CTPP August 2015

ctpp@listserv.transportation.org

22 participants
18 discussions

[CTPP] New 2009-2013 county-to-county commuting flows released today

by Brian Mckenzie

Good morning, Just wanted to give a heads up that the new county commuting flows, based on the 5-year 2009-2013 ACS were released today. The tables include the typical worker flow counts as well as a means of transportation component (4 categories: drove alone, carpool, transit, other). The tables also include a metropolitan area indicator, so it is possible to sort and organize by metro area. Enjoy, Brian Brian McKenzie, Ph.D. Analyst, Journey to Work and Migration Statistics Branch U.S. Census Bureau Email: brian.mcKenzie(a)census.gov<mailto:brian.mcKenzie(a)census.gov>

9 years, 9 months

Re: [CTPP] Job Posting: Transportation Modeler at DCHC MPO/City of Durham

by Zhang

Durham-Chapel Hill-Carrboro Metro Planning Organization (DCHC MPO) is the regional organization responsible for transportation planning for the western part of the Research Triangle area in North Carolina, and a subdivision of Department of Transportation , City of Durham, NC. DCHC MPO/City of Durham is now accepting applications for one (1) transportation modeler. Please click on the link below, and then do the job application. http://durhamnc.gov/1473/City-Jobs<http://agency.governmentjobs.com/durhamnc/default.cfm?action=viewJob&jobID=…> Job Title: Transportation Modeler Job Type: Full time with benefits Company: DCHC MPO/City of Durham Location: 101 City Hall Plaza, Durham, North Carolina Position Salary: $54,046.00 - $86,473.00 Annually Hiring Range: $54,046.00 - $64,800.00 Annually To work with the general public, private sector, and regional agencies; as well as, local, state and federal governments in delivering a multi-modal transportation system. This is accomplished by performing model specifications, estimations, calibrations, validations, maintenance, traffic demand forecasts, policy analysis, traffic simulations, and scenario testing. Other duties include providing technical support for the transportation system performance measures and need assessments; prioritizing the Transportation Improvement Program and Long Range Transportation Plan; and presenting scenario outcomes and project results to the regional technical and policy stakeholders. Duties/Responsibilities: * Manages the multi-modal travel demand model application to regional long-range/metro transportation plan and air quality conformity analysis. Responsible for developing, enhancing, and maintaining the Triangle Regional Model (TRM). * Develops Advance Land Use Model; provides Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) lead support for the development, estimation, programming, calibration, validation, application and documentation of travel demand and land use models. * Manages and supervises technical activities for Multi-Million Transportation Capital Investment. * Develops projects and demand forecasts using Travel Demand Model; performs Transportation Model applications. * Supervises and trains interns by monitoring and directing work activities; provides guidance and support; and manages agendas and schedules. * Supports and contributes to the MPO 3-C Transportation Planning process. * Manages planning special projects and performs statistical analysis for department. Minimum Qualifications & Experience: * Work requires broad knowledge in a professional or technical field. Work requires professional level of knowledge of a discipline equivalent to that which is acquired in a Bachelor's degree-level of study or equivalent in Civil/Transportation Engineering, Transportation Planning or a related field. * Five or more years of experience of progressive and relevant experience in travel demand modeling or an equivalent combination of education and directly related travel demand modeling experience. * Valid North Carolina Class "C" driver's license or obtain a valid North Carolina Class "C" driver's license within 60 days of hire. Additional Preferred Skills: * Computer programming skills (VB, JAVA, C++ or similar), and database programming would be desirable. * Proficiency in statistics, including logit model, would be a plus. * Experience in landuse model, especially UrbanSim, would be a plus. * Experience in TransCad and GISDK would be desirable. Yanping Zhang DCHC MPO/City of Durham

9 years, 11 months

[CTPP] nationwide tracts and block groups

by Mara Kaminowitz

I created a nationwide file of 2015 vintage Census tracts and block groups for a project. If anyone wants them, they can be found at http://www.northarrow.org/data.html Mara *Mara Kaminowitz, GISP*GIS Coordinator ......................................................................... *Baltimore Metropolitan Council* Offices @ McHenry Row 1500 Whetstone Way Suite 300 Baltimore, MD 21230 410-732-0500 ext. 1030 mkaminowitz(a)baltometro.org www.baltometro.org

