CTPP

ctpp@listserv.transportation.org

5 participants
3069 discussions

by Louis Pino

Hello- I am working with the five year ACS data, and we are trying to create profiles for the unincorporated portions of the county. My question(s) is: If I sum up the estimates for all the municipalities in their respective county can I simply take the difference from the county total and call it the unincorporated part? If so, how do you obtain the MOE for this number? Can you "back out" the MOE from the adjusted (square root of the sum)muni MOEs and the county MOE? Or do I have to aggregate block group data for these areas? Thanks in advance for your help! Louis Pino| Socioeconomic Analyst | Customer Resource and Support Direct 303.480.6000 | Fax 303.480.6790 [cid:image001.gif(a)01CBC3A7.A3224D00] [cid:image002.jpg(a)01CBC3A7.A3224D00]<http://solarmap.drcog.org/> Try out DRCOG's new tool to check solar energy savings potential at http://solarmap.drcog.org<http://solarmap.drcog.org/>

14 years, 6 months

RE: [CTPP] 2000 and 2006-08 work trip comparison question

by Graham

Hi Frank-- Hope the new year is treating you well. You asked what you're missing: How is the 3-year or 5-year window *not* like a moving average? Some of the moving parts changing from year to year are the control totals and, as result, the weights (expansion factor) that would be attached to any given household found in the 5 annual sub-samples that comprise the period sample. The population control totals come an exogenous, completely-outside-the-survey-itself, annual estimation model. And in our region, Mpls-St Paul, CB badly underestimated the top-line population totals during early and mid-decade. I think they realized it (oops), and they've been trying to make up ground ever since. Also pertaining to control totals, there may be a time-series disruption for small areas with the vintage 2009 data. CB transitioned from having county-level control totals to having sub-county control totals. And that's likely to cause weird time-series breaks for some cities where population was previously under- (or over-)estimated. ... Expect more fun this Fall, when vintage 2010 ACS are re-benchmarked to 2010 Census Enumeration ________________________ Todd Graham Principal Forecaster Metropolitan Council 390 Robert Street North Saint Paul, MN 55101 ph: 651/602-1322 email: todd.graham(a)metc.state.mn.us in: www.linkedin.com/in/toddgraham web: www.metrocouncil.org ________________________ ________________________________________ From: ctpp-news-bounces(a)chrispy.net [ctpp-news-bounces(a)chrispy.net] On Behalf Of Frank Lenk [FLENK(a)MARC.ORG] Sent: Tuesday, February 01, 2011 10:34 PM To: ctpp-news(a)chrispy.net Subject: RE: [CTPP] 2000 and 2006-08 work trip comparison question. Call me dense, but I don’t see how this problem is any different than working with moving averages. I mean, I do understand that this data is not an average but a period estimate. Still, the issues created by dropping the first year of the period and adding the last year as the data series moves forward in time seems the same to me. What am I not understanding properly? Frank Frank Lenk Director of Research Services Mid-America Regional Council 600 Broadway, Suite 200 Kansas City, MO 64105 www.marc.org<http://www.marc.org> 816.474.4240 flenk(a)marc.org<mailto:flenk(a)marc.org> 816.701.8237 From: ctpp-news-bounces(a)chrispy.net [mailto:ctpp-news-bounces(a)chrispy.net] On Behalf Of Patty Becker Sent: Tuesday, February 01, 2011 3:17 PM To: ctpp-news(a)chrispy.net Subject: Re: [CTPP] 2000 and 2006-08 work trip comparison question. If you see the point about the problem of comparing overlapping 3 year ACS estimates, it gets even worse with consecutive 5 year numbers, in which 4 of the 5 years are the same data. Personally, I think there's a strong argument for releasing 5 year data only twice a decade, by definition non-overlapping. We may get to that point in a couple of years. Patty Becker At 03:53 PM 2/1/2011, you wrote: Frank-I totally agree and I would like to see the statisticians get involved and think about this. People are going to compare overlapping periods and we have to get smart about how to deal with this. As for why some say we should not compare overlapping years the story goes like this. If you have 2006 to 2008 data and 2007 to 2009 data you would have two overlapping years. According to the logic you would in fact only be comparing the first year 2006 to the last year 2009 as the middle two years would cancel themselves out. While this sounds logical on the surface there has to be a way to deal with overlapping 5-year periods or it doesn't make sense to have an ACS. I am not sure if anyone would out right admit it but is anyone designing performance measures or other regional metrics calling for tracking annual multi-year period estimates at tracts or places? Frank Lenk wrote: I would also be interested in a more detailed explanation of why we should not compare overlapping period estimates. From a practical standpoint, people are going to do it anyway, especially the press. What do we need to know - other than the inherent issues of what is a statistically significant vs. insignificant change and the fact that ACS was designed to examine characteristics of the population rather than its level - to be able to correct naïve interpretations of easily calculated tract-level year-to-year differences in the estimates of things like poverty rate, unemployment rate, educational attainment rates, etc.? What is a correct interpretation of these differences? Frank Frank Lenk Director of Research Services Mid-America Regional Council 600 Broadway, Suite 200 Kansas City, MO 64105 www.marc.org<http://www.marc.org/> < http://www.marc.org<http://www.marc.org/>> 