[CTPP] Did you discover any workplace geocoding issues from the EEO?

Census Bureau recently released EEO flows (based on ACS 2006-2010) down to the county and place level. The EEO flows can be accessed from American Factfinder: http://factfinder2.census.gov/faces/nav/jsf/pages/index.xhtml Thanks Charles Barber from Baltimore MPO for bringing up Baltimore City and County workplace geocoding issues in EEO flows. Charles noticed that "The BEA employment estimate for Baltimore City shows a decrease of (-59,800) jobs (-13%) between 2000 and 2010. Analysis of BLS and ES2020 also show decreases for Baltimore City employment between 2000 and 2010. The 2000 Census and 2010 ACS comparison show an increase in 7,500 (2%) workers reporting a primary work location within Baltimore City. BEA estimates for Baltimore County show an increase (59,800 jobs) compared with a small Census/ACS increase (3,500/7%)." It seems to me that some of jobs in Baltimore county were mistakenly geocoded to Baltimore City. Baltimore City is an independent city and have the same street names with those of Baltimore county. We suspect this is the reason causing the grocoding issues. So if your areas have the similar county/independent city situation with the Baltimore county/city, we strongly encourage you to take a look at EEO flows and share your findings with us. CTPP 2006-2010, which is scheduled to be out mid-2013, will be using the same workplace geocoding as those of EEO tabulations. That's why this issue is very important and if we can discover the problems early, we may have better chances to get them corrected in the CTPP 2006-2010. Thanks! Liang Long Cambridge Systematics, Inc. 4800 Hampden Lane Suite 800 Bethesda, MD 20814 tel 301 347 9141 fax 301 347 0101 FHWA 202-366-6971 e-mail llong(a)camsys.com www.camsys.com