CTPP

ctpp@listserv.transportation.org

5 participants
3069 discussions

[CTPP] Census 2000 news Alert (ITS LONG)

by ed christopher

From: Census2000 <Census2000(a)ccmc.org> Congress Reviews American Community Survey Plans; Census Bureau to Release First National ACS Test Data Plus: Updates on Funding, Lawsuits, and Monitoring Board Activities; Mayors, State Officials Press for Release of Adjusted Numbers; and more. The House of Representatives Subcommittee on the Census held its second hearing on the Census Bureau's proposed American Community Survey (ACS) on June 13. Acting Census Bureau Director William Barron Jr. told panel members that the ACS "is the cornerstone of the government's efforts to keep pace with the country's ever-increasing demands for timely and relevant household data." The proposed survey, which would collect data from three million households a year when fully implemented in 2003, is one of three key components of the Bureau's strategy for planning a 2010 census that does not include the traditional long form. (Note: The Census 2000 Initiative is preparing Fact Sheets on the ACS history, methodology and operations, and data products, as well as on key issues associated with development and implementation of the program. Look for these new materials on our web site starting July 16, at www.census2000.org <http://www.census2000.org>.) Three demographers who have closely followed development of the ACS expressed strong support for the concept of producing annual estimates of important demographic and socio-economic characteristics, but warned against abandoning the census long form before a thorough evaluation of the ACS program is complete. Dr. Paul Voss, Professor of Rural Sociology at the University of Wisconsin-Madison and Director of the Wisconsin Applied Population Laboratory, noted that the ACS evolved from a recognition following the 1990 census that "old data... cannot possibly serve decade-long programmatic needs in an era of fast-paced demographic change and devolution of authority." He commended the Census Bureau for modifying basic design elements of the ACS plan in response to feedback from local data users, particularly those from rural areas and small communities. The current ACS plan would produce annually updated estimates for small areas and small population groups, starting in 2006 and 2008, based on three or five-year averages. The multi-year averaging is necessary to ensure accumulation of sufficient sample size to approximate the reliability of census long form data gathered from 17 percent of U.S. households. Dr. Voss said his greatest concern is the sample size, over time, for small areas, which he said must be sustained to ensure high quality data for these communities. While the Census 2000 long form was sent to an average of one in six households, the sampling rate in the most sparsely populated areas was as high as 50 percent. The proposed ACS sample size, Dr. Voss cautioned, is "already beginning to fall short of th[e] goal" of yielding data as reliable as census long form data for rural and small areas. Insufficient funding, he said, "could well place the quality of small-area data from the ACS outside the range of acceptability." Linda Gage, who served as the California Governor's Census 2000 Liaison, said the state "support[s] the full development and rigorous evaluation of the American Community Survey," but that it is "premature" to endorse its use over the census long form. Ms. Gage noted that the survey would not be fully implemented until 2007, when five years of accumulated data would be available to produce the first estimates for areas and groups of 20,000 population and below in 2008, a category that includes 92 percent of the nation's cities. She said it is important for the ACS sample to increase as the number of housing units grows throughout the decade. Ms. Gage also urged improvements in the Census Bureau's annual (or 'intercensal') population estimates, which will be used as controls for the ACS sample. The Bureau's national annual estimate for April 1, 2000 was nearly seven million below the census count tied to that date. Other issues the Bureau should address, Ms. Gage suggested, include the effect of voluntary versus mandatory response and assistance for non-English speakers who receive the ACS questionnaire. "We recommend that 2010 census planning include a contingency for a long-form questionnaire until a positive decision to use the ACS can be made," Ms. Gage told subcommittee members. Don Hernandez, representing the Population Association of America and the Association of Population Centers, called the ACS an "innovative effort...to dramatically improve the timeliness of data" collected previously on the census long form and said the two organizations "strongly endorse the on-going development and evaluation of the ACS." Historically, Mr. Hernandez said, the long form has been "the most accurate, and often the only, source of data" for public and private sector decision-making, particularly at the local level. He echoed the concern that the ACS must receive full funding each year to sustain an adequate sample size that reflected growth in population and housing units. Mr. Hernandez suggested that the ACS content should be flexible to collect data on "pressing, emerging state-level public needs for local data." The Bureau must conduct broader and systematic evaluations of the ACS data and operations through release of data for the smallest areas in 2008, Mr. Hernandez said, before data users can assess fully the program's viability. The subcommittee also heard