I wrote a paper about this 20 years ago; I'll be happy to send it to anyone who asks. In general, I think tract boundaries should be something - usually streets but sometimes water - that local people recognize as being a divider. Freeways are the highest priority, since they're difficult to cross. Then major arterial streets/roads.

I also believe, and have said many times, that continuity is a shibboleth. That is, it's something everything thinks is of highest importance, but it really isn't. Good tracts for now and the future are more important. I almost completely retracted Detroit before the 1980 census, because when the tracts had originally been drawn -- after the 1930 census -- no one understood their purpose, plus the city had changed enormously with new freeways and urban renewal.

I also use housing units rather than population counts as a size criterion. The ideal tract has about 1500 HUs. My reason for using HU counts is twofold: (1) the data are readily available, while pop counts are not, and (2) the sampling errors for ACS data ride on cases, which are households, not people.

Hope this is helpful.

Patty Becker

Virus-free. www.avast.com

On Mon, Mar 4, 2019 at 12:14 PM Reardon, Tim <TReardon@mapc.org> wrote:

Hi all,

I imagine many of us are busy diving into GUPS and getting started with the delineation work.  Obviously there are specific Census-defined thresholds for each type of statistical areas, but I’m curious to know if there are other criteria or principles that folks are using as they consider possible adjustments.

 

Historical continuity aside, what makes for a good block group or tract? Should we seek to minimize heterogeneity by drawing boundaries that separate very different neighborhoods/sub-neighborhoods?  Or is it better to have block groups/tracts that include a more diverse set of households and residents?  I would imagine that the approach taken to these questions will affect not only the confidence intervals of the resulting ACS tables, but also the results of whatever research uses those tables.  

 

Any opinions or literature references on this topic would be most welcome! 

 

Tim Reardon

Data Services Director
Metropolitan Area Planning Council, Boston

 

 

From: Graham, Todd [mailto:todd.graham@metc.state.mn.us]
Sent: Friday, February 22, 2019 1:10 PM
To: sdc_mlist@lists.berkeley.edu; ctpp-news@chrispy.net
Cc: joshua.wixom@census.gov; GEO PSAP (CENSUS/GEO) <geo.psap@census.gov>
Subject: [State Data Centers] PSAP participants in every county: https://www2.census.gov/geo/pdfs/partnerships/psap/Primary_PSAP_Participant_Contact_Information.pdf

 

Hi friends of Census Tracts—

 

If it’s useful to you… Census Bureau has published a contacts list of 2020 Census PSAP participating agencies, here: https://www2.census.gov/geo/pdfs/partnerships/psap/Primary_PSAP_Participant_Contact_Information.pdf

This list covers every county in the nation. 

 

If the listing for your county points to an erroneous agency or a nonworking phone number/email, I suggest you alert Census’s Geog Division:  geo.psap@census.gov

 

 

By the way, our office, Metropolitan Council of the Twin Cities, has a few upcoming meetings where we’ll be describing our review, validation and redrawing of Census Tracts and Block Groups. We are well into the preliminary work. Starting in March we will be pointing interested stakeholders to preliminary, proposed re-tracting for our 7-county region.

 

And we will be inviting stakeholders to comment or express their needs for Census stats tabulations for sub-city zones, service areas, etc. We will consider whether those needs can possibly be met with 2020-vintage Tracts and Block Groups.

 

It’s possible we may receive some comments from outside of our region. When that happens, we will be redirecting commenters to the other county governments and regional development commissions in our state…  May want to bookmark the participants list mentioned above!

 

Hope that helps.

 

Cheers,

Todd Graham

 

EMAILLOGO.png

Todd Graham

Principal Demographer  |  Metropolitan Council   |  Research

todd.graham@metc.state.mn.us

P. 651.602.1322  |  F. 651.602.1674

390 North Robert Street  |  St. Paul, MN 55101  |  metrocouncil.org/data

ConWUsFaceBook_32x32Twitter_32x32linkedinYoutube_32x32 EmailSU    

 

--
SDC Clearinghouse
(http://sdcclearinghouse.wordpress.com)
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sdc_mlist@lists.berkeley.edu" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to sdc_mlist+unsubscribe@lists.berkeley.edu.

Please be advised that the Massachusetts Secretary of State considers e-mail to be a public record, and therefore subject to the Massachusetts Public Records Law, M.G.L. c. 66 § 10.

--
SDC Clearinghouse
(http://sdcclearinghouse.wordpress.com)
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sdc_mlist@lists.berkeley.edu" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to sdc_mlist+unsubscribe@lists.berkeley.edu.


--
Patricia C. (Patty) Becker
APB Associates/Southeast Michigan Census Council (SEMCC)
Note: new address as of 6/5/18: 28332 Franklin Rd, Southfield, MI 48034
office: 248-354-6520
home:248-355-2428
pbecker@umich.edu

Virus-free. www.avast.com