This raises a really interesting question about what data source should be used for income
(or earnings) at low levels of geography.
There are applications, such as travel demand and land use modeling, which require
household income data at very low levels of geography (e.g., traffic analysis zones). So,
regardless of the error of the estimate, someone will have to wager their 'best
guess' at income levels for small geographies for these endeavors.
I believe what I would like to ask is, given this data need, what would provide our best
guess - among professionals on this listserv? In the past, Census long form data was used
for this purpose. I suppose I personally had simply assumed up to this point that ACS 5
Year estimates at the block group level would be our best data source going forward. That
is, I so assumed until the post below raised the question in my mind - does LEHD provide
an alternative? - is it a better alternative than ACS?
I have only used LEHD for estimates of employment by place of work (and I haven't
personally done that recently), so you will have to excuse my ignorance but at what level
of geography does LEHD (or On the Map) provide estimates of earnings by place of
residence? Also, does it provide an actual estimate of earnings (or median earnings,
etc.) or does it only provide the number of jobs by earning level (less than $1,250/month,
etc.) in several very broad categories?
If LEHD provides a point estimate of earnings by place of residence at the block group
level (or similar or lower geography), is there any documentation or does anyone know the
confidence interval/MOE for these estimates as compared to those for ACS income data at
the block group level? In the absence of such formal information on the LEHD side, what
are folks best guess as to the accuracy of LEHD earning vs. ACS income estimates at low
levels of geography? How does the sample size advantage vs. the deliberate introduction
of noise in the LEHD data pan out? Would others generally agree with Jonathan's
conjecture that LEHD is really the superior data source for this purpose at this scale?
On a related note, has anyone else compared ACS income vs. LEHD earnings data - at any
level of geography? Can anyone shed light on how closely they correlate?
Thanks for entertaining my curiosity!
Vince
Vince Bernardin, Jr., Ph.D.
Chief of Transportation Modeling
Bernardin, Lochmueller & Associates, Inc.
-----Original Message-----
From: ctpp-news-bounces(a)chrispy.net [mailto:ctpp-news-bounces@chrispy.net] On Behalf Of
Jonathan Lupton
Sent: Wednesday, April 06, 2011 4:44 PM
To: ctpp-news(a)chrispy.net
Subject: RE: [CTPP] [ctpp-news] Demographic Analysis for Block Groups - Decennial Census
vs. ACS 5 Year Estimates
Ms. Cogburn:
I can't address all of your concerns, but I can say I'd be careful with the
5-yr ACS at the BG level. The sample size is just too small, and margins of
error too great. I agree with Ms. Becker that the old long form data
probably had large errors at the small-geography level too, but the nice
thing is they didn't tell us the margins of error!
I have found the ACS useful and reliable at larger areas of geography, but
the 5-yr product has shown signs of inaccuracy in our region. For example,
one of our towns with a population of 2,200 showed a median HH income trend
that looked odd (sharply declining median household income from 2000 to the
2005-2009 period). It could be true, but the trend change is completely
different from what LEHD's "On the Map" product showed for approximately
the
same time period (2003-2009), for the same town, on workforce earnings by
place of residence.
As I understand it, LEHD comes from a survey which, while not perfect, gets
a sizeable chunk of the workforce, while ACS resident surveys leave lots of
holes. Admittedly, there's an "apples and oranges" aspect to comparing ACS
with LEHD, and median HH income with workforce earnings. I'd like to see
more research on the respective advantages of ACS and LEHD.
Summary: I'd treat the ACS five-year product with care for BGs until we have
more experience with it. And, if you haven't already, you might want to
fiddle with the LEHD's new version of "On the Map," it's got a high
"wow"
factor for quick place-based data analysis.
Jonathan Lupton
Research Planner
Metroplan
Little Rock AR
-----Original Message-----
From: ctpp-news-bounces(a)chrispy.net [mailto:ctpp-news-bounces@chrispy.net]
On Behalf Of Cogburn, Megan S
Sent: Wednesday, April 06, 2011 2:58 PM
To: ctpp-news(a)chrispy.net
Subject: [CTPP] [ctpp-news] Demographic Analysis for Block Groups -
Decennial Census vs. ACS 5 Year Estimates
My name is Megan Cogburn and I am a Community Planner with the North
Carolina Department of Transportation. My group is a part of the Project
Development and Environmental Analysis branch and we are responsible for
completing all of the NEPA documentation for bridge and highway projects
statewide. Specifically, we prepare technical reports assessing potential
project impacts on the human environment from the local/urban planning
perspective.
We currently use decennial Census data for our demographic analyses, however
we are thinking of switching to use American Community Survey data to make
our reports more current and since the American Community Survey has now
replaced the traditional decennial Census long-form. However, it has come to
our attention that ACS data is only available at the block group level for 5
Year Estimates (and not annually). Moreover, certain tables that were
available for the 2000 Census are not available in the ACS 5 Year Estimates
(such as household type by relationship, sex by employment status, and
poverty status). Another glaring issue is that ACS 5 Year Estimates were
just released in 2010, so there is no previous data to make historical
comparisons.
So, my question for the listserv is how other organizations are moving
forward given the discrepancies between the two datasets. My group is trying
to figure out where to get missing data, how to make historical comparisons,
and also the best way to retrieve ACS 5-Year Estimates. A huge drawback for
us is that we use block group data for multiple variables and this is only
available for the 5 year estimates. In order to retrieve summary file data
for block groups you have to use an Excel macro retrieval file that takes an
extremely long time, download a massive file from their FTP site, or use the
not so user friendly Data Ferret platform.
Please advise!
Megan Cogburn, MCRP
Community Planner | Human Environment Unit
NCDOT Project Development & Environmental Analysis
e: mscogburn(a)ncdot.gov
p: (919) 707-6062
f: (919) 212-5785
Email correspondence to and from this sender is subject to the N.C. Public
Records Law and may be disclosed to third parties.
_______________________________________________
ctpp-news mailing list
ctpp-news(a)chrispy.net
http://www.chrispy.net/mailman/listinfo/ctpp-news
_______________________________________________
ctpp-news mailing list
ctpp-news(a)chrispy.net
http://www.chrispy.net/mailman/listinfo/ctpp-news