testimony from Marilyn McMillen, Chief Statistician at the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES), U.S. Department of Education. NCES "collects and disseminates data on all aspects of American Education from pre-school through adult education," using sample surveys, performance and skill assessments, longitudinal studies, and universal surveys. NCES uses data from the census long form to compile information at the state, local, and school district levels, Ms. McMillen said. The ACS would allow the agency to produce more timely data, as well as to identify households with "rare populations," such as recent immigrants, in order to field more targeted surveys to assess the educational characteristics of these populations. Ms. McMillen noted that the Education Department distributes $12 billion annually to state and local governments based in whole or in part on data collected only on the census long form, but that lawmakers have required the use of updated counts of school-age children in poverty for the largest grant program. The ACS, she said, would help improve the accuracy of those estimates for counties and school districts. Subcommittee members expressed a range of views about the proposed ACS design and content. Chairman Dan Miller (R-FL) expressed concern about the survey's potential cost, noting a Bureau estimate of $131 million in fiscal year 2003 (FY03), the first year of nationwide implementation. He acknowledged the benefits of the new program, such as providing more timely information than the once-a-decade long form, but said cost and privacy concerns must be considered "in order to determine whether the ACS is the best means by which to collect" the data policymakers need. Rep. William L Clay (D-MO), the panel's new Ranking Minority Member, said Congress must consider whether the ACS is an effective investment in light of requests to improve statistical programs in several agencies. Rep. Bob Barr (R-GA) said there were "very serious privacy concerns" associated with the questions proposed for the ACS, which currently includes 69 questions, compared to 53 asked on the Census 2000 long form. "There is no way that this is the bare minimum of information that the government needs," Rep. Barr told Mr. Barron. Mr. Barron acknowledged that the first year cost estimate of $131 million for the ACS was lower than projected costs for subsequent years, because there would be only nine months of field follow-up required in FY03. (Note: The federal fiscal year begins October 1, while the ACS will run on a calendar year starting in January.) But the "life cycle costs" for the 2010 census, Mr. Barron said, "will demonstrate cost neutrality" between repeating the Census 2000 design in 2010 and conducting a short-form only census in 2010, with the ACS replacing the long form. In response to concerns about the intrusiveness of the ACS questions, the director noted that all of the topics have a federal law mandate or are required to administer federal programs or laws. Bureau set to release national, state ACS test data: This month, the Census Bureau will start releasing data collected in the Census 2000 Supplementary Survey (C2SS), which surveyed 58,000 households a month using the questionnaire and methods developed for the American Community Survey. The C2SS, administered in 1,203 counties during the decennial census year, was designed "to demonstrate the operational feasibility of collecting [census] long form information at the same time, but separately from the decennial census," according to the Bureau. The July release will include demographic, economic, and housing information for the nation, the 50 states, and the District of Columbia. The tables will be available through the Bureau's web-based American FactFinder at <http://factfinder.census.gov>. By the end of 2001, similar data will be available for most counties and municipalities with 250,000 population or greater. More information on the C2SS can be found at www.census.gov/c2ss/www <http://www.census.gov/c2ss/www>, beginning July 25. Utah pursues legal, legislative remedies for loss of House district: The State of Utah formally appealed a lower federal court ruling that the Census Bureau was not required to count all American citizens living abroad in Census 2000, a policy the State claims cost it a fourth congressional seat in the post-census apportionment process. The appeal goes directly to the U.S. Supreme Court. Utah, its state legislative leaders, and its congressional delegation filed a lawsuit in January, contending that the Census Bureau's failure to count more than 10,000 Mormon missionaries serving in foreign countries, while including members of the armed forces and federal government employees stationed abroad, had shifted the last seat in the U.S. House of Representatives from Utah to North Carolina. In April, a three-judge panel unanimously rejected the State's argument that the Census Bureau's policy was unconstitutional. Meanwhile, Rep. Christopher Cannon (R-UT), a member of the Subcommittee on the Census, introduced legislation that would require the Census Bureau to submit a detailed plan for counting American citizens living abroad in future censuses. H.R. 2171 (introduced on June 14) would prohibit the Bureau from spending funds to implement the American Community Survey until the Secretary of Commerce approves a written plan for counting overseas Americans and puts regulations in place to carry out the plan. In a written statement, Rep. Cannon said his bill "will address the Bureau's perverse set of priorities." The congressman told The (Salt