9 years, 11 months

Re: [CTPP] Question about Inclusion of Students in JTW Data

by ALANPISARSKI

There's a section on it in CIA. Alan > On Aug 18, 2015, at 4:26 PM, <Elaine.Murakami(a)dot.gov> <Elaine.Murakami(a)dot.gov> wrote: > > Persons in Group Quarters were included in the 1990 and 2000 decennial census long forms. > That is why it is important to understand the difference in “universes”: > Total persons and Persons in Households. > Total persons INCLUDES people in group quarters. > Persons in Households EXCLUDES people in group quarters. > > As a reminder, questions about vehicle availability is asked of HOUSEHOLDS, therefore only available to tabulate for households. > Means of transportation to work is asked of PERSONS. > > Elaine Murakami > FHWA Office of Planning > > From: ctpp-news-bounces(a)chrispy.net [mailto:ctpp-news-bounces(a)chrispy.net] On Behalf Of Geoffrey Chiapella > Sent: Monday, August 17, 2015 2:13 PM > To: 'ctpp-news(a)chrispy.net' > Subject: Re: [CTPP] Question about Inclusion of Students in JTW Data > > Concur… dorms are non-institutional GQ. > > Geoffrey Chiapella > Transportation Planner > San Luis Obispo Council of Governments > 1114 Marsh Street > San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 > (805) 781-5190 > gchiapella(a)slocog.org > > From: ctpp-news-bounces(a)chrispy.net [mailto:ctpp-news-bounces(a)chrispy.net] On Behalf Of Patricia Becker > Sent: Monday, August 17, 2015 2:04 PM > To: ctpp > Subject: Re: [CTPP] Question about Inclusion of Students in JTW Data > > I don't think there's any question that dorms are non-institutional GQ. > > On Mon, Aug 17, 2015 at 4:53 PM, Cook, Cliff <ccook(a)cambridgema.gov> wrote: > The code list for the ACS lists dormitories as non-institutional group quarters, unlike jails and nursing homes, for example, which are institutional. > > Cliff Cook > > From: ctpp-news-bounces(a)chrispy.net [mailto:ctpp-news-bounces(a)chrispy.net] On Behalf Of Tabatabaee, Frank > Sent: Monday, August 17, 2015 4:28 PM > To: ctpp-news(a)chrispy.net > Cc: Krause, Henry <hkrause(a)cambridgema.gov> > Subject: Re: [CTPP] Question about Inclusion of Students in JTW Data > > Are there any list/table of “institutional” GQs? This may help resolve this question. A broad definition of “institution” may be interpreted differently by different people. > > Thank you, > S. Frank Tabatabaee > Systems Planning Office > Florida Department of Transportation > 605 Suwannee Street, MS 19 > Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0450 > E-Mail/Respond to: Frank.Tabatabaee(a)dot.state.fl.us > (850) 414-4931 Office > (850) 414-4876 Fax > (850) 414-4900 Switchboard > > Be careful, arrive alive! > > Communicate! > > From: ctpp-news-bounces(a)chrispy.net [mailto:ctpp-news-bounces(a)chrispy.net] On Behalf Of Cook, Cliff > Sent: Monday, August 17, 2015 4:02 PM > To: ctpp-news(a)chrispy.net > Cc: Krause, Henry > Subject: [CTPP] Question about Inclusion of Students in JTW Data > > A question has come as to whether employed students living in dormitories are included in the 2006-10 CTPP JTW tables. > > Researching the question, I found the following on p. 66 of the 2013 ACS Subject Definitions document, under the definition of employed persons (http://www2.census.gov/programs-surveys/acs/tech_docs/subject_definitions/2…): > > Beginning in 2006, the population in group quarters (GQ) is included in the ACS. Some types of GQ populations have employment status distributions that are different from the household population. All institutionalized people are placed in the “not in labor force category.” The inclusion of the GQ population could therefore have a noticeable impact on the employment status distribution. This is particularly true for areas with a substantial GQ population. For example, in areas having a large state prison population, the employment rate would be expected to decrease because the base of the percentage, which now includes the population in correctional institutions, is larger. > > I interpret this to mean that dorm residents, as noninstitutionalized group quarters residents, are included in CTPP statistics but want to confirm that my understanding is correct. > > My follow up question concerns the 1990 and 2000 JTW tables. Were employed dormitory residents (ie, noninstitutionalized group quarters residents) included in those statistics? My recollection is that is not the case but I want to confirm that is correct. > > Thanks > > Cliff Cook > > > Clifford Cook, Planning Information Manager > Cambridge Community Development Department > 344 Broadway, Cambridge, MA. 02139 > > <image001.png> <image002.jpg> <image004.jpg> > www.cambridgema.gov/CDD > ccook(a)cambridgema.gov > M: 8:30-8:00 T-Th: 8:30-5:00 F: 8:30-Noon > 617/349-4656 > 617/349-4669 FAX > 617/349-4621 TTY > > > > _______________________________________________ > ctpp-news mailing list > ctpp-news(a)chrispy.net > https://www.chrispy.net/mailman/listinfo/ctpp-news > > > > > -- > Patricia C. (Patty) Becker > APB Associates/Southeast Michigan Census Council (SEMCC) > 28300 Franklin Rd, Southfield, MI 48034 > office: 248-354-6520 > home:248-355-2428 > pbecker(a)umich.edu > _______________________________________________ > ctpp-news mailing list > ctpp-news(a)chrispy.net > https://www.chrispy.net/mailman/listinfo/ctpp-news

