ctpp-news

ctpp-news@mailman.chrispy.net

2560 discussions

Data Problem Fixed: MCD/County-to-MCD/County Worker Flow Files

by clara.a.reschovsky＠census.gov

MCD Flow users, I finally have some good news! We have the corrected MCD Flow files up on the internet site so you can use any of the files up on the website (see address below). If anybody has any questions or concerns, please let me know. Clara Reschovsky 301 763 2454 ----- Forwarded by Clara A Reschovsky/POP/HQ/BOC on 08/01/2003 09:58 AM ----- |---------+----------------------------> | | Clara A | | | Reschovsky | | | | | | 07/30/2003 04:21 | | | PM | | | | |---------+----------------------------> >-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------| | | | To: ctpp-news(a)chrispy.net | | cc: | | Subject: Data Problem: MCD/County-to-MCD/County Worker Flow Files | >-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------| MCD Flow users, It has come to our attention at the Census Bureau that some of the MCD Flow files on the internet site are not correct. The Excel files sorted by Workplace MCD for MI, MN, NJ, NY, PA, and WI erroneously contain the residence sorted data. We have transmitted the correct files to replace the incorrect files on the internet and will let you know as soon as they are fixed. In the meantime, you can use the plain text file to get the workplace sort for these states. The only drawback is you will not be able to open these in Excel as they have too many records. If this will be a problem for you, please let me know. We do appologize for any inconvienience this may have caused. Clara ----- Forwarded by Celia G Boertlein/POP/HQ/BOC on 07/30/2003 04:10 PM ----- |---------+----------------------------> | | phillip.a.salopek| | | @census.gov | | | Sent by: | | | owner-ctpp-news@c| | | hrispy.net | | | | | | | | | 07/25/2003 10:04 | | | AM | | | | |---------+----------------------------> >-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------| | | | To: ctpp-news(a)chrispy.net | | cc: | | Subject: [CTPP] Release of MCD/County-to-MCD/County Worker Flow Files | >-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------| The Census Bureau released today the Census 2000 MCD/County-to-MCD/County Worker Flow Files. These files contain commuter flow data at the county subdivision or minor civil division (MCD) level in twelve states: Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont, and Wisconsin. For the other 38 states and the District of Columbia data are presented at the county level. Files for Puerto Rico are also provided in this product, showing data at the county equivalent (municipio) level. The files may be found at the following location: www.census.gov/population/www/cen2000/mcdworkerflow.html Alternatively, from the Census Bureau home page (www.census.gov) click on "J" in the Subjects A to Z Index. On the next page click on the link for "Journey to Work and Place of Work Data." From there, under the heading Census 2000 Data click on the link "2000 Minor Civil Division/County-to-Minor Civil Division/County Worker Flow Files."

22 years, 7 months

Data Problem: MCD/County-to-MCD/County Worker Flow Files

by clara.a.reschovsky＠census.gov

MCD Flow users, It has come to our attention at the Census Bureau that some of the MCD Flow files on the internet site are not correct. The Excel files sorted by Workplace MCD for MI, MN, NJ, NY, PA, and WI erroneously contain the residence sorted data. We have transmitted the correct files to replace the incorrect files on the internet and will let you know as soon as they are fixed. In the meantime, you can use the plain text file to get the workplace sort for these states. The only drawback is you will not be able to open these in Excel as they have too many records. If this will be a problem for you, please let me know. We do appologize for any inconvienience this may have caused. Clara ----- Forwarded by Celia G Boertlein/POP/HQ/BOC on 07/30/2003 04:10 PM ----- |---------+----------------------------> | | phillip.a.salopek| | | @census.gov | | | Sent by: | | | owner-ctpp-news@c| | | hrispy.net | | | | | | | | | 07/25/2003 10:04 | | | AM | | | | |---------+----------------------------> >-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------| | | | To: ctpp-news(a)chrispy.net | | cc: | | Subject: [CTPP] Release of MCD/County-to-MCD/County Worker Flow Files | >-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------| The Census Bureau released today the Census 2000 MCD/County-to-MCD/County Worker Flow Files. These files contain commuter flow data at the county subdivision or minor civil division (MCD) level in twelve states: Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont, and Wisconsin. For the other 38 states and the District of Columbia data are presented at the county level. Files for Puerto Rico are also provided in this product, showing data at the county equivalent (municipio) level. The files may be found at the following location: www.census.gov/population/www/cen2000/mcdworkerflow.html Alternatively, from the Census Bureau home page (www.census.gov) click on "J" in the Subjects A to Z Index. On the next page click on the link for "Journey to Work and Place of Work Data." From there, under the heading Census 2000 Data click on the link "2000 Minor Civil Division/County-to-Minor Civil Division/County Worker Flow Files."