816.474.4240 flenk(a)marc.org< mailto:flenk(a)marc.org> 816.701.8237 From: ctpp-news-bounces(a)chrispy.net [ mailto:ctpp-news-bounces(a)chrispy.net] On Behalf Of Kendra Watkins Sent: Monday, January 31, 2011 10:05 AM To: ctpp-news(a)chrispy.net Subject: RE: [CTPP] 2000 and 2006-08 work trip comparison question. This is interesting. I recall hearing this guidance in the past. However on the Census website on the ACS page it specifically states; "Generally, you can compare American Community Survey (ACS) 3-year and 5-year estimates with Census 2000 data. There are differences in the universe, question wording, residence rules, reference periods, and the way in which the data are tabulated which can impact comparability." The qualifier in the second sentence addresses the conflict (different methods, time periods etc) but I can't find anywhere on the ACS pages where the Census recommends we not compare ACS to decennial Census. And when I search by subject the Journey to Work topic states that I can 'Compare' it to the 2000 Census. It does specifically state not to compare overlapping years on multiyear estimates. Kendra Watkins Senior Data Analyst Mid-Region Council of Governments 809 Copper Ave. NW Albuquerque, NM 87102 Phone: (505)724-3601 Fax: (505)247-1753 Email: kwatkins(a)mrcog-nm.gov< mailto:tgaudette(a)mrcog-nm.gov> This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to which they are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify the system manager. This message contains confidential information and is intended only for the individual named. If you are not the named addressee you should not disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail. From: ctpp-news-bounces(a)chrispy.net [ mailto:ctpp-news-bounces(a)chrispy.net] On Behalf Of Weinberger, Penelope Sent: Monday, January 31, 2011 8:41 AM To: ctpp-news(a)chrispy.net Subject: RE: [CTPP] 2000 and 2006-08 work trip comparison question. The CB does not recommend comparing an ACS based data set to a CB Long Form based data set. The 2000 data represent a point in time estimate, the ACS data represent a period estimate. Furthermore, the Census Bureau recommends not comparing period estimates with overlapping years. Penelope Weinberger CTPP Program Manager AASHTO 202-624-3556 http://ctpp.transportation.org/Pages/default.aspx It's just as bad to not make a plan as to blindly follow the one you already have. From: ctpp-news-bounces(a)chrispy.net [ mailto:ctpp-news-bounces(a)chrispy.net] On Behalf Of Seidensticker, Dan Sent: Friday, January 28, 2011 4:18 PM To: (ctpp-news(a)chrispy.net) Subject: [CTPP] 2000 and 2006-08 work trip comparison question. We downloaded the2006-2008 ACS county-to-county worker flow for Dane County, Wisconsin from http://ctpp.transportation.org/Pages/3yrdas.aspx. The question we now have...can that data be compared to the county-to-county 2000 CTPP work trips to determine any statistically significant increase/decrease? If so, how would one calculate the margin of error? Dan Seidensticker GIS Specialist Madison Area Transportation Planning Board: A Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) City of Madison Planning Unit 121 S. Pinckney Street, Suite 400 Madison, WI 53703 Voice: 608-266-9119 Fax: 608-261-9967 Email: dseidensticker(a)cityofmadison.com< mailto:dseidensticker(a)cityofmadison.com> www.MadisonAreaMPO.org<http://www.madisonareampo.org/> < http://www.madisonareampo.org/> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ _______________________________________________ ctpp-news mailing list ctpp-news(a)chrispy.net http://www.chrispy.net/mailman/listinfo/ctpp-news -- Ed Christopher 708-283-3534 (V) 708-574-8131 (cell) FHWA RC-TST-PLN 4749 Lincoln Mall Drive, Suite 600 Matteson, IL 60443 _______________________________________________ ctpp-news mailing list ctpp-news(a)chrispy.net http://www.chrispy.net/mailman/listinfo/ctpp-news ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Patricia C. (Patty) Becker 248/354-6520 APB Associates/SEMCC FAX 248/354-6645 28300 Franklin Road Home 248/355-2428 Southfield, MI 48034 pbecker(a)umich.edu

14 years, 6 months

[CTPP] 2010 Data is starting to roll out

by Ed Christopher

The Census Bureau has started to ship the local 2010 Census data. So far Louisiana, Mississippi, New Jersey and Virginia have been shipped. Next week Arkansas, Iowa, Indiana and Maryland are planned. To see what states have been shipped and which are next in line go to http://www.census.gov/rdo/data/2010_census_redistricting_data_pl_94-171_sum… According to the release program which is tied to redistricting the data is shipped to the state leadership and after confirmation of receipt which usually takes 24 hours the CB will issue a news release with five custom tables of data for the state. At that time, the full set of data will be available simultaneously via FTP download on the Redistricting Data Office page http://www.census.gov/rdo/data>. Then within 24 hours after release, the data will be posted on the CB's new American FactFinder site at http://factfinder2.census.gov. The data will include summaries of population totals, as well as data on race, Hispanic origin and voting age. These data will be presented for multiple geographies within the state, such as census blocks, tracts, voting districts, cities, counties and school districts. According to Public Law 94-171, the CB must provide redistricting data to the 50 states no later than April 1 of the year following the census. As a result, the CB is delivering the data state-by-state on a flow basis in February and March. All states will receive their data by April 1, 2011. -- Ed Christopher 708-283-3534 (V) 708-574-8131 (cell) FHWA RC-TST-PLN 4749 Lincoln Mall Drive, Suite 600 Matteson, IL 60443

