that need to be addressed, but the basic functionality seems to be working properly. I do not anticipate getting a second version to review any sooner than the first week of February, and it will take us a few days to check out that version. If we are up and running in data file production by then we will submit the files to the vendors, they will import the data and create the CD images, send the images back to us for volume CD production, and then shipping out to the States and MPOs will occur. Given these delays and CD production scheduling, I expect that the first CDs will be available beginning in late February at the earliest. Part 1 release for the entire country will probably take six to eight weeks. I know that many States and MPOs are planning to use the CTPP 2000 for their model update work and need the data as quickly as possible. I apologize for this delay and am working to get the data out as soon as possible. --Phil Salopek

21 years, 11 months

Adjusted 2000 Census Data Now Available from Caliper Corporation

by Peter H. Van Demark

All: Caliper Corporation has just made available to its users the Adjusted 2000 Census Data. These data contain PL94-171 redistricting data, adjusted based on the Accuracy and Coverage Evaluation (A.C.E.) survey conducted during Census 2000. The A.C.E. survey was designed to measure net undercounts, such as people missed, and overcounts, such as people counted twice. The undercounts are largely in Latino, African-American, and other minority groups. We have created a web mapping application at (http://198.22.17.155/maptitude/censusadjusted/map.asp?map=1) that you can use to browse the difference and percent difference between the original and adjusted total population, and the difference between the original and adjusted Hispanic population. The map starts at the state level, and as you zoom in shows the data at the county and then the place/MCD level. You can locate a state, a ZIP Code, and even an address to move the map to an area of interest, and you can click on map to get more detail on the Adjusted 2000 Census Data for an area. Users of the Caliper Corporation Geographic Information System software products, Maptitude and TransCAD, can purchase Redistricting Data CDs with Adjusted 2000 Census Data, which are available for a single state or territory. Each Data CD contains boundaries and adjusted 2000 Census data for Block Groups, Blocks, Counties, County Subdivisions (MCDs), Indian Reservations, Places, State, Tracts, and Voting Districts for a single state or territory. For more information, please visit (http://www.caliper.com/DataCDs/AdjustedData.htm). We hope that you find the web mapping application a useful way to start looking at the Adjusted 2000 Census Data. Peter ---------------------------------------------------------------- Peter Van Demark Director of GIS Products and Training Phone: 617-527-4700 Caliper Corporation Fax: 617-527-5113 1172 Beacon Street E-mail: peter(a)caliper.com Newton MA 02461-9926 Web site: http://www.caliper.com

21 years, 11 months

CTPP and Census Products Workshop Registration & News

by Chuck Purvis

TO: CTPP-News; BayArea Census Listserv; BayArea GIS-T Listserv FR: Chuck Purvis Hello again! The registration for the "CTPP and Census 2000 Products" Workshop for Monday, January 27th, is closing at 5:00 PM today. We currently have over 100 persons registered, and we need to close down registration for planning the final logisitics of the workshop. We're very much looking forward to having you all here! http://www.abag.ca.gov/abag/events/ctpp/ We have a substitution on the program with Ms. Clara Reschovsky of the Census Bureau Journey-to-Work and Migration Statistics Branch filling in for Phil Salopek. Thank you, Clara! In terms of CTPP data available at the January 27th workshop, we do not anticipate having any of the CTPP area-of-residence (Part 1) data to show. The area-of-residence data is expected in February - March 2003; the area-of-work and commute flow data is expected this summer (April - July); and the county-to-county total commuters data files are anticipated in February. For those folks not attending, we will do what we can to post all materials, powerpoint presentations, etc., on the MTC/ABAG web sites by sometime next week. Chuck Purvis, MTC ************************************************************** 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) www: http://www.mtc.ca.gov/ Census WWW: http://www.bayareacensus.ca.gov/ **************************************************************