22 years, 7 months

CTPP data problem

by clara.a.reschovsky＠census.gov

CTPP users, We have identified a problem with Table 1-039 of CTPP 2000 Part 1. This table is supposed to be Household Income by Worker Earnings for Workers in Households. However it looks like it is tabulating Household Income by Means of Transportation. But, the numbers are incorrect even for that cross (see table 1-034 for the right numbers) because the variables do not have the same number of categories. DO NOT USE TABLE 1-039. We are working on correcting the table and will make it available to you as soon as we can. As of today this affects: AL, AZ, CA, CO, DE, DC, FL, GA, ID, IL, IN, MD, MI, MT, NV, NJ, NM, NY, NC, ND, OH, OR, TN, TX, UT, WA, WV, WI. We expect it will not be a problem in the remaining states. This problem does not affect the ASCII files for CTPP 2000 Part 1. If you have any questions or concerns, let me know. We regret any inconvienience this has caused you. Clara Reschovsky

22 years, 7 months

SAS jobs for CTPP Part 1 ASCII data

by Chuck Purvis

TO: CTPP-News This e-mail may be of interest to the State DOTs and MPOs who have requested an ASCII version of the CTPP Part 1 CD data from the Census Bureau, and who are using (or will be using) SAS to analyze CTPP datasets. The Census Bureau did a great job in providing SAS jobs for building master SAS databases. This is *extremely* helpful! I did some minor modifications to the programs, that I've included in a zip archive of CTPP Part 1 SAS programs. I also have some jobs which extract my region's data, then exports various tables into "csv" files of less than 256 columns, for purposes of importing into spreadsheets and GIS. Essentially this is a "SAS chop shop" approach that is an alternative to using CAT (CTPP Access Tool). (A key addition to the SAS code that saves immensely on the SAS file size is the use of the variable "default length=5" statement which limits variables to less than one-half billion in value.) These SAS files are on our web site, at: http://www.mtc.ca.gov/datamart/census/ctpp2000/ (This is using our http site, rather than our ftp site, so it should be available to some of my colleagues who've had firewall problems accessing our ftp site.) The SAS jobs also have some "label statements" that may be extremely useful to non-SAS programmers, e.g.: tab15x1 ="tab15: OCCUPATION=1, INDUSTRY=1" tab15x2 ="tab15: OCCUPATION=1, INDUSTRY=2" tab15x3 ="tab15: OCCUPATION=1, INDUSTRY=3" tab15x4 ="tab15: OCCUPATION=1, INDUSTRY=4" tab15x5 ="tab15: OCCUPATION=1, INDUSTRY=5" tab15x6 ="tab15: OCCUPATION=1, INDUSTRY=6" tab15x7 ="tab15: OCCUPATION=1, INDUSTRY=7" The real effort will be to create mnemonic variable names for variables such as "tab15x1" (perhaps "occ1ind1" ?) Hope this helps. Chuck Purvis, MTC