14 years, 6 months

RE: [CTPP] 2000 and 2006-08 work trip comparison question.

by Weinberger

The CB does not recommend comparing an ACS based data set to a CB Long Form based data set. The 2000 data represent a point in time estimate, the ACS data represent a period estimate. Furthermore, the Census Bureau recommends not comparing period estimates with overlapping years. Penelope Weinberger CTPP Program Manager AASHTO 202-624-3556 http://ctpp.transportation.org/Pages/default.aspx <http://ctpp.transportation.org/Pages/default.aspx> It's just as bad to not make a plan as to blindly follow the one you already have. From: ctpp-news-bounces(a)chrispy.net [mailto:ctpp-news-bounces(a)chrispy.net] On Behalf Of Seidensticker, Dan Sent: Friday, January 28, 2011 4:18 PM To: (ctpp-news(a)chrispy.net) Subject: [CTPP] 2000 and 2006-08 work trip comparison question. We downloaded the2006-2008 ACS county-to-county worker flow for Dane County, Wisconsin from http://ctpp.transportation.org/Pages/3yrdas.aspx. The question we now have...can that data be compared to the county-to-county 2000 CTPP work trips to determine any statistically significant increase/decrease? If so, how would one calculate the margin of error? Dan Seidensticker GIS Specialist Madison Area Transportation Planning Board: A Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) City of Madison Planning Unit 121 S. Pinckney Street, Suite 400 Madison, WI 53703 Voice: 608-266-9119 Fax: 608-261-9967 Email: dseidensticker(a)cityofmadison.com www.MadisonAreaMPO.org <http://www.madisonareampo.org/>

