As well as the fact that there are several groups interested in
anti-poverty programs here, and it would be nice to know with some certainty
whether the problem is getting better or worse, by how much and where.
Frank
From: ctpp-news-bounces@chrispy.net
[mailto:ctpp-news-bounces@chrispy.net] On Behalf Of Murakami, Elaine
Sent: Wednesday, June 11, 2008 3:46 PM
To: ctpp-news@chrispy.net
Subject: RE: [CTPP] CTPP Update
One of the reasons that income and poverty data from
ACS is important and why we, as planners not specifically transportation
planners, should be interested in getting high quality, consistent data is
because HUD is planning to use the ACS data in their Community Development
Block Grant (CDBG) and HOME Investment Partnership Program eligibility and
funding distributions.
Nathan Erlbaum (NY State DOT) shared the text below
from the Census State Data Center (SDC) listserv, so I hope it is OK to
share with the CTPP listserv.
HUD to Use ACS Data to Set HOME, CDBG Eligibility in
FY 2011
HUD officials say they will begin calculating
Community Development Block Grant and HOME Investment Partnership Program
eligibility and funding using American Community Survey data for fiscal year
2011.
The ACS is used by the Census Bureau as a way to
fill in gaps between the 10-year population census data normally used by HUD to
determine program eligibility, funding allocation and targeted program
activities.
With factors such as population and area median
household income for neighborhoods among the various factors HUD considers, the
ACS data is seen as a way to prevent the occasional massive changes local
public housing agencies can face during a given 10-year period. Instead, the
intent to use ACS is to make the change more gradual and consistent, thereby
ensuring better use of federal dollars.
Urban counties and some small entitlement
jurisdictions in CDBG & HOME have their current data built from block
groups under the current system. The necessary five-year average data for those
groups in the ACS model likely won't be available until mid-2010, he says. The
first data HUD will use in the ACS model, therefore, will cover the years
2006-2010, Todd Richardson, HUD director program evaluation, tells CDD.
The new ACS also will require changes to the
Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS) that local programs have
been required since 1990 as part of housing planning for CDBG and HOME. The
data helps HUD determine different characteristics of a given community and was
altered in 2000 following that census. New CHAS computer tables using ACS data
will be required. "We hope to have those available in line with the start
of using ACS," Richardson says.
One issue that remains to be determined is how HUD
will define eligibility areas as low- and moderate-income. Currently, HUD puts
out block group files that take a relatively small sample -- smaller than a
census tract, Richardson says -- and uses the demographics in those to
determine whether a given area is eligible. But the margin of error in using
such small samples is high, he says, so HUD is considering putting several
block groups together to gain a larger data sample such as a census tract that
can provide the department with greater confidence in whether a given area is
eligible for HOME and CDBG entitlement funds.
Richardson says HUD will be unable to make use of
census tract data until fiscal year 2011, since it won't have the necessary ACS
data until then. "We have not made a decision on whether to stick with the
block group or raise the geography to census tract level," he says.
"That's still a discussion we're having." -- Thomas Harman
06/02/2008 4:49 PM
From:
ctpp-news-bounces@chrispy.net [mailto:ctpp-news-bounces@chrispy.net] On
Behalf Of Alan Pisarski
Sent: Wednesday, June 11, 2008 12:43 PM
To: ctpp-news@chrispy.net
Cc: 'Arlee Reno'
Subject: RE: [CTPP] CTPP Update
I agree with Steve. If you look today at consumer
expenditures data the income stuff is rather useless for the lower income
quintile. Those young and old spend more than their incomes. I always use
the spending data rather than incomes for my work. For modeling the
income issue will be critical.