9 years, 11 months

Re: [CTPP] Question about Inclusion of Students in JTW Data

by Cook

Thank you Elaine! Cliff Cook From: ctpp-news-bounces(a)chrispy.net [mailto:ctpp-news-bounces(a)chrispy.net] On Behalf Of Elaine.Murakami(a)dot.gov Sent: Tuesday, August 18, 2015 4:27 PM To: ctpp-news(a)chrispy.net Subject: Re: [CTPP] Question about Inclusion of Students in JTW Data Persons in Group Quarters were included in the 1990 and 2000 decennial census long forms. That is why it is important to understand the difference in “universes”: Total persons and Persons in Households. Total persons INCLUDES people in group quarters. Persons in Households EXCLUDES people in group quarters. As a reminder, questions about vehicle availability is asked of HOUSEHOLDS, therefore only available to tabulate for households. Means of transportation to work is asked of PERSONS. Elaine Murakami FHWA Office of Planning From: ctpp-news-bounces(a)chrispy.net<mailto:ctpp-news-bounces(a)chrispy.net> [mailto:ctpp-news-bounces(a)chrispy.net] On Behalf Of Geoffrey Chiapella Sent: Monday, August 17, 2015 2:13 PM To: 'ctpp-news(a)chrispy.net' Subject: Re: [CTPP] Question about Inclusion of Students in JTW Data Concur… dorms are non-institutional GQ. Geoffrey Chiapella Transportation Planner San Luis Obispo Council of Governments 1114 Marsh Street San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 (805) 781-5190 gchiapella(a)slocog.org<mailto:gchiapella(a)slocog.org> From: ctpp-news-bounces(a)chrispy.net<mailto:ctpp-news-bounces(a)chrispy.net> [mailto:ctpp-news-bounces(a)chrispy.net] On Behalf Of Patricia Becker Sent: Monday, August 17, 2015 2:04 PM To: ctpp Subject: Re: [CTPP] Question about Inclusion of Students in JTW Data I don't think there's any question that dorms are non-institutional GQ. On Mon, Aug 17, 2015 at 4:53 PM, Cook, Cliff <ccook(a)cambridgema.gov<mailto:ccook(a)cambridgema.gov>> wrote: The code list for the ACS lists dormitories as non-institutional group quarters, unlike jails and nursing homes, for example, which are institutional. Cliff Cook From: ctpp-news-bounces(a)chrispy.net<mailto:ctpp-news-bounces(a)chrispy.net> [mailto:ctpp-news-bounces(a)chrispy.net<mailto:ctpp-news-bounces(a)chrispy.net>] On Behalf Of Tabatabaee, Frank Sent: Monday, August 17, 2015 4:28 PM To: ctpp-news(a)chrispy.net<mailto:ctpp-news(a)chrispy.net> Cc: Krause, Henry <hkrause(a)cambridgema.gov<mailto:hkrause(a)cambridgema.gov>> Subject: Re: [CTPP] Question about Inclusion of Students in JTW Data Are there any list/table of “institutional” GQs? This may help resolve this question. A broad definition of “institution” may be interpreted differently by different people. Thank you, S. Frank Tabatabaee Systems Planning Office Florida Department of Transportation 605 Suwannee Street, MS 19 Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0450 E-Mail/Respond to: Frank.Tabatabaee(a)dot.state.fl.us<mailto:Frank.Tabatabaee(a)dot.state.fl.us> (850) 414-4931<tel:%28850%29%20414-4931> Office (850) 