21 years, 11 months

RE: [CTPP] New Urbanized Area Boundaries -- Impacts

by Larry Mugler

We have found that EPA is using the urbanized area information in the stormwater permitting program. I think it is mostly used to identify which local governments will need to apply for permits. Larry G. Mugler, AICP Denver Regional Council of Governments -----Original Message----- From: David Saladino [mailto:dsaladino@swrpc.org] Sent: Tuesday, January 21, 2003 11:51 AM To: ctpp-news(a)chrispy.net Subject: [CTPP] New Urbanized Area Boundaries -- Impacts We have recently been asked by our State DOT to review and revise our region's Federal Functional Classifications based on the new Census 2000 urban areas. I have a fairly good understanding of the impact that new and re-aligned urban bounds will have in our State's Federal allotment of funds from US DOT. Does anyone know what other Federal agencies (other than DOT) use urbanized boundaries (either urban areas or clusters) for administrative and/or funding purposes? Thanks in advance, Dave -------------------------------- David Saladino Regional Planner Southwest Region Planning Commission 20 Central Square, Second Floor Keene, NH 03431 Ph: (603) 357-0557 Fx: (603) 357-7440 E-mail: dsaladino(a)swrpc.org Internet: <http://www.swrpc.org> http://www.swrpc.org

21 years, 11 months

New Urbanized Area Boundaries -- Impacts

by David Saladino

We have recently been asked by our State DOT to review and revise our region's Federal Functional Classifications based on the new Census 2000 urban areas. I have a fairly good understanding of the impact that new and re-aligned urban bounds will have in our State's Federal allotment of funds from US DOT. Does anyone know what other Federal agencies (other than DOT) use urbanized boundaries (either urban areas or clusters) for administrative and/or funding purposes? Thanks in advance, Dave -------------------------------- David Saladino Regional Planner Southwest Region Planning Commission 20 Central Square, Second Floor Keene, NH 03431 Ph: (603) 357-0557 Fx: (603) 357-7440 E-mail: dsaladino(a)swrpc.org Internet: http://www.swrpc.org

21 years, 11 months

Re: [CTPP] New Urbanized Area Boundaries -- Impacts

by millef1＠mail.modot.state.mo.us

I can't answer your question directly, but I think it is important to note that many DOT's will be modifying the Census Definition for use in transportation planning. Therefore, if you concur with a modified boundary with the DOT, that boundary would probably not have bearing on another Federal agency's programs. Frank Miller Missouri Department of Transportation - Springfield Area District "David Saladino" <dsaladino(a)swrpc.org>@chrispy.net on 01/21/2003 12:51:15 PM Sent by: owner-ctpp-news(a)chrispy.net To: <ctpp-news(a)chrispy.net> cc: Subject: [CTPP] New Urbanized Area Boundaries -- Impacts We have recently been asked by our State DOT to review and revise our region's Federal Functional Classifications based on the new Census 2000 urban areas. I have a fairly good understanding of the impact that new and re-aligned urban bounds will have in our State's Federal allotment of funds from US DOT. Does anyone know what other Federal agencies (other than DOT) use urbanized boundaries (either urban areas or clusters) for administrative and/or funding purposes? Thanks in advance, Dave -------------------------------- David Saladino Regional Planner Southwest Region Planning Commission 20 Central Square, Second Floor Keene, NH 03431 Ph: (603) 357-0557 Fx: (603) 357-7440 E-mail: dsaladino(a)swrpc.org Internet: http://www.swrpc.org (See attached file: C.htm)

21 years, 11 months

Re: 1990 ctpp

by ed christopher

Michelle Musser wrote: > morning ed - i heard that the 1990 ctpp information was going to be > released on the internet today. do you know the site > address.thanks,Michelle Musser > Planner - GIS Technician > St. Cloud Area Planning Organization I am at the Transportation Research Board meetings and I heard the same thing. If it is not up today it will be any day. The 1990 (not 2000 yet) ctpp is going up on the BTS (bureau of transportation statistics) TransStats website. You can get to it from the BTS homepage by clicking on the TransStats link http://www.bts.gov/