22 years, 7 months

RE: [CTPP] 1980 County-to-County Worker Flows

by Robert Griffiths

Laurie, We published a report in 1992 on Commuting Patterns in the metropolitan Washington region that included tables on 1980 and 1990 county-to-county worker flows for jurisdictions in the metropolitan region. The report is not available in electronic form, but I could arrange to get you a hard copy of it if that would help. Bob Robert E. Griffiths Director of Technical Services Department of Transportation Planning Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments -----Original Message----- From: Gill, Laura A. [mailto:lgill@pwcgov.org] Sent: Monday, July 28, 2003 2:19 PM To: ctpp-news(a)chrispy.net Subject: RE: [CTPP] 1980 County-to-County Worker Flows Does anyone know if this historical data (I'm interested in 1970 and 1980) is tabulated according to the place of work? That is, I want to find out where all workers in a given jurisdiction are commuting from. I'd even be satisfied to know the percentage of workers that are coming from outside of a given jurisdiction. The data available at the link below is fantastic, but as far as I can tell, it is only available according to place of residence. Thank you for any help you can give me. Laurie Gill Demographer Prince William County, VA -----Original Message----- From: Chuck Purvis [mailto:CPurvis@mtc.ca.gov] Sent: Friday, April 18, 2003 11:15 AM To: ctpp-news(a)chrispy.net Subject: Re: [CTPP] 1980 County-to-County Worker Flows Bob and others: The 1970, 1980 and 1990 data on county-to-county total commuter flows is available on the Department of Commerce, Bureau of Economic Analysis web site at: http://www.bea.doc.gov/bea/regional/reis/jtw/ Anything finer grained that county, or county-to-county by means of transportation to work, would have to be extracted from your old 1970 UTP, 1980 UTPP and 1990 CTPP data files. Note that the 1980 Census workplace information was coded for only half of the long form sample. So, essentially the sampling rate for the 1980 commute flows is about 1-in-12, not the 1-in-6 sampling rate we have from the 1990 and 2000 Censuses. Also note that the largest county-of-work in the 1970 Census is "Not Reported." So, take care in how you report/allocate/impute the 1970 data, if at all. Chuck Purvis, MTC >>> "Bob Paddock" <bob.paddock(a)METC.STATE.MN.US> 04/18/03 07:40AM >>> Pardon my asking this, but are county-to-county worker flows available from the 1980 census datafiles? I know that it goes back a bit and is not the latest and greatest from the US Census. I have some flow data but am looking for additional counties to include in my review. Bob Paddock Metropolitan Council Minneapols-St.Paul

22 years, 7 months

RE: [CTPP] Rounding and Totalling in CTPP Part 1 Data

by Srinivasan, Nanda

Peter, All numbers in CTPP are rounded. The rounding rules are as follows: Any number from 0-7 is rounded to 4. Any other number is rounded to the nearest 5. Totals in tables are rounded independently of the cells, so cell values may not add up to the total. SF 3, being a standard product of the decennial census, did not have any rounding. Nandu -----Original Message----- From: peter(a)caliper.com Sent: Monday, July 28, 2003 12:59 PM To: ctpp-news(a)chrispy.net Subject: [CTPP] Rounding and Totalling in CTPP Part 1 Data All: Has anyone else noticed that the values for counts in the CTPP Part 1 data always seem to be rounded to multiples of 5 (except for 5 itself, which usually seems to be 4)? Also, it seems that the total for a variable rarely is the sum of the other values for that variable. For example: - If you add up the individual means of transportation, only coincidentally will they add up to the total of all means of transportation, using the Both Sexes fields in Table 1-002 - When you look at the same data in SF 3, the values are close but different, clearly not rounded to multiples of 5 and definitely adding up to the expected total (in this case, All Workers) 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

22 years, 7 months

1980 Place-to-Place Flows (was: 1980 County-to-County Worker Flows)

by Chuck Purvis

Laura: Yes, the 1980 data on place-to-place (city-to-city) commuting is available from the 1980 UTPP. I'm looking at the 4/26/83 version of the "Part 6 Data Dictionary" and the variables SUMLEV and SUMLEVW represent the summary levels for residence area to work area. SUMLEV=44 is for SMSA-STATE-COUNTY-PLACE; and SUMLEVW=44 is for SMSA-STATE-COUNTY-PLACE of WORK. In response to Joe Barbeau's (Central Connecticut RPA) question: Yes, 1980 UTPP data has MCD to MCD flows (SUMLEV=43 and SUMLEVW=43). On the other hand, it does NOT have county subdivision (COUSUB in census-speak) summary levels. In terms of 1970 data on place-to-place commuter flows, I am very certain it does *not* exist unless you or your predecessors did the computations and saved the data from over 30 years ago. My agency, for example, only has the 1970 commuter flow on zone-to-zone (our very old zone system) basis, by means of transportation. Our old zones don't aggregate very well to cities. One critical (and available in libraries) reference to the 1980 UTPP is the Transportation Research Record #981, which includes an Appendix "D" on "Areas Covered by the UTPP and Contacts" as of 12/1/84. Laurie: since Prince William County is in the Metro Wash COG region, you can probably contact the census guy at MWCOG (Bob Griffiths?), or check with Nanda Srinivasan at FHWA. Joe: Lucky for you, Connecticut purchased a statewide 1980 UTPP data file. The Connecticut DOT contact was Mr. Joseph Spragg as of 12/1/84, so chances are the contacts for the state have changed. With even better luck, the DOT will have saved the 1980 UTPP data and downloaded it from 6250 bpi density mainframe tapes to PC files. Again, check with Nanda to see if they have the 1980 UTPP tape for Connecticut. I know that Nanda has been working - in his spare time - on assembling/archiving old (pre-1990) census journey-to-work data files. Unfortunately, the Census Bureau never archived (i.e., kept their own copy) the 1980 UTPP tapes that they produced in 1983-1985. Chuck Purvis, MTC **************************** >>> "Gill, Laura A." <lgill(a)pwcgov.org> 07/28/03 11:19AM >>> Does anyone know if this historical data (I'm interested in 1970 and 1980) is tabulated according to the place of work? That is, I want to find out where all workers in a given jurisdiction are commuting from. I'd even be satisfied to know the percentage of workers that are coming from outside of a given jurisdiction. The data available at the link below is fantastic, but as far as I can tell, it is only available according to place of residence. Thank you for any help you can give me. Laurie Gill Demographer Prince William County, VA