Lake City) Deseret News that, "The information [collected in the ACS] is nice. But the core mission of the census according to the Constitution is for apportionment." H.R. 2171 was referred to the Committee on Government Reform, which has not yet scheduled hearings on the measure. The Census Bureau is preparing a report to Congress, due September 30, on the issues involved in counting overseas Americans. Acting Director Barron told the Decennial Census Advisory Committee at a June 21 meeting that the report would raise significant concerns about the feasibility of such a count. Utah is challenging its failure to gain a fourth congressional district on other grounds, as well. It filed a second lawsuit in April, arguing that the use of a statistical method called "imputation" violates the Census Act and the Constitution. Imputation involves the use of statistical models to assign occupants (or vacancy status) to housing units for which census takers cannot gather any information, based on data collected from nearby households. A hearing in the second case has been set for August; the State filed a motion for summary judgment in June, asking a new three-judge panel to declare the use of imputation illegal without a prolonged trial. The Census Bureau has said imputation added about 1.2 million people, or 0.2 percent of the population, to the state population totals used for apportionment in Census 2000. Census Monitoring Board activities: The Congressional Members of the U.S. Census Monitoring Board held a press briefing in Washington, D.C. on June 7 to discuss their semi-annual report to Congress. A. Mark Neuman, co-chair for the Board's three Republican members (there is one Republican vacancy), called Census 2000 the "most successful" in history, citing a 60 percent reduction over 1990 in the undercount gap between African Americans and non-Hispanic Whites and a "dramatic reduction" in the undercount of Hispanics. Mr. Neuman, who succeeded Kenneth Blackwell as co-chair for the Congressional appointees, said the Census 2000 results do not mean "we can't do better in the future," but that analysis of the count "tells us how to do better." He credited local partnerships and the use of enumerators indigenous to the neighborhoods they counted for helping to increase participation among traditionally hard-to-enumerate populations in 2000. Republican Board Member David Murray called the possibility of using the Accuracy and Coverage Evaluation (A.C.E.) survey results to statistically correct under- and overcounts in the census a case of "hope over experience." He criticized the adjustment methodology, which is based on the A.C.E. survey results, for relying on "weak" assumptions about the similarity of different demographic subgroups (i.e. racial groups, renter/owner, age cohorts, male/female) and for having too small a sample to measure the accuracy of the raw census data for numerically small population groups. The A.C.E. program included a quality-check survey of 314,000 households, designed to measure the numbers of people missed and counted twice in the census. The Congressional Members' report, entitled "A Guide to Statistical Adjustment: How It Really Works," is available on their web site at www.cmbc.gov <http://www.cmbc.gov>. The Presidential Members issued their own report in April, which is available on their web site at www.cmbp.gov <http://www.cmbp.gov>. Congress established the eight-member Board in late 1997 to monitor Census 2000 activities. Congressional Republican leaders and President Clinton each appointed four members to the panel. Earlier this week, the Board's four Presidential Members released estimates of the Census 2000 undercount for counties with populations of 500,000 or greater. Dr. Eugene Ericksen, a professor of statistics at Temple University and co-chair of the Special Advisory Panel on Adjustment during the 1990 census, prepared the estimates based on information from the A.C.E. survey. The co-chair for the Presidential Members, Gilbert Cassellas, said the analysis was necessary in light of the Census Bureau's decision not to release the A.C.E.-adjusted numbers, which he said "could be of significant use to state and local governments for planning decisions and funds distribution." Dr. Ericksen described his county undercount estimates as "reasonable approximations" of the Census Bureau's calculations and noted that they do not include the 'group quarters' population. He previously estimated the undercount rates for states, which he said, "equal the [Census Bureau's] estimates." According to Dr. Rexene's analysis, Los Angeles County had the highest number of people missed (176,000), while Bronx County (NY) had the highest undercount rate (2.7 percent), of the nation's largest counties. The Presidential Members also criticized the Commerce Department and Census Bureau for proposing new rules governing the release of information to the Monitoring Board and other oversight bodies, which they believe "plainly violates our enabling legislation" and "severely impedes our statutory reporting requirements." In a letter to Commerce Secretary Donald Evens, Mr. Cassellas said the proposed Memorandum of Understanding was "designed to repress the flow of information" on the census. In a subsequent letter to the chairmen of the Senate committees that oversee and fund the Census Bureau, Mr. Cassellas said the Bureau would not comply with requests for data from the Monitoring Board unless its members agreed not to reveal the information publicly until 2002. The Board's authority will expire on September 30, 2001. The final report