414-4876<tel:%28850%29%20414-4876> Fax (850) 414-4900<tel:%28850%29%20414-4900> Switchboard Be careful, arrive alive! Communicate! From: ctpp-news-bounces(a)chrispy.net<mailto:ctpp-news-bounces(a)chrispy.net> [mailto:ctpp-news-bounces(a)chrispy.net] On Behalf Of Cook, Cliff Sent: Monday, August 17, 2015 4:02 PM To: ctpp-news(a)chrispy.net<mailto:ctpp-news(a)chrispy.net> Cc: Krause, Henry Subject: [CTPP] Question about Inclusion of Students in JTW Data A question has come as to whether employed students living in dormitories are included in the 2006-10 CTPP JTW tables. Researching the question, I found the following on p. 66 of the 2013 ACS Subject Definitions document, under the definition of employed persons (http://www2.census.gov/programs-surveys/acs/tech_docs/subject_definitions/2…): Beginning in 2006, the population in group quarters (GQ) is included in the ACS. Some types of GQ populations have employment status distributions that are different from the household population. All institutionalized people are placed in the “not in labor force category.” The inclusion of the GQ population could therefore have a noticeable impact on the employment status distribution. This is particularly true for areas with a substantial GQ population. For example, in areas having a large state prison population, the employment rate would be expected to decrease because the base of the percentage, which now includes the population in correctional institutions, is larger. I interpret this to mean that dorm residents, as noninstitutionalized group quarters residents, are included in CTPP statistics but want to confirm that my understanding is correct. My follow up question concerns the 1990 and 2000 JTW tables. Were employed dormitory residents (ie, noninstitutionalized group quarters residents) included in those statistics? My recollection is that is not the case but I want to confirm that is correct. Thanks Cliff Cook Clifford Cook, Planning Information Manager Cambridge Community Development Department 344 Broadway, Cambridge, MA. 02139 [cid:image001.png(a)01CF4355.A65408C0] <https://www.facebook.com/CDDat344> [cid:image002.jpg(a)01CF4357.3478C720] <https://twitter.com/cddat344> [cid:image008.jpg(a)01CF4357.3478C720] <http://cddat344.tumblr.com/> [cid:image010.jpg(a)01CF4357.3478C720] <http://instagram.com/cddat344> www.cambridgema.gov/CDD<http://www.cambridgema.gov/CDD.aspx> ccook(a)cambridgema.gov<mailto:ccook(a)cambridgema.gov> M: 8:30-8:00 T-Th: 8:30-5:00 F: 8:30-Noon 617/349-4656<tel:617%2F349-4656> 617/349-4669<tel:617%2F349-4669> FAX 617/349-4621<tel:617%2F349-4621> TTY _______________________________________________ ctpp-news mailing list ctpp-news(a)chrispy.net<mailto:ctpp-news(a)chrispy.net> https://www.chrispy.net/mailman/listinfo/ctpp-news -- Patricia C. (Patty) Becker APB Associates/Southeast Michigan Census Council (SEMCC) 28300 Franklin Rd, Southfield, MI 48034 office: 248-354-6520 home:248-355-2428 pbecker(a)umich.edu<mailto:pbecker(a)umich.edu>

