ACS did not include group quarters in 2005, but did add them in 2006 and
2007. The 3-year period estimates for 2005-07 include them too
(adjusting the weighting to account for their absence in the 2005 data).
I can't speak for the methodology used by the California Dept. of
Finance, but if it is similar to that used by its Washington State
counterpart, the administrative data it uses to estimate current
population will be different from that used by Census, and can account
for a difference in the outcome. (Remember that both agencies are
making estimates based on indirect information). Calif Dept of Finance
may be using employment records (employees covered by unemployment
insurance, which excludes the self-employed), school enrollments, motor
vehicle registrations, births, deaths, etc.; while Census has access to
births, deaths, employment records, and Social Security records.
Typically, the figures from Census do not align with those from the
Washington Office of Financial Management, though they are usually in
the ballpark.
All such agencies benchmark their annual population estimates to the
decennial census once those figures come out. Typically they will
revise their intercensal estimates back to the previous census, but
maybe only for the county totals. Census also will do this, but only
for the county totals, not for the ACS figures. You could apply the ACS
percentages (e.g., percent age 15-64 in the workforce) to the Calif Dept
of Finance totals if you felt those were more reliable totals. ACS is
intended to be a source of data on characteristics, not necessarily on
total numbers - that's the job of the decennial census, and of
intercensal and postcensal totals.
Pete Swensson, Senior Planner
Thurston Regional Planning Council
2424 Heritage Ct. SW
Olympia, WA 98502
(360) 741-2530 (direct line)
(360) 956-7575 (main desk)
(360) 956-7815 (fax)
swenssp(a)trpc.org
This e-mail and any attachments are for the use of the addressed
individual. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify
our systems manager. TRPC has taken responsible precautions to ensure
no viruses are present in this e-mail, however we do not accept
responsibility for loss or damage arising from the use of this e-mail or
attachments.
From: ctpp-news-bounces(a)chrispy.net
[mailto:ctpp-news-bounces@chrispy.net] On Behalf Of Mike Harmon
Sent: Thursday, June 25, 2009 3:40 PM
To: ctpp-news(a)chrispy.net
Subject: RE: [CTPP] ACS 2005-2007 Population Estimates
You should remember that the ACS estimates include the household
population only, whereas the DOF numbers include people in group
quarters, which makes the State numbers higher.
________________________________
From: ctpp-news-bounces(a)chrispy.net
[mailto:ctpp-news-bounces@chrispy.net] On Behalf Of wendell cox
Sent: Thursday, June 25, 2009 2:54 PM
To: ctpp-news(a)chrispy.net
Cc: JPLevin(a)oaklandnet.com
Subject: Re: [CTPP] ACS 2005-2007 Population Estimates
Do not know the issue you are raising, however, Calif Dept of Finance
estimates are high on municipal populations of SF and LA... by a large
margin... this is in comparison to the annual Census Bureau estimates
(which may or may not be related to ACS).
On Thu, Jun 25, 2009 at 9:28 PM, Shimon Israel <SIsrael(a)mtc.ca.gov>
wrote:
For ACS 2005-2007 population and housing occupancy/vacancy estimates,
are people finding discrepancies between ACS and other data sources,
particularly in sub-county geographies? ACS estimates are controlled at
the county level and, like the ACS 1-year data, ACS 2005-2007 population
estimates are showing disagreement with other data sources. For
example, the Oakland 3-year ACS estimate shows the population at
372,000, when CA Dept. of Finance estimates are over 400,000. This runs
counter to the on-the-ground anecdotal experience - ACS shows a loss of
30,000 people during a period that showed an increase of 10,000 housing
units.
Will the decennial census correct this? My understanding is that
Census 2010 numbers will be used to control 2010 ACS characteristic
data. There will need to be some adjustment, however, given that the
decennial census benchmarks population at April 1, and ACS uses a July 1
population number. It's also my understanding that population
estimates for 2001-2009 will be updated, though retroactive adjustments
for ACS characteristics will not be done. Does anyone else know
something different about this?
Other thoughts about this?
Thanks,
Shimon
---------------------------------------------------------------
Shimon Israel
Associate Transportation Planner/Analyst
Metropolitan Transportation Commission
101 Eighth Street
Oakland, CA 94607-4700
(510) 817-5839 (office)
(510) 817-5848 (fax)
---------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
ctpp-news mailing list
ctpp-news(a)chrispy.net
http://www.chrispy.net/mailman/listinfo/ctpp-news
--
--
Wendell Cox
Demographia | Wendell Cox Consultancy - St. Louis Missouri-Illinois
metropolitan region
Visiting Professor, Conservatoire National des Arts et Metiers, Paris
France..33.6.16.63.58.76
USA..1.618 632 8507
www.demographia.com |
www.publicpurpose.com |
www.rentalcartours.net
Books & Publications
WAR ON THE DREAM: How Anti-Sprawl Policy Threatens the Quality of Life
http://www.demographia.com/wod1.pdf
5th ANNUAL DEMOGRAPHIA INTERNATIONAL HOUSING AFFORDABILITY SURVEY
(
http://www.demographia.com/dhi.pdf)
THE WAL-MART REVOLUTION: How Big-Box Stores Benefit Consumers, Workers,
and the Economy
By Richard Vedder & Wendell Cox