from the Presidential Members "will not be complete, having been denied the data necessary for a thorough and complete analysis of Census 2000," Mr. Cassellas told the senators. Census Bureau FY03 Funding Bill Starts Moving Through House: The House of Representatives began the process of funding Census Bureau activities in Fiscal Year 2002 (FY03), as the Appropriations Subcommittee on Commerce, Justice, and State, The Judiciary and Related Agencies approved a draft spending bill by voice vote on June 27. The subcommittee "mark," as it is called, includes $519.8 million for the Census Bureau in the fiscal year beginning October 1, 2001, about $23.6 million less than the Bush Administration's request of $543.4 million. The $38.5 billion spending bill, one of 13 regular annual appropriations measures that fund all federal government activities, allocates $4.76 billion for the Commerce Department, which houses the Census Bureau. The Commerce-Justice-State panel approved $350.4 million for Periodic Censuses and Programs, about $24.5 million below the President's request of $374.8 million. The "Periodic" account, one of two main Census Bureau funding categories, covers the decennial census and proposed American Community Survey. The panel approved $169.4 million for the Salaries and Expenses account (which funds ongoing surveys), an increase of $863,000 over the President's request of $168.6 million. A more detailed spending bill will emerge in the coming days, as the full Appropriations panel prepares to consider it when Congress returns from its July 4th recess next week. (For details of President Bush's FY03 budget request for the Census Bureau, please see our April 16, 2001 News Alert.) Stockholders continue calls for release of adjusted data: The U.S. Conference of Mayors (USCG) adopted a resolution at its annual meeting in Detroit, calling upon the Census Bureau to release the statistically adjusted census numbers down to the block level. The resolution, offered by Stanford (CT) Mayor Daniel Malay and approved on June 25, also urged the U.S. Senate to hold hearings to address the mayors' "grave concerns" about the implications of the Census 2000 undercount for cities and to review the Census Bureau's plans to complete the analysis of the Accuracy and Coverage Evaluation (A.C.E.) program. The USCG "applauded" the Bureau for "an admirable job of conducting the 2000 Census under difficult conditions," but said the Administration has not adequately explained how it will account for the 6.4 million people the census missed. Two state legislators from Oregon are seeking access to the adjusted Census 2000 data through the Freedom of Information Act (FOE). Sen. Margaret Carter (Portland) and Sen. Susan Castile (Deign) filed a lawsuit in federal district court on June 11 after the U.S. Commerce Department (the defendant in the lawsuit) declined to release the statistically adjusted numbers in response to the senators' FOE request. The department cited a FOE exemption for information that is "pre decisional and deliberative." Sen. Castile said the unadjusted numbers, which the Census Bureau sent to the states in March for use in the redistricting process, "continue historical patterns of undercounting," but that "we won't really know how badly Oregonians are being shortchanged" unless the Bureau releases the entire set of adjusted data. Sen. Carter said the adjusted census numbers "will ensure that Oregon and other states get what they deserve when it comes to the allocation of federal funds. ...We need to right a wrong, not perpetuate one." Thomas Balmier, an attorney representing the senators, noted that the 9th United States Circuit Court of Appeals, which covers Oregon, granted California's FOE request for the state's adjusted though unofficial data following the 1990 census. In Washington, DC, 51 Democratic Representatives called upon the Senate to "investigate the Commerce Department's refusal to release the corrected data." In a letter spearheaded by Rep. Clay and Rep. Carolina Mallory (DNA), the legislators asked Sen. Earnest Holdings (D.Sc.), who chairs the Commerce appropriations subcommittee, and Sen. Joseph Liberian (CDT), chairman of the Governmental Affairs Committee, to hold hearings on the department's decision to withhold the adjusted numbers, which they said could affect the allocation of $185 billion annually in federal program funds. Acting Bureau Director Barron told members of the agency's advisory committees at their meetings in late June that the Executive Steering Committee for A.C.E. Policy (ESCAPE) would recommend whether to use statistically adjusted data to allocate federal program funds and for other non redistricting purposes by October 15. Newly confirmed Commerce Under Secretary Kathleen Cooper, who also spoke to advisory committee members, said she was not sure who would make the final decision about using the adjusted numbers. Questions about the information contained in this News Alert may be directed to Terry Ann Lowenthal at 202/484-2270 or, by e-mail at mailto:terriann2k(a)aol.com. For copies of previous News Alerts and other information, use our web site www.census2000.org <http://www.census2000.org>. Please direct all requests to receive News Alerts, and all changes in address/phone/fax/e-mail, to the Census 2000 Initiative at mailto:Census2000(a)ccmc.org or 202/326-8700. Please feel free to circulate this information to colleagues and other interested individuals. -- Ed Christopher Bureau of Transportation Statistics U.S. Department of Transportation 400 Seventh Street SW Washington DC 20590 202-366-0412

