ctpp-news August 2005

ctpp-news@mailman.chrispy.net

6 participants
7 discussions

American Community Survey 2004 is now available

by Chuck Purvis

TO: CTPP-News The Census Bureau released the 2004 American Community Survey data on Tuesday, August 30th. The Bureau had a kickoff news conference on "Income, Poverty & Health Insurance Coverage" on Tuesday morning. ACS data is available on the American Factfinder, at: http://factfinder.census.gov/ Data from the 2004 ACS is available for most geographic areas of 250,000+ population, including: states, counties, places, congressional districts, CMSAs, PMSAs, MSAs (old metro definitions), county subdivisions (in 3 states). The American Factfinder (AFF) appears to be changing on a day-by-day basis. Yesterday morning we were able to access the 2004 ACS "data profiles" and the "multi-year profiles." After we returned from lunch, they were gone. Hopefully the Bureau is working on it and will restore those "profiles" ASAP. They're extremely important for understanding significance of change from one year to the next. The "profile" series is a group of four data highlight reports: demographic, social, economic and housing. The AFF "Ranking Tables" are apparently the same as previous years' releases. A very nice feature is the ability to click on a row / geographic area of interest, and see which areas are "not significantly different" than the area you selected. This can be very useful when characterizing your community, e.g., the commute time of San Jose resident workers is very similar to the commute times for residents of Atlanta, Dallas, San Diego, .... New to the 2004 ACS data, in AFF, are "Subject Tables." This is apparently a work in progress; only subject tables for the U.S. national level for income and poverty are available as of 8/31/05, 8:00 AM. Also new to the 2004 ACS data access in American Factfinder are "Thematic Maps." Right now these are state-level thematic (choropleth) maps for about 80 different themes. It look likes they're setting this up for the eventual production of online maps perhaps for more detailed geographic areas like counties or metro areas. The "Detailed Tables" in the 2004 ACS edition of American Factfinder are greatly expanded from the 2003 ACS and previous years' versions. For example, Table B08006 provides "sex of workers by means of transportation to work" These are the DETAILED means of transportation (including bicycle, carpool level, transit sub-modes"). (The 2003 ACS table, P047, didn't have the workers by sex breakout, or the detailed carpool levels.) To my pleasant surprise, the 2004 ACS PUMS data (Public Use Microdata Sample) was available the first day of release. Data is available in CSV and SAS formats. I'm having some problems with the SAS files, but I'll work that out with our IT people or the Census Bureau. So, there's plenty of work & analysis to do, so just get to it! Chuck Purvis, MTC

19 years, 2 months

RE: [CTPP] county-to-county flows vs. ES202, BEA county control totals

by Murakami, Elaine

Dear Norm: You should probably take a look at the Souleyrette et al article in TRR 1768, 2001. "Applications of State Employment Data to Transportation Planning" Also, Wende Mix and Phil Fulton prepared a poster at the recent TRB Census Conference (May 2005) where both ES-202 and Census data were used. She has a full paper available and I believe she has submitted it for review to TRB for Jan 2006. The biggest problems have been: ES-202 files do not require multiple site businesses to report specific workplace locations. Some states are better than others. For example, MN is considered excellent (LEHD project by Census Bureau). One estimate is that 40% of employment is by businesses with multiple sites. ES-202 file may lack a physical workplace location (e.g. PO Box, or location of office responsible for employment records) "Personnel Supply" companies have become increasingly larger shares of total employment, and employees of these companies will not have their specific work location captured, only the office of where they were hired. On the Census side: Approximately 25 percent of workplace locations were imputed. The Census Long Form went to 1:6 households nationwide, so it is a sample survey, not a universe. Elaine Murakami FHWA Office of Planning 206-220-4460 -----Original Message----- From: ctpp-news-bounces(a)chrispy.net [mailto:ctpp-news-bounces@chrispy.net]On Behalf Of Norm Marshall Sent: Tuesday, August 30, 2005 11:41 AM To: ctpp-news(a)chrispy.net Subject: [CTPP] county-to-county flows vs. ES202, BEA county control totals I am comparing CTPP 2000 county-to-county flows vs. travel demand model for a mid-sized region. There are a number of complicating issues, including: Census work trip may not be made every day Census work tour may be coded as other than home-based-work (HBW) trips in trip-based model Census only records one commute for workers with more than one job In trying to massage the data to be as consistent as possible, I also reviewed ES-202 and BEA county employment data. The BEA totals including proprietors are very high, but the BEA wage and salary totals are reasonably consistent with ES-202 data, i.e. consistently higher as they include non-covered employment including government. However, the CTPP flow data are not particularly consistent with ES-202 and BEA, i.e. some counties appear to attract more commuters than indicated by ES-202 and BEA, and other counties attract less than ES-202 and BEA (after adjusting so the totals are the same). Have others observed similar discrepancies? Does anyone have advice for reconciling these datasets? Norm Marshall

19 years, 2 months

county-to-county flows vs. ES202, BEA county control totals

by Norm Marshall

I am comparing CTPP 2000 county-to-county flows vs. travel demand model for a mid-sized region. There are a number of complicating issues, including: Census work trip may not be made every day Census work tour may be coded as other than home-based-work (HBW) trips in trip-based model Census only records one commute for workers with more than one job In trying to massage the data to be as consistent as possible, I also reviewed ES-202 and BEA county employment data. The BEA totals including proprietors are very high, but the BEA wage and salary totals are reasonably consistent with ES-202 data, i.e. consistently higher as they include non-covered employment including government. However, the CTPP flow data are not particularly consistent with ES-202 and BEA, i.e. some counties appear to attract more commuters than indicated by ES-202 and BEA, and other counties attract less than ES-202 and BEA (after adjusting so the totals are the same). Have others observed similar discrepancies? Does anyone have advice for reconciling these datasets? Norm Marshall