Alan E. Pisarski
6501 Waterway Drive
Falls Church Va. 22044
703 941-4257
alanpisarski@alanpisarski.com
From: ctpp-news-bounces@chrispy.net
[mailto:ctpp-news-bounces@chrispy.net] On Behalf Of Polzin, Steve
Sent: Wednesday, June 11, 2008 3:37 PM
To: ctpp-news@chrispy.net
Subject: RE: [CTPP] CTPP Update
In some ways the quality and
meaning of income data is destined to get cloudier over time as more folks join
the ranks of the retired. Spending will be a combination of spending
income and drawing down assets - particularly as more folks are not privy to
defined benefit retirement plans. In addition the necessity of saving
from income (versus having an employer do it for you) may impact the actual
discretionary share of income for working folks. Add all the part time
employment, self employed etc. and we will likely struggle to find as much
meaning in the income data.
Steven E. Polzin, Ph.D.
Center for Urban Transportation
Research
University of South Florida
4202 Fowler Ave., CUT100
Tampa, FL 33620-5375
813-974-9849 (w)
813-416-7517 (c)
polzin@cutr.usf.edu
http://www.cutr.usf.edu
-----Original Message-----
From: ctpp-news-bounces@chrispy.net [mailto:ctpp-news-bounces@chrispy.net] On
Behalf Of Frank Lenk
Sent: Wednesday, June 11, 2008 3:04 PM
To: ctpp-news@chrispy.net
Subject: RE: [CTPP] CTPP Update
I made this comment to Elaine
off-line, and she suggested I post it to
the entire group for reaction.
The more I read about asking
people for their incomes the prior 12
months, the more I worry about
it being accurate, or at least inaccurate
in a consistent way so that
trends can be trusted. I certainly couldn't
tell you my last 12 months of
income without some figuring - the
minimum calculation would appear
to be what was my salary last year,
what is it this year, how may
months was I paid in one versus the other
and applying the appropriate
weighting factors. And this doesn't count
differences in my non-salary
income, which might come at very irregular
intervals.
If this last-12-month approach
does produce inaccurate estimates (say
people either report what they
earned last year or what they are earning
this year, but not a weighted
average), then applying an inflation
factor based on the month seems
wholly inappropriate to me when we don't
really know which period they
are using to estimate their income.
Maybe it all averages out and I
shouldn't worry. But I'd rather they ask
what the income was on my last
tax return. This is something I've had to
spend significant time
calculating beforehand and can at least go look
up. Seems like this would
produce a more stable, precise estimate, even
though it wouldn't accurately
reflect the my income over the last 12
months.
The difficulty in establishing
what is trend vs what is error (or
difference from 2000 long-form)
using ACS is for me the most vexing part
of learning how to use it. Here,
poverty rates jumped up 50% since 2000
in some (but not all) counties.
Admittedly, it's been a relatively bad
decade for us economically in KC
(employment didn't surpass its 2001
pre-recession peak until the
last half of 2006). But I am having trouble
figuring out just how bad
because I am uncertain how to interpret the
ACS income results.
Any help will be appreciated.
Frank
Frank Lenk
Director of Research Services
Mid-America Regional Council
600 Broadway, Suite 200
Kansas City, MO 64105
www.marc.org
816.474.4240
flenk@marc.org
816.701.8237
-----Original Message-----
From:
ctpp-news-bounces@chrispy.net
[mailto:ctpp-news-bounces@chrispy.net]
On Behalf Of Murakami, Elaine
Sent: Wednesday, June 11, 2008
1:43 PM
To: ctpp-news@chrispy.net
Subject: RE: [CTPP] CTPP Update
Re: poverty and Income
comparisons between Census 2000 Long Form and
ACS:
The only report I am familiar
with is:
http://www.census.gov/acs/www/Downloads/Report05.pdf
Pages 34-37 discuss county-level
comparisons. These are comparisons
between the Census 2000 Long
Form (aka sample) and the ACS "C2SS", and
18 of the test ACS
counties. They found that the C2SS results
consistently had lower incomes
than the Census 2000 sample, and
therefore, a higher poverty
ratio. They found that income allocation
occurs 30 percent in the Census
2000 sample, and 24% in the C2SS.