24 years, 1 month

[CTPP] How to convert SF1 data to other platforms

by Nanda Srinivasan

This e-mail is a follow-up to the another posted a while ago. Daryl Scott from South Western Regional Planning Agency wrote to me a note on how he converted SF1 data into an Oracle database, and subsequently related it to Arcview. Attached is his note. SF1 has a number of tables. Oracle and other databases are especially capable of handling huge tables and files. Darryl's note will be useful to anyone interested in developing extensive Census 2000 databases for their planning region. Thanks Nanda Srinivasan ********************************************** INCOMING from Darryl Scott: Here is my experience with importing the data into Oracle. My goal was to load all the data for the State of Connecticut, all Counties in Connecticut, all Towns in Connecticut, and all tracts, block groups, and blocks in Fairfield County from Census 2000 Summary File 1 into Oracle and link it to GIS. Below are the steps I took to accomplish that task. I do not describe the failed attempts in detail. 1. I downloaded the data in ASCII format for Connecticut from the Census Web Site and extracted all the files. 2. I imported the ctgeo file into Oracle. 3. Then I created a view that contained all the records that I wanted to import into Oracle. --- create view ctfcgeo as SELECT sumlev, geocomp, logrecno, state, county, cousub, cousubcc, place, placecc, placedc, tract, blkgrp, block, msacmsa, cmsa, macci, pmsa, necma, necmacci, ua, uatype, ur, sldu, sldl, vtd, vtdi, zcta3, zcta5, arealand, areawatr, arealand/2590000 as area_sqmi, name, funcstat, gcuni, pop100, hu100, sdelm, sdsec, sduni, taz, macc, uacp, stfid FROM ctgeo WHERE (sumlev = '040' and geocomp='00') or (sumlev='050') or (sumlev = '060' and Name Like '% town') or (sumlev = '140' and county = '001') or (sumlev = '150' and county = '001') or (sumlev = '101' and county = '001'); --- 4. I tried to import one data file and delete the unneeded records with a SQL command, but the process proved to be very inefficient. So I wrote an Avenue Script that extracts the desirable records from sf1 data files. I saved the list of good values from the logrecno field to a text file. The script created one .dat file for each each .uf1 file. In addition, the script removed the first four fields from the uf1 file. The script caused ArcView and even the computer to hang, but that was how I knew the script was working. --- mypath="d:\gis\gisdata_temp\Census2000\sumfile1\" file_list={"ct00005","ct00006","ct00007","ct00008","ct00009", "ct00010","ct00011","ct00012","ct00013","ct00014","ct00015","ct00016","ct000 17","ct00018","ct00019", "ct00020","ct00021","ct00022","ct00023","ct00024","ct00025","ct00026","ct000 27","ct00028","ct00029", "ct00030","ct00031","ct00032","ct00033","ct00034","ct00035","ct00036","ct000 37","ct00038","ct00039"} rec_file=TextFile.Make((mypath+"ctfcgeo_logrecno.txt").AsFileName,#FILE_PERM _READ) rec_source=rec_file.Read(rec_file.GetSize) rec_file.Close rec_list_string = {} rec_list_number = {} rec_list_string=rec_source.AsTokens(nl) for each rec in rec_list_string rec_list_number.add(rec.AsNumber) end for each file_prefix in file_list data_file_name=(mypath+file_prefix+".uf1").AsFileName newdata_file_name=(mypath+file_prefix+".dat").AsFileName data_file=LineFile.Make(data_file_name,#FILE_PERM_READ) newdata_file=LineFile.Make(newdata_file_name,#FILE_PERM_WRITE) for each i in 0..