14 years, 6 months

[CTPP] RE: ctpp-news Digest, Vol 84, Issue 5

by Wade L. White

Change is "part and parcel" of why we do all of this analysis and data collection. To some degree it is to understand today (not easy given the lags in data collection vs. reporting timeframes) but it is more important for most planning-related work to understand how changes are likely to play out. Understanding trends and dynamics is why we do what we do- at least those of us in the forecasting world. Some places use longitudinal panel surveys to inform forecasting- a very useful albeit expensive approach to develop an understanding of forecasting likely changes. Digging around in the multi-year data sounds like an excellent and perhaps low-cost way to add even more insight to understanding the dynamics of change- even if you can't get a statistically valid measure for every variable/geography in there. Chiming in with Ken C., that too should somehow fit into the overall research plan if we're going to maximize our "return on investment" on the multi-year survey data sets. I guess I'm up to a quarter's worth of thoughts now (or at least a nickel). W -----Original Message----- From: ctpp-news-bounces(a)chrispy.net [mailto:ctpp-news-bounces(a)chrispy.net] On Behalf Of ctpp-news-request(a)chrispy.net Sent: Tuesday, February 01, 2011 4:26 PM To: ctpp-news(a)chrispy.net Subject: ctpp-news Digest, Vol 84, Issue 5 Send ctpp-news mailing list submissions to ctpp-news(a)chrispy.net To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit http://www.chrispy.net/mailman/listinfo/ctpp-news or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to ctpp-news-request(a)chrispy.net You can reach the person managing the list at ctpp-news-owner(a)chrispy.net When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than "Re: Contents of ctpp-news digest..." Today's Topics: 1. Re: 2000 and 2006-08 work trip comparison question. (Ed Christopher) 2. RE: 2000 and 2006-08 work trip comparison question. (Planning Department) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Message: 1 Date: Tue, 01 Feb 2011 14:53:19 -0600 From: Ed Christopher <edc(a)berwyned.com> Subject: Re: [CTPP] 2000 and 2006-08 work trip comparison question. To: ctpp-news(a)chrispy.net Message-ID: <4D4872BF.7040902(a)berwyned.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Frank-I totally agree and I would like to see the statisticians get involved and think about this. People are going to compare overlapping periods and we have to get smart about how to deal with this. As for why some say we should not compare overlapping years the story goes like this. If you have 2006 to 2008 data and 2007 to 2009 data you would have two overlapping years. According to the logic you would in fact only be comparing the first year 2006 to the last year 2009 as the middle two years would cancel themselves out. While this sounds logical on the surface there has to be a way to deal with overlapping 5-year periods or it doesn't make sense to have an ACS. I am not sure if anyone would out right admit it but is anyone designing performance measures or other regional metrics calling for tracking annual multi-year period estimates at tracts or places? Frank Lenk wrote: > I would also be interested in a more detailed explanation of why we should not compare overlapping period estimates. From a practical standpoint, people are going to do it anyway, especially the press. What do we need to know - other than the inherent issues of what is a statistically significant vs. insignificant change and the fact that ACS was designed to examine characteristics of the population rather than its level - to be able to correct naove interpretations of easily calculated tract-level year-to-year differences in the estimates of things like poverty rate, unemployment rate, educational attainment rates, etc.? What is a correct interpretation of these differences? > > Frank > > Frank Lenk > Director of Research Services > Mid-America Regional Council > 600 Broadway, Suite 200 > Kansas City, MO 64105 > www.marc.org<http://www.marc.org> > 816.474.4240 > flenk(a)marc.org<mailto:flenk(a)marc.org> > 816.701.8237 > > From: ctpp-news-bounces(a)chrispy.net [mailto:ctpp-news-bounces(a)chrispy.net] On Behalf Of Kendra Watkins > Sent: Monday, January 31, 2011 10:05 AM > To: ctpp-news(a)chrispy.net > Subject: RE: [CTPP] 2000 and 2006-08 work trip comparison question. > > This is interesting. I recall hearing this guidance in the past. However on the Census website on the ACS page it specifically states; "Generally, you can compare American Community Survey (ACS) 3-year and 5-year estimates with Census 2000 data. There are differences in the universe, question wording, residence rules, reference periods, and the way in which the data are tabulated which can impact comparability." > The qualifier in the second sentence addresses the conflict (different methods, time periods etc) but I can't find anywhere on the ACS pages where the Census recommends we not compare ACS to decennial Census. And when I search by subject the Journey to Work topic states that I can 'Compare' it to the 2000 Census. > > It does specifically state not to compare overlapping years on multiyear estimates. > > > Kendra Watkins > Senior Data Analyst > Mid-Region Council of Governments > 809 Copper Ave. NW > Albuquerque, NM 87102 > Phone: (505)724-3601 > Fax: (505)247-1753 > Email: kwatkins(a)mrcog-nm.gov<mailto:tgaudette(a)mrcog-nm.gov> > > > > > This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to which they are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify the system manager. This message contains confidential information and is intended only for the individual named. If you are not the named addressee you should not disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail. > > > From: ctpp-news-bounces(a)chrispy.net [mailto:ctpp-news-bounces(a)chrispy.net] On Behalf Of Weinberger, Penelope > Sent: Monday, January 31, 2011 8:41 AM > To: ctpp-news(a)chrispy.net > Subject: RE: [CTPP] 2000 and 2006-08 work trip comparison question. > > The CB does not recommend comparing an ACS based data set to a CB Long Form based data set. The 2000 data represent a point in time estimate, the ACS data represent a period estimate. Furthermore, the Census Bureau recommends not comparing period estimates with overlapping years. > > Penelope Weinberger > CTPP Program Manager > AASHTO > 202-624-3556 > http://ctpp.transportation.org/Pages/default.aspx > > It's just as bad to not make a plan as to blindly follow the one you already have. > From: ctpp-news-bounces(a)chrispy.net [mailto:ctpp-news-bounces(a)chrispy.net] On Behalf Of Seidensticker, Dan > Sent: Friday, January 28, 2011 4:18 PM > To: (ctpp-news(a)chrispy.net) > Subject: [CTPP] 2000 and 2006-08 work trip comparison question. > > We downloaded the2006-2008 ACS county-to-county worker flow for Dane County, Wisconsin from http://ctpp.transportation.org/Pages/3yrdas.aspx. > > The question we now have...can that data be compared to the county-to-county 2000 CTPP work trips to determine any statistically significant increase/decrease? If so, how would one calculate the margin of error? > > Dan