9 years, 11 months

Re: [CTPP] Question about Inclusion of Students in JTW Data

by Geoffrey Chiapella

Concur… dorms are non-institutional GQ. Geoffrey Chiapella Transportation Planner San Luis Obispo Council of Governments 1114 Marsh Street San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 (805) 781-5190 gchiapella(a)slocog.org From: ctpp-news-bounces(a)chrispy.net [mailto:ctpp-news-bounces(a)chrispy.net] On Behalf Of Patricia Becker Sent: Monday, August 17, 2015 2:04 PM To: ctpp Subject: Re: [CTPP] Question about Inclusion of Students in JTW Data I don't think there's any question that dorms are non-institutional GQ. On Mon, Aug 17, 2015 at 4:53 PM, Cook, Cliff <ccook(a)cambridgema.gov<mailto:ccook(a)cambridgema.gov>> wrote: The code list for the ACS lists dormitories as non-institutional group quarters, unlike jails and nursing homes, for example, which are institutional. Cliff Cook From: ctpp-news-bounces(a)chrispy.net<mailto:ctpp-news-bounces(a)chrispy.net> [mailto:ctpp-news-bounces(a)chrispy.net<mailto:ctpp-news-bounces(a)chrispy.net>] On Behalf Of Tabatabaee, Frank Sent: Monday, August 17, 2015 4:28 PM To: ctpp-news(a)chrispy.net<mailto:ctpp-news(a)chrispy.net> Cc: Krause, Henry <hkrause(a)cambridgema.gov<mailto:hkrause(a)cambridgema.gov>> Subject: Re: [CTPP] Question about Inclusion of Students in JTW Data Are there any list/table of “institutional” GQs? This may help resolve this question. A broad definition of “institution” may be interpreted differently by different people. Thank you, S. Frank Tabatabaee Systems Planning Office Florida Department of Transportation 605 Suwannee Street, MS 19 Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0450 E-Mail/Respond to: Frank.Tabatabaee(a)dot.state.fl.us<mailto:Frank.Tabatabaee(a)dot.state.fl.us> (850) 414-4931<tel:%28850%29%20414-4931> Office (850) 414-4876<tel:%28850%29%20414-4876> Fax (850) 414-4900<tel:%28850%29%20414-4900> Switchboard Be careful, arrive alive! Communicate! From: ctpp-news-bounces(a)chrispy.net<mailto:ctpp-news-bounces(a)chrispy.net> [mailto:ctpp-news-bounces(a)chrispy.net] On Behalf Of Cook, Cliff Sent: Monday, August 17, 2015 4:02 PM To: ctpp-news(a)chrispy.net<mailto:ctpp-news(a)chrispy.net> Cc: Krause, Henry Subject: [CTPP] Question about Inclusion of Students in JTW Data A question has come as to whether employed students living in dormitories are included in the 2006-10 CTPP JTW tables. Researching the question, I found the following on p. 66 of the 2013 ACS Subject Definitions document, under the definition of employed persons (http://www2.census.gov/programs-surveys/acs/tech_docs/subject_definitions/2…): Beginning in 2006, the population in group quarters (GQ) is included in the ACS. Some types of GQ populations have employment status distributions that are different from the household population. All institutionalized people are placed in the “not in labor force category.” The inclusion of the GQ population could therefore have a noticeable impact on the employment status distribution. This is particularly true for areas with a substantial GQ population. For example, in areas having a large state prison population, the employment rate would be expected to decrease because the base of the percentage, which now includes the population in correctional institutions, is larger. I interpret this to mean that dorm residents, as noninstitutionalized group quarters residents, are included in CTPP statistics but want to confirm that my understanding is correct. My follow up question concerns the 1990 and 2000 JTW tables. Were employed dormitory residents (ie, noninstitutionalized group quarters residents) included in those statistics? My recollection is that is not the case but I want to confirm that is correct. Thanks Cliff Cook Clifford Cook, Planning Information Manager Cambridge Community Development Department 344 Broadway, Cambridge, MA. 02139 [cid:image001.png(a)01CF4355.A65408C0] <https://www.facebook.com/CDDat344> [cid:image002.jpg(a)01CF4357.3478C720] <https://twitter.com/cddat344> [cid:image008.jpg(a)01CF4357.3478C720] <http://cddat344.tumblr.com/> [cid:image010.jpg(a)01CF4357.3478C720] <http://instagram.com/cddat344> www.cambridgema.gov/CDD<http://www.cambridgema.gov/CDD.aspx> ccook(a)cambridgema.gov<mailto:ccook(a)cambridgema.gov> M: 8:30-8:00 T-Th: 8:30-5:00 F: 8:30-Noon 617/349-4656<tel:617%2F349-4656> 617/349-4669<tel:617%2F349-4669> FAX 617/349-4621<tel:617%2F349-4621> TTY _______________________________________________ ctpp-news mailing list ctpp-news(a)chrispy.net<mailto:ctpp-news(a)chrispy.net> https://www.chrispy.net/mailman/listinfo/ctpp-news -- Patricia C. (Patty) Becker APB Associates/Southeast Michigan Census Council (SEMCC) 28300 Franklin Rd, Southfield, MI 48034 office: 248-354-6520 home:248-355-2428 pbecker(a)umich.edu<mailto:pbecker(a)umich.edu>