(data_file.GetSize-1) dline=data_file.ReadElt if (dline=nil) then continue end dline=dline.Right(dline.Count-15) d_recno=dline.Left(7) d_num=d_recno.AsNumber results=rec_list_number.FindByValue(d_num) if (results= -1) then continue end newdata_file.WriteElt(dline) end newdata_file.Close data_file.Close end msgbox.info("Finished Processing Files","Script") --- 5. The following day, I created the SQL statements to create the tables in Oracle and control files to import the information in the dat files. (These files were compressed into a zip file and attached to this document.) I decided to use the same field names as described in the data dictionary. I sought help from Nanda Srinivasan at FHWA who told me about the sf1combo.xls file found at http://mcdc2.missouri.edu/data/sf12000/Tools/. That file saved hours of work because I was able to create most of my SQL and control files from it. I still had to explore the data files to see which fields had decimal places, but fortunately most of the data did not have decimal places. I also added the number of the datafile to the logrecno field name to make sure that each table had unique fields (e.g. logreno1 for ct00001, logrecno2 for ct00002, and so on.) I also used TextPad (http://www.textpad.com) to create the SQL and control files because of its ability to select text as blocks rather than lines. The SQL and control files worked and I was able to import the data from SF1 into Oracle. 6. Then I had to link the data to TIGER 2000 files in shape file format. I already had the shape files from http://www.geographynetwork.com/. I created some views in Oracle where I joined the data files to the geography file and used the [logreno] field as the common field. Then, I used ArcView's Database Access Extension to add the Oracle views to a ArcView project. Except for the town level, I discovered that I needed to create a common field to link the Oracle views to the shape files. Thus, I created a stfid field in the ctgeo table with the SQL statements below. --- alter table ctgeo add stfid VARCHAR2(16); update ctgeo set stfid = state||county||tract where sumlev='140'; update ctgeo set stfid = state||county||tract||blkgrp where sumlev='150'; update ctgeo set stfid = state||county||tract||block where sumlev='101'; --- 7. To improve performance, I created indexes on the logrecno* field on each sf1 table. I also indexed the sumlev field and stfid field in the ctgeo field. It took a little bit longer than expected, but I accomplished my goals. I imported the sf1 data into Oracle and became able to produce thematic maps in ArcView. Because of this approach, the sf1 data can be used in ArcView, Microsoft Access, and any other software that can connect to the Oracle database through an ODBC connection. <<sf1_oracle_sql.zip>> -- Daryl Scott South Western Regional Planning Agency Stamford Government Center 888 Washington Blvd., 3rd Floor Stamford, CT 06901 Tel: (203) 316-5190 Fax: (203) 316-4995 E-mail: dscott(a)swrpa.org

24 years, 1 month

[CTPP] Summary levels for CTPP 2000

by Nanda Srinivasan

The CTPP Working Group is currently developing summary levels for reporting CTPP 2000 data. A summary level in CTPP 2000 is a geographic unit of reporting. For example, urban TAZ is a reporting summary level. The hierarchy of reporting TAZs will be State-County-TAZ (meaning that State level totals, County level Totals will be present as separate records). We want your inputs on two reporting issues. Attached is a document (listservsumlev.doc) that explains these issues. Please send your suggestions to Nanda Srinivasan (Email: ctpp(a)fhwa.dot.gov, Phone: 202-366-5021)