Seidensticker > GIS Specialist > Madison Area Transportation Planning Board: > A Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) > City of Madison Planning Unit > 121 S. Pinckney Street, Suite 400 > Madison, WI 53703 > Voice: 608-266-9119 > Fax: 608-261-9967 > Email: dseidensticker(a)cityofmadison.com<mailto:dseidensticker(a)cityofmadison.com> > www.MadisonAreaMPO.org<http://www.madisonareampo.org/> > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > _______________________________________________ > ctpp-news mailing list > ctpp-news(a)chrispy.net > http://www.chrispy.net/mailman/listinfo/ctpp-news -- Ed Christopher 708-283-3534 (V) 708-574-8131 (cell) FHWA RC-TST-PLN 4749 Lincoln Mall Drive, Suite 600 Matteson, IL 60443 ------------------------------ Message: 2 Date: Tue, 1 Feb 2011 15:05:03 -0500 From: Planning Department <PlanningDepartment(a)countyofberks.com> Subject: RE: [CTPP] 2000 and 2006-08 work trip comparison question. To: "ctpp-news(a)chrispy.net" <ctpp-news(a)chrispy.net> Message-ID: <D465CB8E9BCA0249BB15FC9E59276F33A658EDC922(a)MSCLS001.countyofberks.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Frank: I agree wholeheartedly with your concerns. One particular issue that we, as data 'superusers' need to remember, is every federal, state, and nonprofit application for aid, grants, loans, etc. will still ask for the same information for a set time. The vast majority of people are still--and will be for a long time--used to using data derived from a "point in time snapshot". Getting us used to working with 'trends' and 'characteristics' has been difficult enough. We now have to pass that knowledge and practice onto those to whom we give that data, whether it be the press, elected officials, nonprofit agencies, students, or the general public. This goes beyond our transportation uses, but at the same time has a significant impact on our transportation uses of these data. Michael D. Golembiewski Transportation Modeler BERKS COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION 633 Court Street FL 14 Reading, PA 19601 Ph: 610 478-6300 ext 6304 Fax: 610 478-6316 e-mail: mgolembiewski(a)countyofberks.com<mailto:mgolembiewski(a)countyofberks.com> Web: http://www.co.berks.pa.us/dept/planning Note: The comments on and attachment to this e-mail are intended only for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed, and may contain information that is privileged, confidential and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, your are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you received this in error, please contact the sender and delete the original message, any attachment(s) and copies. Thank you for your cooperation. ________________________________ From: ctpp-news-bounces(a)chrispy.net [mailto:ctpp-news-bounces(a)chrispy.net] On Behalf Of Frank Lenk Sent: Tuesday, February 01, 2011 2:30 PM To: ctpp-news(a)chrispy.net Subject: RE: [CTPP] 2000 and 2006-08 work trip comparison question. I would also be interested in a more detailed explanation of why we should not compare overlapping period estimates. From a practical standpoint, people are going to do it anyway, especially the press. What do we need to know - other than the inherent issues of what is a statistically significant vs. insignificant change and the fact that ACS was designed to examine characteristics of the population rather than its level - to be able to correct naove interpretations of easily calculated tract-level year-to-year differences in the estimates of things like poverty rate, unemployment rate, educational attainment rates, etc.? What is a correct interpretation of these differences? Frank Frank Lenk Director of Research Services Mid-America Regional Council 600 Broadway, Suite 200 Kansas City, MO 64105 www.marc.org<http://www.marc.org> 816.474.4240 flenk(a)marc.org<mailto:flenk(a)marc.org> 816.701.8237 From: ctpp-news-bounces(a)chrispy.net [mailto:ctpp-news-bounces(a)chrispy.net] On Behalf Of Kendra Watkins Sent: Monday, January 31, 2011 10:05 AM To: ctpp-news(a)chrispy.net Subject: RE: [CTPP] 2000 and 2006-08 work trip comparison question. This is interesting. I recall hearing this guidance in the past. However on the Census website on the ACS page it specifically states; "Generally, you can compare American Community Survey (ACS) 3-year and 5-year estimates with Census 2000 data. There are differences in the universe, question wording, residence rules, reference periods, and the way in which the data are tabulated which can impact comparability." The qualifier in the second sentence addresses the conflict (different methods, time periods etc) but I can't find anywhere on the ACS pages where the Census recommends we not compare ACS to decennial Census. And when I search by subject the Journey to Work topic states that I can 'Compare' it to the 2000 Census. It does specifically state not to compare overlapping years on multiyear estimates. Kendra Watkins Senior Data Analyst Mid-Region Council of Governments 809 Copper Ave. NW Albuquerque, NM 87102 Phone: (505)724-3601 Fax: (505)247-1753 Email: kwatkins(a)mrcog-nm.gov<mailto:tgaudette(a)mrcog-nm.gov> This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to which they are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify the system manager. This message contains confidential information and is intended only for the individual named. If you are not the named addressee you should not disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail. From: ctpp-news-bounces(a)chrispy.net [mailto:ctpp-news-bounces(a)chrispy.net] On Behalf Of Weinberger, Penelope Sent: Monday, January 31, 2011 8:41 AM To: ctpp-news(a)chrispy.net Subject: RE: [CTPP] 2000 and 2006-08 work trip comparison question. The CB does not recommend comparing an ACS based data set to a CB Long Form based data set. The 2000 data represent a point in time estimate, the ACS data represent a period estimate. Furthermore, the Census Bureau recommends not comparing period estimates with overlapping years. Penelope Weinberger CTPP Program Manager AASHTO 202-624-3556 http://ctpp.transportation.org/Pages/default.aspx It's just as bad to not make a plan as to blindly follow the one you already have. From: ctpp-news-bounces(a)chrispy.net [mailto:ctpp-news-bounces(a)chrispy.net] On Behalf Of Seidensticker, Dan Sent: Friday, January 28, 2011 4:18 PM To: (ctpp-news(a)chrispy.net) Subject: [CTPP] 2000 and 2006-08 work trip comparison question. We downloaded the2006-2008 ACS county-to-county worker flow for Dane County, Wisconsin from http://ctpp.transportation.org/Pages/3yrdas.aspx. The question we now have...can that data be compared to the county-to-county 2000 CTPP work trips to determine any statistically significant increase/decrease? If so, how would one calculate the margin of error? Dan Seidensticker GIS Specialist Madison Area Transportation Planning Board: A Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) City of Madison Planning Unit 121 S. Pinckney Street, Suite 400 Madison, WI 53703 Voice: 608-266-9119 Fax: 608-261-9967 Email: dseidensticker(a)cityofmadison.com<mailto:dseidensticker(a)cityofmadison.com> www.MadisonAreaMPO.org<http://www.madisonareampo.org/>