21 years, 11 months

Upcoming Census 2000 CTPP & Products Workshop - January 27, 2003 web-based registration

by Chuck Purvis

TO: Bay Area Census Listserv; CTPP-News Listserv; Bay Area GIS-T Listserv FR: Chuck Purvis, MTC DT: January 10, 2003 *********************************************************************************************************************** The web-based registration page, and agenda, are now up-and-running, at: http://www.abag.ca.gov/abag/events/ctpp/ PLEASE REGISTER BY January 20th, in order for us to get an accurate headcount! Thanks! By the way, in terms of the CTPP data, we are *ONLY* expecting that the residence-based tables (Part I of the CTPP) will or may be available for California by the January 27th workshop. DATA ON COMMUTER FLOWS (place-to-place, county-to-county, tract-to-tract, etc.) WILL BE RELEASED IN THE April-June 2003 time period. DATA ON WORKPLACE-based tables (Part 2) will also be released in the April-June 2003 period. *********************************************************************************************************************** Mark your calendars for January 27th! MTC and ABAG are hosting a free workshop on Census 2000, on Monday, January 27, 2003, 8:30 AM - 4:00 PM, at the MetroCenter Auditorium, 101 Eighth Street, Oakland. The title of the workshop is "CTPP and Census Products" and will cover two main topics: * the CTPP (Census Transportation Planning Package); and * the PUMS (Public Use Microdata Sample). The purpose of the workshop is to learn about Census 2000 datasets to be released in 2003. The CTPP, also known as the "Journey-to-Work Package" is a rich dataset that is "not just for transportation planners." The PUMS is a research dataset that provides the most flexibility for planners and researchers. Leading the workshop will be senior staff from the U.S. Census Bureau, the Federal Highway Administration, and MTC. We will have a web-based registration page in the next few days, and we encourage you to RSVP so we can make our necessary arrangements for seating, handouts & refreshments. The intended audience for this workshop are city and county planners, transportation planners and engineers, consultants, librarians and the media. For more information on the workshop, please contact me or the workshop registrar: Mr. Shimon Israel of MTC, at 510-464-7839, or e-mail: sisrael(a)mtc.ca.gov For more information on the Census Transportation Planning Package, visit the Transportation Research Board's subcommittee site, at: http://www.trbcensus.com/ and the FHWA Census site, at: http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/ctpp/ We look forward to seeing you here on January 27th! Chuck Purvis ************************************************************** 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) www: http://www.mtc.ca.gov/ Census WWW: http://www.bayareacensus.ca.gov/ **************************************************************

21 years, 11 months

RE: [CTPP] ADJUSTED CENSUS COUNTS

by Gage, Linda

The adjusted census data are also available on the UC Berkeley website in a different format: http://swdb.berkeley.edu/data/adjusted_census.html -----Original Message----- From: Elizabeth Hartmann [mailto:elizabeth.hartmann@dot.state.mn.us] Sent: Wednesday, January 08, 2003 8:14 AM To: ctpp-news(a)chrispy.net; dvest(a)ci.pueblo.co.us Subject: Re: [CTPP] ADJUSTED CENSUS COUNTS Here's a possibility: >From just a quick look at the file(s) structure, what you get when the files are unzipped is something very similar to the SF1, 100% counts (someone please correct me if I'm off-the-wall, here). Way back when the Redistricting files were released, someone on this listserve was kind enough to share his (very user-friendly) SAS program. That program can be altered for SF1, and with cut-and-paste, and a little tweaking, I believe the same program can be used for the adjusted counts. Haven't tried it yet, though. Good luck! Liz Hartmann Research Analysis Specialist Minnesota Department of Transportation Office of Investment Management >>> "Vest, Don" <dvest(a)ci.pueblo.co.us> 01/07/03 06:51PM >>> Pardon my ignorance, but perhaps someone would be kind enough to suggest how I might be able to at least view the data from the unzipped files. The technical documentation referrs to a simple software program on the CD-ROM disk which allows the data to be viewed--similar to what FactFinder does. Thanks. Don Vest City of Pueblo Dept. of Planning & Development

21 years, 11 months

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

2004

2003

2002

2001

2000

1999

1998

ctpp-news January 2003