24 years, 1 month

[CTPP] Call for Papers (TRB 2002 Meeting)

by ed christopher

Call for Poster Session Papers/Presentations The Subcommittee on Census Data for Transportation Planning (A1D08-1) is interested in developing a poster session for the 81st TRB Annual Meetings in January 2002. The subject of the poster session will center on the innovative and creative ways, in which census related data is being presented, displayed or delivered. Under the TRB guidelines, a poster session is a series of presentations on vertical display boards with direct interaction between the presenter and attendees. The entire presentation is placed on a display board and should be considered the equivalent to the conventional paper or presentation sessions. Typically, a TRB Poster Session is made up of reviewed papers. However, due to the evolving nature of the subject and the fact that the US Census related data is just now being released--time is short--presentations will be considered. Individuals interested in sharing some of the innovative and creative ways in which they are displaying and making Census data available within their transportation community are encouraged to "show their work". Those seeking publication as part of the TRB Research Record series need to have their paper submitted, according to TRB guidelines no later than August 1, 2001. For more information on the paper submittal process or the Annual meeting refer to; http://www4.trb.org/trb/annual.nsf For those wishing to present their materials without seeking full publication may submit an abstract by August 1, 2001 to Ed Christopher, Chair of the Subcommittee on Census Data for Transportation Planning at the address and phone number below. More detailed information and general instructions for a TRB Poster Session can be found at http://www.nas.edu/trb/archives/publications/am/poster.pdf Should you have any questions please contact either Ed Christopher, Subcommittee Chair, or Chuck Purvis Chair of the Urban Data and Information Systems Committee (A1D08). Ed Christopher Transportation Industry Analyst Bureau of Trans. Statistics K-30 400 Seventh Street, SW Washington D.C. 20590 202-366-0412 edc(a)bts.gov Chuck Purvis, AICP Senior Transportation Planner Metropolitan Trans. Commission 101 Eighth Street Oakland, CA 94607 510- 464-7731 cpurvis(a)mtc.ca.gov

24 years, 1 month

[CTPP] Subject: How to convert SF1 data to your TAZs.

by Nanda Srinivasan

The Census Bureau started release of Summary File 1 (SF1) data from June 13, 2001 on a state-by-state basis. SF1 contains the 100-percent data, which is the information compiled from the questions asked of all people and about every housing unit. Most of the SF1 data is reported at the Census Block level. Since the Transportation Analysis Zones defined in TIGER/Line 2000 are aggregations of Census Blocks, transportation planning agencies can assemble SF1 data for their TAZs. Attached is a note on SF1 data and a process to convert SF1 data to your TAZs. Note to SAS and SPSS users: A code to automate the data transfer is posted at: http://www.sdcbidc.iupui.edu/Profiles/profiles.html Thank you Nanda Srinivasan

24 years, 1 month

[CTPP] Attention: Agencies that want to define new TAZs or alter TIGER/Line 2000 TAZs.

by Nanda Srinivasan

Agencies have written to the CTPP Working Group asking: If TAZs defined in TIGER/Line 2000 can be altered/changed. Can an agency submit new TAZs in Urban areas based on TIGER/Line 2000 geography for CTPP 2000? The CTPP Working Group met on June 14, 2001 to discuss these issues. We decided that agencies could define new TAZs or alter TAZs in TIGER/Line 2000 and obtain CTPP 2000 data reported for the new TAZs. However, agencies must use Census 2000 tabulation blocks to build new TAZs or alter existing TAZs. In effect, an equivalency file between census blocks and TAZs will be built and used, as was done in previous censuses. However, due to processing issues and schedule considerations, agencies wishing to do this should note the following: 1. Cost: To change TAZs or define new TAZs, agencies must separately contract with the Census Bureau, Journey to Work Branch, and work out a process and cost for defining and obtaining CTPP 2000 data based on the new TAZs. 2. Schedule: CTPP data will be processed for those agencies after the Standard CTPP 2000 products are released for the whole country. Currently, the expected completion date for CTPP 2000 is June 2003. 3. Exclusion of the changes from TIGER/Line database: There are no plans or processes in place to include new TAZs in the TIGER/Line database. Thus, the changes will not be reflected in TIGER/Line 2000 and it is unlikely that new TAZs will be inserted into TIGER until the next round of TAZ updating, the date of which has not been scheduled. For more information, please contact Phillip Salopek, Census Bureau, Population Division (Journey to Work Branch) at 301-457-2454 (e-mail: phillip.a.salopek(a)census.gov).