22 years, 7 months

RE: [CTPP] 1980 County-to-County Worker Flows

by Gill, Laura A.

Does anyone know if this historical data (I'm interested in 1970 and 1980) is tabulated according to the place of work? That is, I want to find out where all workers in a given jurisdiction are commuting from. I'd even be satisfied to know the percentage of workers that are coming from outside of a given jurisdiction. The data available at the link below is fantastic, but as far as I can tell, it is only available according to place of residence. Thank you for any help you can give me. Laurie Gill Demographer Prince William County, VA -----Original Message----- From: Chuck Purvis [mailto:CPurvis@mtc.ca.gov] Sent: Friday, April 18, 2003 11:15 AM To: ctpp-news(a)chrispy.net Subject: Re: [CTPP] 1980 County-to-County Worker Flows Bob and others: The 1970, 1980 and 1990 data on county-to-county total commuter flows is available on the Department of Commerce, Bureau of Economic Analysis web site at: http://www.bea.doc.gov/bea/regional/reis/jtw/ Anything finer grained that county, or county-to-county by means of transportation to work, would have to be extracted from your old 1970 UTP, 1980 UTPP and 1990 CTPP data files. Note that the 1980 Census workplace information was coded for only half of the long form sample. So, essentially the sampling rate for the 1980 commute flows is about 1-in-12, not the 1-in-6 sampling rate we have from the 1990 and 2000 Censuses. Also note that the largest county-of-work in the 1970 Census is "Not Reported." So, take care in how you report/allocate/impute the 1970 data, if at all. Chuck Purvis, MTC >>> "Bob Paddock" <bob.paddock(a)METC.STATE.MN.US> 04/18/03 07:40AM >>> Pardon my asking this, but are county-to-county worker flows available from the 1980 census datafiles? I know that it goes back a bit and is not the latest and greatest from the US Census. I have some flow data but am looking for additional counties to include in my review. Bob Paddock Metropolitan Council Minneapols-St.Paul

22 years, 7 months

Rounding and Totalling in CTPP Part 1 Data

by Peter H. Van Demark

All: Has anyone else noticed that the values for counts in the CTPP Part 1 data always seem to be rounded to multiples of 5 (except for 5 itself, which usually seems to be 4)? Also, it seems that the total for a variable rarely is the sum of the other values for that variable. For example: - If you add up the individual means of transportation, only coincidentally will they add up to the total of all means of transportation, using the Both Sexes fields in Table 1-002 - When you look at the same data in SF 3, the values are close but different, clearly not rounded to multiples of 5 and definitely adding up to the expected total (in this case, All Workers) 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

22 years, 7 months

CTPP release update

by ed christopher

This week the following Part 1 CDs were mailed out: GA, IL, IN, MD&DC, MI, NJ, NM, TN, OH This makes a total of 20 states done. Note that CA is being rerun and will be redistributed next week to correct the the 6 MPO regions where no TAZ data was present. -- Ed Christopher Planning Specialist Resource Center Federal Highway Administration 19900 Governors Drive Olympia Fields, Illinois 60461 708-283-3534 (V) 708-574-8131 (cell)

22 years, 7 months

Jump to page:

2026

2025

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