19 years, 2 months

Job Opportunity - NPTS

by Srinivasan, Nanda

FHWA is advertising for a GS 14 position on the NPTS (National Personal Travel Survey) project team. Duties include: - making recommendations regarding survey design, content, methodology, operations, dataset development and user interface - maintaining effective working relationships with survey sponsors, states and MPOs, national organizations, survey contractors and a large and diverse group of survey users - analyzing travel behavior trends, and - assuming some project management duties. We are seeking someone with household travel survey experience. You do not have to be a current or former federal employee to apply for this job. Salary range is $88,369 to $114,882. The position is located in Washington, DC (Yes, we know that housing costs are high in the Washington DC area, we live here.) For more information or to apply go to: <http://jobsearch.usajobs.opm.gov/a9fhwa.asp> click on Washington DC, and look for job announcement FHWA.HPL-2005-0016. The specific link is http://jobsearch.usajobs.opm.gov/getjob.asp?JobID=33409209&AVSDM=2005%2D08%… Susan Liss (NPTS Program Manager)

19 years, 2 months

Customer Satisfaction Survey for CTPP and other Census/ACS produc ts

by Clawson, Dave

AASHTO is seeking your feedback, input, and opinions on CTPP 2000 and other current and future census/ACS products. To gauge customer satisfaction, we designed a web-based survey posted at http://surveys.transportation.org/ctpp.htm <http://surveys.transportation.org/ctpp.htm> . Completing the survey should only take about 5 minutes of your time, but would help us immensely in forming our plans for the next suite of transportation related census/ACS products. We are requesting that you complete the survey by September 15, 2005. Thank you for your participation. Sincerely, Dave Clawson ______________________________________________ David H. Clawson Program Director for Policy and Planning AASHTO 202-624-5807 202-624-5806 FAX davidc(a)aashto.org

19 years, 2 months

RE: [CTPP] CTPP - Part 3 - summary level question

by Srinivasan, Nanda

Bob: You want to know how many workers working in downtown live in specific suburbs. I would go about it in a different way: 1. Select WORKPLACE - IN, the second option. 2. Select all the destination TAZs. 3. Select the general residence area = All workers in the state of MN? 4. Option a. Once the session is created, you can either export the data to an Excel spreadsheet, and then: i. Break the components of geography into the Residence, Work TAZ, and then ii. Query for the specific TAZs in the suburbia on the residence end. OR Option b. i. Click on the mapping engine, then click on the Data Analysis Tool. ii. Using the yellow selection tool, Select all the flows you want to aggregate between the downtown and the specific TAZs. iii. Highlight the tables you want to aggregate, and then click on the spreadsheet view within the Data Analysis Window. The aggregated answer will show-up on the sheet. Part 3 is going to cause some confusion in the minds of any user. Also, please note that tables 3-08 to 3-14 should not be accessed using the browser, use the TranStats website instead. If in doubt, please call/e-mail me. Thanks Nanda Srinivasan 202-366-5021 -----Original Message----- From: ctpp-news-bounces(a)chrispy.net [mailto:ctpp-news-bounces@chrispy.net]On Behalf Of Bob Paddock Sent: Wednesday, August 03, 2005 10:45 AM To: ctpp-news(a)chrispy.net Subject: [CTPP] CTPP - Part 3 - summary level question I just received the CDs for Part 3 of the 2000 CTPP and have attempted to follow the instructions on how to run through the various options. I have had problems trying to access different summary levels. On the bottom of page 1 of the instructions for working with Part3 it states: "First option button: "From RESIDENCE Geography out" -- click this radial button if you want to know the workplaces for residents in a particular area. For example, if you want to know where workers who live in Suburb A commute. Do they go downtown, or to the largest employer, or do they go all over the region." Since I would like to know how many workers living in specific suburbs actually work downtown, this appeared to be the way to go. HOWEVER, if I select the summary level for the place of residence, I cannot re-select the summary level for place of work. How can I get "downtown" as a work destination, which is at the TAZ level if the only summary level option available is "place"? Apparently I have to identify the TAZ for each place of resident in order to get TAZ of work. Yet I cannot identify TAZs of work - all I get to select is the county of work. So I get all TAZs in the county. Am I doing this incorrectly? Any thoughts? Bob _______________________________________________ ctpp-news mailing list ctpp-news(a)chrispy.net http://www.chrispy.net/mailman/listinfo/ctpp-news

19 years, 3 months

CTPP - Part 3 - summary level question

by Bob Paddock

I just received the CDs for Part 3 of the 2000 CTPP and have attempted to follow the instructions on how to run through the various options. I have had problems trying to access different summary levels. On the bottom of page 1 of the instructions for working with Part3 it states: "First option button: "From RESIDENCE Geography out" -- click this radial button if you want to know the workplaces for residents in a particular area. For example, if you want to know where workers who live in Suburb A commute. Do they go downtown, or to the largest employer, or do they go all over the region." Since I would like to know how many workers living in specific suburbs actually work downtown, this appeared to be the way to go. HOWEVER, if I select the summary level for the place of residence, I cannot re-select the summary level for place of work. How can I get "downtown" as a work destination, which is at the TAZ level if the only summary level option available is "place"? Apparently I have to identify the TAZ for each place of resident in order to get TAZ of work. Yet I cannot identify TAZs of work - all I get to select is the county of work. So I get all TAZs in the county. Am I doing this incorrectly? Any thoughts? Bob

19 years, 3 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 August 2005