9 years, 11 months

[CTPP] Question about Inclusion of Students in JTW Data

by Cook

A question has come as to whether employed students living in dormitories are included in the 2006-10 CTPP JTW tables. Researching the question, I found the following on p. 66 of the 2013 ACS Subject Definitions document, under the definition of employed persons (http://www2.census.gov/programs-surveys/acs/tech_docs/subject_definitions/2…): Beginning in 2006, the population in group quarters (GQ) is included in the ACS. Some types of GQ populations have employment status distributions that are different from the household population. All institutionalized people are placed in the "not in labor force category." The inclusion of the GQ population could therefore have a noticeable impact on the employment status distribution. This is particularly true for areas with a substantial GQ population. For example, in areas having a large state prison population, the employment rate would be expected to decrease because the base of the percentage, which now includes the population in correctional institutions, is larger. I interpret this to mean that dorm residents, as noninstitutionalized group quarters residents, are included in CTPP statistics but want to confirm that my understanding is correct. My follow up question concerns the 1990 and 2000 JTW tables. Were employed dormitory residents (ie, noninstitutionalized group quarters residents) included in those statistics? My recollection is that is not the case but I want to confirm that is correct. Thanks Cliff Cook Clifford Cook, Planning Information Manager Cambridge Community Development Department 344 Broadway, Cambridge, MA. 02139 [cid:image001.png(a)01CF4355.A65408C0] <https://www.facebook.com/CDDat344> [cid:image002.jpg(a)01CF4357.3478C720] <https://twitter.com/cddat344> [cid:image008.jpg(a)01CF4357.3478C720] <http://cddat344.tumblr.com/> [cid:image010.jpg(a)01CF4357.3478C720] <http://instagram.com/cddat344> www.cambridgema.gov/CDD<http://www.cambridgema.gov/CDD.aspx> ccook(a)cambridgema.gov<mailto:ccook(a)cambridgema.gov> M: 8:30-8:00 T-Th: 8:30-5:00 F: 8:30-Noon 617/349-4656 617/349-4669 FAX 617/349-4621 TTY

9 years, 11 months

Re: [CTPP] more on journey to work and Millennials

by Mike Cline

Sorry to be a crank and perhaps it is because I am personally sandwiched between these two generations and sick of hearing about them both... Interesting statistics but why compare an older age group with a younger age group and then place a generational label. I am afraid that, without some context, folks are going to make conclusions that might be more about age differences (an age group at the height of their career vs. an age group at the beginning)? Generational (cohort) comparisons would be more appropriate if you could compare the Baby boom when they were young to the millenials at the same age. Not saying there are not differences but I am afraid that these side by side comparisons would lead some (the press) to draw conclusions that are beyond what can be told from the data. Michael E. Cline, PhD Associate Director Hobby Center for the Study of Texas Rice University 5615 Kirby Dr Ste 840 Houston, TX 77005 713-348-5396 Mailing Address: 6100 Main St,MS-202 Houston, TX 77005 http://hobbycenter.rice.edu http://thetexaschallenge.com On 8/13/2015 1:46 PM, Elaine.Murakami(a)dot.gov wrote: > > In case you haven’t seen these, we posted new profile sheets that use > the 2006-2008 ACS and the 2011-2013 ACS Public Use Microdata Sample. > > In these profiles, Baby Boomers are defined as those born between 1946 > and 1964, and Millennials are defined as those born between 1983 and > 2000. > > For the 2006-2008 ACS, many of the Millennials were not yet of working > age. > > The geography is limited only to those Counties for which PUMA > geography has matching boundaries. > > http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/planning/census_issues/american_community_survey/pr… > > > I have seen some recent forecasts about declining gasoline prices, so > we will see how this impacts the mode to work and auto ownership for > younger workers in the near future. > > Elaine Murakami > > FHWA Office of Planning > > 206-220-4460 (in Seattle) > > > > _______________________________________________ > ctpp-news mailing list > ctpp-news(a)chrispy.net > https://www.chrispy.net/mailman/listinfo/ctpp-news