14 years, 6 months

[CTPP] RE: ctpp-news Digest, Vol 83, Issue 32

by Wade L. White

Penny: I would chime in that my experience suggests all data and findings should be compared as the differences, whether due to methodology, underlying assumptions, or actual observed change can add great insight and "point the way" towards the answers desired. Such comparisons often highlight differences and should help analysts start to comprehend the weaknesses and strengths of data upon which they're building assumptions. It doesn't make one set of data more "right" than another, just a different perspective. I always ask "what does the comparison tell me?" Does the comparison yield differences and similarities I expect? Are the findings consistent with other "common wisdom"? If no, why not? For example, take a few very different data sources: the CTPP, ACS, NHTS, QCEW, IRS, D&B and InfoUSA. Each include very different ways of estimating employment. All are incomplete but paint part of the picture. Taken together, I can see patterns and weigh the relative strength of each one's methodology to meeting a specific need. How are part-time jobs treated? How about sole proprietors? How about workers with more than one job? Workers that work one day/week or month? 1099 workers? Volunteers? Seasonal workers? Military? Are there things missing, discounted or even double-counted in one vs. the other? Understanding Standard Error terms is one thing, understanding utility and suitability is quite another. Even trying to answer a simple question such as "how many jobs/workers are there at a given moment in time" doesn't have a simple answer or at least there isn't one dataset that will answer it depending on the definition of job/worker I'm looking for to meet a specific need. One "comparison" I was looking at in the 2000 vs. 2009 3 year data is a simple "relative order" of destination county in one dataset vs. the other (row-wise relative ranking). Comparing the 2009 3 Year data (off your wonderful website) vs. 2000 CTPP would seem to have merit. See below: Are the changes consistent with what is known about the economic and development change in the area? Observed traffic flows (yet more data) and changes in the flows over time? What's missing or considered incompletely in each dataset? Do the differences in the dataset suggest I need to use them to inform decision-making differently. All fair and good comparisons (and questions) that help provide me some level of insight both into data differences and change. For a "real-world" comparison of two different dataset that has made a difference in understanding, think about the release and subsequent re-release of the NHTS based on comparisons made between its findings and the NTD for US transit ridership. The comparison highlighted additional considerations that would need to be included in the weighting process for NHTS. Without the comparison, the suitability of NHTS for certain transit analyses would be in question. The more comparisons we make and questions we ask the better the data gets and the better the understanding of its limitations. Of course, if we blindly use any data, caveat emptor. My 2 cents. W -----Original Message----- From: ctpp-news-bounces(a)chrispy.net [mailto:ctpp-news-bounces(a)chrispy.net] On Behalf Of ctpp-news-request(a)chrispy.net Sent: Monday, January 31, 2011 11:06 AM To: ctpp-news(a)chrispy.net Subject: ctpp-news Digest, Vol 83, Issue 32 Send ctpp-news mailing list submissions to ctpp-news(a)chrispy.net To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit http://www.chrispy.net/mailman/listinfo/ctpp-news or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to ctpp-news-request(a)chrispy.net You can reach the person managing the list at ctpp-news-owner(a)chrispy.net When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than "Re: Contents of ctpp-news digest..." Today's Topics: 1. RE: 2000 and 2006-08 work trip comparison question. (Weinberger, Penelope) 2. RE: 2000 and 2006-08 work trip comparison question. (Kendra Watkins) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Message: 1 Date: Mon, 31 Jan 2011 10:41:28 -0500 From: "Weinberger, Penelope" <pweinberger(a)aashto.org> Subject: RE: [CTPP] 2000 and 2006-08 work trip comparison question. To: <ctpp-news(a)chrispy.net> Message-ID: <94A99461953E3341B89642B00D5C0B7D0705A4B4(a)AASHTO-MAIL.aashto.local> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" The CB does not recommend comparing an ACS based data set to a CB Long Form based data set. The 2000 data represent a point in time estimate, the ACS data represent a period estimate. Furthermore, the Census Bureau recommends not comparing period estimates with overlapping years. Penelope Weinberger CTPP Program Manager AASHTO 202-624-3556 http://ctpp.transportation.org/Pages/default.aspx <http://ctpp.transportation.org/Pages/default.aspx> It's just as bad to not make a plan as to blindly follow the one you already have. From: ctpp-news-bounces(a)chrispy.net [mailto:ctpp-news-bounces(a)chrispy.net] On Behalf Of Seidensticker, Dan Sent: Friday, January 28, 2011 4:18 PM To: (ctpp-news(a)chrispy.net) Subject: [CTPP] 2000 and 2006-08 work trip comparison question. We downloaded the2006-2008 ACS county-to-county worker flow for Dane County, Wisconsin from http://ctpp.transportation.org/Pages/3yrdas.aspx. The question we now have...can that data be compared to the county-to-county 2000 CTPP work trips to determine any statistically significant increase/decrease? If so, how would one calculate the margin of error? Dan Seidensticker GIS Specialist Madison Area Transportation Planning Board: A Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) City of Madison Planning Unit 121 S. Pinckney Street, Suite 400 Madison, WI 53703 Voice: 608-266-9119 Fax: 608-261-9967 Email: dseidensticker(a)cityofmadison.com www.MadisonAreaMPO.org <http://www.madisonareampo.org/>