I do not know if the Census
Bureau has pursued other research on how ACS
respondents answer the income
questions.
Elaine
-----Original Message-----
From:
ctpp-news-bounces@chrispy.net
[mailto:ctpp-news-bounces@chrispy.net]
On Behalf Of Ed Christopher
Sent: Wednesday, June 11, 2008
9:50 AM
To: ctpp-news maillist
Subject: [CTPP] CTPP Update
On May 21 and June 4 members of
the CTPP team conducted a series of
webinars to help bring our
community up-to-speed on several of the CTPP
activities. The slides
from these presentations can be downloaded from
our webinar room at
http://fhwa.acrobat.com/ctpp1 (enter as a guest) and
the responses to many of the
questions asked during the meetings are
presented below. If folks
have additional questions please feel free to
post them to the list serve and
someone on the CTPP team will attempt to
answer them.
CTPP Webinar - Questions and
Answers
Question: Will the 3-year CTPP
data product based on ACS include tables
by race and household income?
Response: Yes but the best
source for information on race will still be
the Census Bureau's standard ACS
tabulations found on American
FactFinder
(http://factfinder.census.gov/). The 3-year CTPP proposed
tables for parts 1 and 2 include
a few tables with the variable
"minority status."
Also, there are various tables with the variables -
Income, Poverty Status and
Worker Earnings that will be available.
Please note that Poverty Status
is a calculated variable based on
household income, family size,
number of children and number of family
members over the age of 65.
Question: Since the new CTPP
products will be based on data collected
over 3 years (or 5 years), to
which year will the income be adjusted?
Response: Income will be
adjusted to the last year of the survey
period. For the
first 3-year product all incomes will adjusted to
2007.
Question: Is there data
available on zero car households? If yes, what
geography level is it available?
Response: Yes, there will
be information available for zero car
households in both the 3-year
CTPP data product and as part of the
standard Census products.
The data will be available for geographic
areas greater than 20,000
residents.
Question: Slides 6 & 7 of
the DRB presentation show different
percentages of data lost due to
DRB rules, why is that?
Response: Slide 6 showed
the number of workers lost while slide 7
showed the number of
origin-destination pairs lost. The point is that
when thresholds were applied to
CTPP Part 3 data as was the case with
the 2000 data, many folks looked
at the loss of workers as being
significant but more surprising
was actual loss of individual O-D
pairs. All in all table
thresholds devastated the part 3 flow data.
Question: 2005 ACS data doesn't
have information on Group Quarters, but
the 2006 and 2007 do. How
is this being handled in the 3-year 2007 ACS
products?
Response: The Group
Quarter data available for 2 years (2006 and 2007)
will be reweighed to account for
the missing year.
Question: Will the variable -
Means of Transportation to Work have walk
and bike modes combined? Also,
what about taxi, bus and other?
Response: Regarding the
3-year CTPP data product there are multiple
category lists for the variable
- Means of Transportation to Work.
There are a few tables all 17
modes plus the total are shown separately
but then there are many others
where walk and bike have been collapsed
together. A great deal of
the detail on the mode variable is in the
hands of the Census Bureau's
disclosure Review Board. Currently they
have proposed some very tight
restrictions on the proposed 3-year CTPP
tables. Please see
http://trbcensus.com/drb/ for more
Question: Do you have anything
on the TAZ definition timeframe that you
can share with the group?
Response: Please see our
Status Report newsletter for the latest
http://www.TRBcensus.com/newsltr/sr052008.pdf.
Question: Can you talk about the
difference in income between ACS and
Long Form?
Response: In Census 2000,
the question was asked during April for the
previous year, 1999.
Because April is so close to IRS annual return
data it was felt that
"good" income data was being collected because it
was fresh in people's
minds. However, for the ACS the same questions
are asked, but the respondent
could be getting the survey during any
month of year (depending on when
she/he received the form). This
reported income is then adjusted
to the current year (year of
tabulation) based on CPI.