9 years, 11 months

Re: [CTPP] JSM

by Elaine.Murakami＠dot.gov

Hi Krishnan – Since the presentation is about Smartphones and NOT CTPP, I’ll send you a separate email and not clog up the CTPP listserv. But thanks for asking about JSM in the first place! Re: IRS. Yes, it is very difficult to get permission to use IRS records, but the Census Bureau has an agreement, which is why Amy O’Hara and Alison Fields did the presentation I mentioned. Let’s find out more about their research! Elaine From: ctpp-news-bounces(a)chrispy.net [mailto:ctpp-news-bounces(a)chrispy.net] On Behalf Of Krishnan Viswanathan Sent: Thursday, August 13, 2015 3:21 PM To: ctpp-news(a)chrispy.net Subject: Re: [CTPP] JSM Hi Elaine Thanks for the JSM update. I am curious to learn about the smartphone app and data that you presented on. Is it something that you can share with us? Also, WRT tax records there was a huge study done by Harvard which uses tax records (http://www.equality-of-opportunity.org/) to look at inter-genertional mobility. So the question that naturally arises is how can Federal agencies such as FHWA get access to such data which will help explore the resident side that Ed mentioned in his email. Past experience trying to get access to such data is not very encouraging. Krishnan On Thu, Aug 13, 2015 at 5:51 PM Ed Christopher <edc(a)berwyned.com<mailto:edc(a)berwyned.com>> wrote: Thanks Elaine--I hope we get to hear more about the tax records work. I am hoping it is dealing with IRS records and where we say we live and pay our taxes from. I know that LEHD uses IRS tax records for its origin (home) locations but that is something that we do not know much about. Do we live and start our journey to work at the same place we use for our tax home is one obvious question. We know a lot about QCEW and worker place data (the other half of LEHD) but we really do not know anything about the resident side. Thanks for the update and I apologize for the digression. On 8/13/2015 3:33 PM, Elaine.Murakami(a)dot.gov<mailto:Elaine.Murakami(a)dot.gov> wrote: Hi Krishnan and anyone else who is interested! I had the BEST time at my one day (Aug 10) at the Joint Statistical Meetings. JSM includes many organizations including the American Statistical Association (ASA). 6000 statisticians at the Seattle Convention Center. It is like TRB for statisticians. ☺ My presentation was about using aggregate cellphone data and the test of the RMove Smartphone app in Indiana. Thank you to everyone (Sumit Bindra, Leta Huntsinger, Xian-Biao Hu, Christina Barrone and Elizabeth Greene ) whose information I used in my presentation, which was mostly drawn from the TRB Planning Applications conference and the American Planning Association conference! I had hoped to talk about the NCHRP 08-95 project on cell phone data, but that project is running 1 year behind. CB staff (Amy O’Hara and Alison Fields) did a presentation about using tax records to examine “mobility.” I missed the presentation because it was first thing on Monday morning, but Amy will send me a copy of the presentation. Their research is not yet final. The session (session 158) on interactive graphics with R was very fun but I could not stay the entire time. Here are some of the R library names: (animint) (plotly) (ggplotly) and (gridSVG). One key person with R code and involved with ASA is Carson Sievert from Iowa State. WOW! This is where I think we need to be going with big data mining and analysis. Transportation Statistics Interest Group (TSIG). (This is an equivalent of a TRB Task Force before it becomes a full committee). TSIG will continue as an interest group and may promote up to a “section” in the future. Alan Karr from RTI is the current chair. They discussed putting together 2 sessions for next year’s JSM. Feng Guo VA Tech will lead one effort, and Pat Hu will work on another (administrative records). Please contact them feng.guo(a)vt.edu<mailto:feng.guo(a)vt.edu> patricia.hu(a)dot.gov<mailto:patricia.hu(a)dot.gov> if you are interested in being a speaker. I would have liked to attend these, but since I only had one-day registration, did not. Session 516 on Wed. was “utilizing Administrative Records and Adaptive Design in the 2020 Census”. Session 541 on Wed – Cynthia Bland Augustine from RTI (member of TRB ABJ40) discussed “GeoSampling Weights and Design Effects” Session 593 on Wed – was on using the Census Bureau’s Planning Database. (see the attachment of the people who presented). I think this is a potential resource for assisting in regional and statewide surveys to better estimate low response and plan, in advance, for different recruitment or sampling design. Elaine From: ctpp-news-bounces(a)chrispy.net<mailto:ctpp-news-bounces(a)chrispy.net> [mailto:ctpp-news-bounces(a)chrispy.net] On Behalf Of Krishnan Viswanathan Sent: Thursday, August 13, 2015 12:18 PM To: ctpp-news(a)chrispy.net<mailto:ctpp-news(a)chrispy.net> Subject: [CTPP] JSM Elaine & (others who attended) Anything interesting from the JSM that pertains to transportation? Look forward to hearing from take on how it went & what we should look to in terms of data, methods, etc. Krishnan _______________________________________________ ctpp-news mailing list ctpp-news(a)chrispy.net<mailto:ctpp-news(a)chrispy.net> https://www.chrispy.net/mailman/listinfo/ctpp-news -- Ed Christopher _______________________________________________ ctpp-news mailing list ctpp-news(a)chrispy.net<mailto:ctpp-news(a)chrispy.net> https://www.chrispy.net/mailman/listinfo/ctpp-news