14 years, 6 months

[CTPP] Working with ACS Data

by Ed Christopher

For those folks who are interested in what others of us are doing with ACS data here are some links to what the Baltimore MPO has been up to. They were sent to me by friend Charles Baber of Baltimore Metro Council. Thanks Charles http://www.baltometro.org/maps-and-data/american-community-survey --------------------- In December 2010, the Census Bureau released ACS data from 2005-2009 for small geographic areas. Using this data, BMC has produced a series of thematic maps that provide snapshots of the entire Baltimore region, as well as of each jurisdiction. These include: * Population Density (region) * Race and Hispanic Heritage (region) * Median Household Income (by jurisdiction) * Poverty (by jurisdiction) * Unemployment (by jurisdiction) * Homes Where Mortgage Is More Than 30% of Income (by jurisdiction) * Rental Units Where Rent Is More Than 30% of Income (by jurisdiction) * Workers Who Take Public Transportation to Work (by jurisdiction) In addition, BMC has created an interactive online map where data can be viewed at the Regional Planning District (RPD) level. The RPDs follow census boundaries and contain one or more census tracts. There are 94 RPDs in the Baltimore region. To see data for a particular RPD, simply click on that location and ACS 2005-2009 data will appear. http://www.baltometro.org/ -- Ed Christopher 708-283-3534 (V) 708-574-8131 (cell) FHWA RC-TST-PLN 4749 Lincoln Mall Drive, Suite 600 Matteson, IL 60443

14 years, 6 months

[CTPP] 2000 and 2006-08 work trip comparison question.

by Seidensticker

We downloaded the2006-2008 ACS county-to-county worker flow for Dane County, Wisconsin from http://ctpp.transportation.org/Pages/3yrdas.aspx. The question we now have...can that data be compared to the county-to-county 2000 CTPP work trips to determine any statistically significant increase/decrease? If so, how would one calculate the margin of error? Dan Seidensticker GIS Specialist Madison Area Transportation Planning Board: A Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) City of Madison Planning Unit 121 S. Pinckney Street, Suite 400 Madison, WI 53703 Voice: 608-266-9119 Fax: 608-261-9967 Email: dseidensticker(a)cityofmadison.com<mailto:dseidensticker(a)cityofmadison.com> www.MadisonAreaMPO.org<http://www.madisonareampo.org/>

14 years, 6 months

RE: [CTPP] RE: TAZ software training: WEB ONLY scheduled for Friday, Feb 25 and Monday, Feb 28