There are several issues with this with the
largest being that at anytime
during the year most people do not how
much money they made in the last
12 months. Needless to say the income
question is messy.
Question: Poverty rates seem
discontinuous, higher. Any ideas why?
Response: Yes, they are
discontinuous. Hopefully they will look better
with the 3-year ACS data
products.
Question: If the DRB is so
strict with its rules then why bother with
new TAZs?
Response: We hope that the
DRB will relax its rules but having TAZs
that correspond to the ACS data
release products (65,000 pop TAZs,
20,000 pop TAZs and small TAZs)
will help us in the future all sorts of
data products. Having
geography match the data release seems to make
good sense so that we can at
least get complete coverage (wall-to-wall)
within a region.
Question: What are the
implications of rising fuel prices on travel
choices on mode to work?
Has anybody thought about it, especially with
aggregating 3 years worth of
data? Since the ACS asks about "usual"
mode, it could still miss modes
used only part of the time.
Response: The 3 year ACS
trend data might look a lot different than the
2000 data. This might be a good
research question.
Question: Is the category list
for the variable - occupation being
consolidated?
Response: No, DRB has not
asked us to collapse the variables - industry
or occupation.
Question: Is anybody planning to
write to Congress about the DRB issue?
Response: AASHTO SCOP is sending
a letter to the Census Bureau to appeal
the DRB decision. As FHWA
staff, we cannot contact Congress directly
but we know that many regional
agencies do talk with their Congressional
delegations. It is
somewhat ironic but many of the congressionally
mandated analysis like the FTA
New Starts program and environmental
justice analysis all need data
at a smaller geography level which will
be difficult to obtain with the
DRB's current rules.
Question: We are relatively a
new MPO and I have a CTPP 101 question.
As an MPO do we need to provide
you any information, and what are our
sources of information regarding
CTPP specifically regarding TAZs?
Response: The CTPP listserve is
a good place for information regarding
ongoing CTPP related activities.
The TAZ definition process is planned
for March/April of 2009 and it
is recommended that MPO's allocate some
budget when preparing their work
plans for FY 2009, especially for new
MPOs. The CTPP Status Report is
also a good source of information. If
you have any particular
questions please do not hesitate to contact
anyone one of us on the CTPP
team.
Question: Somewhere it was
noted the first CTPP ACS product would be
available in 2009 for areas of
20,000 or more for places and counties.
Response: Yes that is
correct. We are still in the negotiation stage
regarding some DRB issues but
this is our GOAL. This first CTPP product
would use 3 years of ACS
data.
Question: There was also a
mention of TAZ level data also for 20,000
population threshold.
However, I am not sure if this is included in the
first 3 year product for 2009,
or whether the first TAZ level report
will not be available until 2012
with a 5 year product.
Response: To get
"small" area geography like a TAZ or a census tract,
the census requires 5 years of
ACS data. So, we are planning to wait for
2006 thru 2010 ACS data to
incorporate 2010 Census geography and
weights, which we hope would be
tabulated by 2012. This will likely
require some data synthesis
before release. Because of the probability
that the data will be synthetic,
we do not anticipate any population
threshold.
--
Ed Christopher
Resource Center Planning Team
Federal Highway Administration
19900 Governors Drive
Olympia Fields, Illinois
60461
708-283-3534 (V)
708-574-8131 (cell)
708-283-3501 (F)
_______________________________________________
ctpp-news mailing list
ctpp-news@chrispy.net
http://www.chrispy.net/mailman/listinfo/ctpp-news
_______________________________________________
ctpp-news mailing list
ctpp-news@chrispy.net
http://www.chrispy.net/mailman/listinfo/ctpp-news
_______________________________________________
ctpp-news mailing list
ctpp-news@chrispy.net
http://www.chrispy.net/mailman/listinfo/ctpp-news