24 years, 1 month

RE: [CTPP] INFORMATION: Urbanized Area Proposed Definition

by Haila Maze

We have been working on defining the proposed urbanized area for our region. However, we are encountering some issues with the "hop" step -- namely, is there a quicker way in ArcView to identify eligible blocks or other unconnected densely populated areas (BG cores + blocks) not contiguous to the "core" (and their corresponding connecting paths), rather than manually determining the shortest qualifying path between the block and the core for each individual instance? Thanks. Haila R. Maze, Senior Planner Berkeley Charleston Dorchester Council of Governments 5290 Rivers Avenue, Suite 400 North Charleston, SC 29406 (843) 529-0400 (843) 529-0305 fax -----Original Message----- From: Elaine Murakami [mailto:Elaine.Murakami(a)igate.fhwa.dot.gov] Sent: Monday, April 09, 2001 12:31 PM To: CTpp-news(a)chrispy.net Subject: [CTPP] INFORMATION: Urbanized Area Proposed Definition This information (probably in revised form) will be sent to the FHWA field offices within the next day. However, I am sending this along to the CTPP listserv to get it out as soon as possible. ---------------------------------------- Attached is a document to assist those areas which may want to evaluate what the impact of the proposed definition of Urbanized Areas may be for their area. You will need to know how to use GIS to conduct this evaluation. While we conferred with the Census Bureau staff to assure that these notes are correct, we cannot guarantee them. You will want to print this in COLOR to be able to read the maps. Technical questions should be addressed to ua(a)geo.census.gov. You may also call the Census Bureau Geography Division at 301-457-1099. Comments to the Federal Register notice (posted at www.census.gov/geo/www/ua/ua_2k.html) are due by April 27, 2001. Comments should be submitted to Director, U.S. Census Bureau, Room 2049, Fedral Building 3, Washington, D.C. 20233-0001. The FHWA Office of Metropolitan Planning prepared these notes to assist local areas, however, we will not be checking individual areas against these proposed criteria, and will not be able to provide technical assistance in operating ArcView or ArcInfo.

24 years, 2 months

[CTPP] Tom Manks' comments on dorms in Ithaca

by Patty Becker

The Census Bureau makes a distinction between special places and group quarters. It's kind of arcane, and in cases where it's just one facility where the administration takes place at the same address that houses the residents, it doesn't really matter. But in the case of multiple college dorms it can matter a lot. In the case of a college, the special place is the contact point for the enumeration, most likely the college housing office. The individual dorms are each a separate group quarters. It sounds to me like they geocoded all the GQ facilities to the address of the special place. I'd be willing to bet that the block where all the Cornell students are enumerated is where the housing office is located. This is sloppy, sloppy work and yes, they should fix it before SF3! Patty Becker ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 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

24 years, 2 months

[CTPP] SF 1 Data Coming Out

by ed christopher

It looks like SF (Summary File) 1 data is starting to be released on a flow basis. Delaware is now out and Vermont appears to be right behind. Below is a link to a weekly release schedule that is posted on a special page on the Census Bureau's Web site. http://www.census.gov/Press-Release/www/2001/sumfile1.html ----- Ed Christopher Bureau of Transportation Statistics U.S. Department of Transportation 400 Seventh Street SW Washington DC 20590 202-366-0412

24 years, 2 months

[CTPP] Arcview 3.2 Geo-coding

by John Zastrow

We are looking for a way to geocode addresses in our 7 county region using Arcview and TIGER. Our problem is street addresses with similar address ranges that occur in several civil divisions. We have built a file containing all the TIGER data for each of our 7 counties. We are looking for information on how to incorporate the civil division name in the address coding process. Our experience to date has been that Arcview selects the first address range it encounters and assigns that geocode. Does anyone have any suggestions? John Zastrow Principal Specialist Southeastern Wisconsin Regional Planning Commission 916 N. East Avenue Waukesha, WI 53186 262.522.9099

24 years, 2 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