by Liang.Long＠dot.gov

Hi, Curt I did get a confirmation email which says I have successfully registered for the CTPP TAZ Delineation webniar. I would suggest you re-register and double check your email address is correct. Hope this helps! Liang Long Federal Highway Administration Room 74-440 1200 New Jersey, SE Washington, DC 20590 tel 202 366 6971 fax 202 493 2198 e-mail liang.long(a)dot.gov <mailto:liang.long(a)dot.gov> ________________________________ From: ctpp-news-bounces(a)chrispy.net on behalf of Curt Hutchings Sent: Fri 1/28/2011 10:44 AM To: ctpp-news(a)chrispy.net Cc: llong(a)camsys.com Subject: [CTPP] RE: TAZ software training: WEB ONLY scheduled for Friday, Feb 25 and Monday, Feb 28 Elaine, I have gone through the registration procedure for the training. Will there be a notice of confirmation sent out? I could not tell, by submitting the registration, if the process was successful or not. I want to make sure that I am on board with you for this. Please let me know if there is anything else I need to do or if I am in good shape. Thanks, email signature 09<https://webmail3.dot.gov/exchange/Liang.Long/Drafts/RE:%20[CTPP]%20RE:%20TA…> From: ctpp-news-bounces(a)chrispy.net [mailto:ctpp-news-bounces(a)chrispy.net] On Behalf Of Elaine.Murakami(a)dot.gov Sent: Thursday, January 13, 2011 4:25 PM To: ctpp-news(a)chrispy.net Subject: [CTPP] TAZ software training: WEB ONLY scheduled for Friday, Feb 25 and Monday, Feb 28 As you know, TAZ delineation by State DOTs and MPOs will occur very soon, with software distribution in March/early April and files returned to the CB by mid-July. The software is being tested by volunteer State DOTs and MPOs starting from Friday, Jan 14 thru Feb 2. Thank you to all the volunteers! We do not need any additional software testers. We have two web training events scheduled. REGISTRATION IS REQUIRED. Please make sure that you capture the full http:// <http://console.mxlogic.com/redir/?EzDAkQQn3q8WWqbVI06rLRPhOUe7c8CzBBYTsTqqO…> address, in case the listserv breaks it up. You need the address including webconfid=22433, or webconfid=21975 I have reserved 300 spaces for each day, so there should be enough room for everyone. If you are unavailable on those days, the sessions will be recorded and available for later viewing. The same training will occur on each day, so please sign up for only one. The web meeting software has been upgraded, therefore, the email with the confirmation of your registration will have a link to check the functionality on your computer. Friday, 2/25/2011, from 10 a.m. - noon EASTERN: Registration URL: https://www.nhi.fhwa.dot.gov/resources/webconference/web_conf_learner_reg.a… <http://console.mxlogic.com/redir/?khPOaqqbxJ4ttd5YSjDdqymokW1eneAP6Yxmv4qCs…> Monday, 2/28/2011, from 2 - 4 p.m. EASTERN: Registration URL: https://www.nhi.fhwa.dot.gov/resources/webconference/web_conf_learner_reg.a… <http://console.mxlogic.com/redir/?a8VV5dd5MSyeKCy-r9PCJhbcat0DbDipzugHfydje…> Question: why is the time to do this only 3 months? Answer: For the TAZ and TAD delineation, it is important to be able to use the TIGER files with the 2010 geography and 2010 population counts. The 2010 population counts will be released to the public on a flow basis starting in March 2011, so we have to wait until these data are available to begin TAZ and TAD delineation. If the 5-year CTPP using 2006-2010 ACS records will be tabulated for TAZs and TADs, the TAZ and TAD delineations need to be completed quickly and returned to the CB Geography Division (GEO) 3 months after the agencies receive their files (no later than July 2011). This provides GEO with sufficient time to QC the submissions, produce the necessary files so that ACS records will get TAZ/TAD identifiers, and create TIGER/Line shapefiles for TAZ/TAD geography. If the TAZs and TADs are not delineated within this time frame, the CTPP tabulation could be delayed for another year, that is, Fall 2013. Question: are there strict thresholds on either residential population or workplace population? Answer: No. The software will give a warning message, but will still allow you to define TAZs below the recommended "threshold." (The FAQ will include more discussion about this topic.) We are working on an FAQ document on TAZs and will post it on the AASHTO CTPP page. http://ctpp.transportation.org/Pages/taz.aspx <http://console.mxlogic.com/redir/?54sYyCCyUrh7njhvdw0XjmmWstxhqIpXelos01Mbq…> Elaine Murakami FHWA Office of Planning 206-220-4460

14 years, 6 months

[CTPP] TAZ software training: WEB ONLY scheduled for Friday, Feb 25 and Monday, Feb 28

by Elaine.Murakami＠dot.gov

As you know, TAZ delineation by State DOTs and MPOs will occur very soon, with software distribution in March/early April and files returned to the CB by mid-July. The software is being tested by volunteer State DOTs and MPOs starting from Friday, Jan 14 thru Feb 2. Thank you to all the volunteers! We do not need any additional software testers. We have two web training events scheduled. REGISTRATION IS REQUIRED. Please make sure that you capture the full http:// address, in case the listserv breaks it up. You need the address including webconfid=22433, or webconfid=21975 I have reserved 300 spaces for each day, so there should be enough room for everyone. If you are unavailable on those days, the sessions will be recorded and available for later viewing. The same training will occur on each day, so please sign up for only one. The web meeting software has been upgraded, therefore, the email with the confirmation of your registration will have a link to check the functionality on your computer. Friday, 2/25/2011, from 10 a.m. - noon EASTERN: Registration URL: https://www.nhi.fhwa.dot.gov/resources/webconference/web_conf_learner_re g.aspx?webconfid=22433 Monday, 2/28/2011, from 2 - 4 p.m. EASTERN: Registration URL: https://www.nhi.fhwa.dot.gov/resources/webconference/web_conf_learner_re g.aspx?webconfid=21975 Question: why is the time to do this only 3 months? Answer: For the TAZ and TAD delineation, it is important to be able to use the TIGER files with the 2010 geography and 2010 population counts. The 2010 population counts will be released to the public on a flow basis starting in March 2011, so we have to wait until these data are available to begin TAZ and TAD delineation. If the 5-year CTPP using 2006-2010 ACS records will be tabulated for TAZs and TADs, the TAZ and TAD delineations need to be completed quickly and returned to the CB Geography Division (GEO) 3 months after the agencies receive their files (no later than July 2011). This provides GEO with sufficient time to QC the submissions, produce the necessary files so that ACS records will get TAZ/TAD identifiers, and create TIGER/Line shapefiles for TAZ/TAD geography. If the TAZs and TADs are not delineated within this time frame, the CTPP tabulation could be delayed for another year, that is, Fall 2013. Question: are there strict thresholds on either residential population or workplace population? Answer: No. The software will give a warning message, but will still allow you to define TAZs below the recommended "threshold." (The FAQ will include more discussion about this topic.) We are working on an FAQ document on TAZs and will post it on the AASHTO CTPP page. http://ctpp.transportation.org/Pages/taz.aspx Elaine Murakami FHWA Office of Planning 206-220-4460

14 years, 6 months

Jump to page:

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