9 years, 11 months

Re: [CTPP] more on journey to work and Millennials

by Rob Case

Our study (emailed to CTPP last night) covers, and measures, all generations from the Lost Generation to Millennials. From: ctpp-news-bounces(a)chrispy.net [mailto:ctpp-news-bounces(a)chrispy.net] On Behalf Of Lindeman, Nicholas (MPO) Sent: Friday, August 14, 2015 1:03 PM To: 'ctpp-news(a)chrispy.net' Subject: Re: [CTPP] more on journey to work and Millennials <Crank on> As I'm sure you're all aware, an entire generation exists between the Boomers and the Y's - but the bulk of generational analysis I've seen in recent years tends to focus on only on those two generations. It's like those of us in GenX don't even exist. I know we aren't as numerous as Boomers or Y's, but to leave us out generational discussions entirely paints an incomplete picture of issues like commuting habits. <Crank off> Nicholas J. Lindeman | Economic & Systems Data Analyst Nashville Area Metropolitan Planning Organization 800 Second Ave. South | P.O. Box 196300 | Nashville, TN 37219 615.862.7198 lindeman(a)nashvillempo.org<mailto:lindeman(a)nashvillempo.org> | nashvillempo.org From: ctpp-news-bounces(a)chrispy.net<mailto:ctpp-news-bounces(a)chrispy.net> [mailto:ctpp-news-bounces(a)chrispy.net] On Behalf Of Elaine.Murakami(a)dot.gov<mailto:Elaine.Murakami(a)dot.gov> Sent: Thursday, August 13, 2015 1:47 PM To: ctpp-news(a)chrispy.net<mailto:ctpp-news(a)chrispy.net> Subject: [CTPP] more on journey to work and Millennials In case you haven't seen these, we posted new profile sheets that use the 2006-2008 ACS and the 2011-2013 ACS Public Use Microdata Sample. In these profiles, Baby Boomers are defined as those born between 1946 and 1964, and Millennials are defined as those born between 1983 and 2000. For the 2006-2008 ACS, many of the Millennials were not yet of working age. The geography is limited only to those Counties for which PUMA geography has matching boundaries. http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/planning/census_issues/american_community_survey/pr… I have seen some recent forecasts about declining gasoline prices, so we will see how this impacts the mode to work and auto ownership for younger workers in the near future. Elaine Murakami FHWA Office of Planning 206-220-4460 (in Seattle)

9 years, 11 months

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

2004

2003

2002

2001

2000

1999

1998

CTPP August 2015