Appendix H

2000 Census Long-Form-Sample Data Processing

Similar to the companion Appendix G on basic data processing, this appendix describes the processing of the items that were asked of the long-form sample in the 2000 census (see Appendix B for a listing of the long-form-sample items). It covers data capture, weighting, and imputation, assignment, and editing of items for missing and inconsistent responses. About 1 in 6 households received the long form in 2000. Sampling rates were 1 in 2 for governmental areas (counties, towns, townships, and school districts) with fewer than 800 occupied housing units (fewer than about 2,100 people); 1 in 4 for governmental areas with 800–1,200 occupied housing units (about 2,100–3,100 people); 1 in 6 for census tracts with fewer than 2,000 occupied housing units (fewer than about 5,200 people); and 1 in 8 for larger census tracts. (Estimates of occupied housing units were those developed by the Population Division as part of the intercensal estimates program.) The 1990 census long-form sampling scheme was similar, except that there was no 1 in 4 sampling rate and school districts were not among the governmental areas that were eligible to be oversampled.



The National Academies | 500 Fifth St. N.W. | Washington, D.C. 20001
Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Terms of Use and Privacy Statement



Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.

OCR for page 469
The 2000 Census: Counting Under Adversity Appendix H 2000 Census Long-Form-Sample Data Processing Similar to the companion Appendix G on basic data processing, this appendix describes the processing of the items that were asked of the long-form sample in the 2000 census (see Appendix B for a listing of the long-form-sample items). It covers data capture, weighting, and imputation, assignment, and editing of items for missing and inconsistent responses. About 1 in 6 households received the long form in 2000. Sampling rates were 1 in 2 for governmental areas (counties, towns, townships, and school districts) with fewer than 800 occupied housing units (fewer than about 2,100 people); 1 in 4 for governmental areas with 800–1,200 occupied housing units (about 2,100–3,100 people); 1 in 6 for census tracts with fewer than 2,000 occupied housing units (fewer than about 5,200 people); and 1 in 8 for larger census tracts. (Estimates of occupied housing units were those developed by the Population Division as part of the intercensal estimates program.) The 1990 census long-form sampling scheme was similar, except that there was no 1 in 4 sampling rate and school districts were not among the governmental areas that were eligible to be oversampled.

OCR for page 469
The 2000 Census: Counting Under Adversity H.1 DATA CAPTURE For the 2000 census, data capture of information on questionnaires was performed by scanning short-form and long-form returns into computer files and using optical mark and optical character recognition (OMR/OCR) to record the information. Clerks keyed data items from images when the automated technology could not read the responses. Keying of long-form-sample information was carried out in a second, separate process in order to permit the fastest possible completion of data capture for the basic items on all returns. After data capture, long-form-sample records for households and their members could fall into one of two categories: Long-Form Data-Defined At least one member of a household in the long-form sample was “long-form data-defined;” that is, at least one member had at least two long-form data items reported. All records for long-form data-defined households were retained in the sample. Any long-form housing or person items not reported, or reported inconsistently, had missing or consistent values supplied through item imputation, assignment, and editing. Imputations for any missing complete-count items that were performed during the basic data processing were retained (i.e., they were not reimputed during the long-form-sample processing). Whole-Household Nonresponse Households that lacked any long-form data-defined persons were dropped from the sample. Weights were developed for long-form data-defined households and their members so that long-form-sample estimates agreed with complete-count totals on basic items. The weighting effectively adjusted for whole-household nonresponse. H.2 WEIGHTING H.2.a Initial Weighting Areas In a procedure similar to that used in 1990, 2000 long-form-sample weights were developed to produce estimates for specified groups and geographic areas that agreed with estimates from the basic (complete-count) data records. A goal of the weighting was to

OCR for page 469
The 2000 Census: Counting Under Adversity minimize the variation in weights, which, in turn, would minimize the variation in estimated sampling error across population groups and geographic areas. Adjusting the weights to match complete-count controls would also reduce the variance in estimates.1 The weighting was specified by the Decennial Statistical Studies Division (see Hefter, 2000; see also U.S. Census Bureau, 2003d:Ch.8). Initial weighting steps included defining initial weighting areas and computing for each the ratio of basic records (complete-count data-defined people and whole-person and whole-household imputations) to long-form data-defined records. The purpose for the ratios was to determine if data augmentation would be needed before proceeding to calculate final weights. Initial weighting areas (IWAs) were defined within counties. They comprised all of the records in a tabulation block group with thesameexpectedsamplingrate(1/2, 1/4, 1/6, or 1/8). Ratios were calculated of long-form data-defined records to the total records in each IWA separately for housing units, persons in group quarters, and persons counted in service-based enumeration. H.2.b Data Augmentation In order to achieve the target IWA ratios of sample to total records for housing units, group quarters enumerations, and service-based enumerations so that weights would not be too large, an appropriate number of records that were not previously long-form data-defined were selected to be augmented—that is, have values for their long-form data items supplied through editing, assignment, and imputation. After this first round of augmentation, IWAs were combined into final weighting areas (FWAs), and a second round of augmentation was performed as needed. As it turned out, augmentation was rarely required in 2000: only 1,477 occupied housing units were selected for augmentation out of 16.4 million occupied units in the long-form sample (2,412 vacant housing units were also selected for augmentation). Less than 0.001 percent of long-form-sample household member records (unweighted) were augmented people (4,090 of 42.6 million records); 1   See Fairchild (2001) for draft specifications for the estimation of direct variances for the 2000 long-form sample. These variance estimates do not account for the variance due to item imputation.

OCR for page 469
The 2000 Census: Counting Under Adversity however, 4.2 percent of group quarters long-form-sample records were augmented people. On a weighted basis, augmented household members represented only 0.002 percent of the household population estimated from the long-form sample, while augmented group quarters residents represented 11.9 percent of the group quarters population estimated from the long-form-sample. This percentage is disturbingly high. It would be useful to know how it varied by type of group quarters (e.g., college dormitory or prison). H.2.c Final Weighting Areas The specifications for combining IWAs into FWAs called for no FWA to have fewer than 400 long-form data-defined persons, while also observing the constraint that IWAs were never combined across counties. If an IWA had more sample persons than the threshold, it was an FWA on its own. If it had fewer sample persons, then it was combined with one or more IWAs in the same tabulation block group, or in the same census tract if necessary, or in the same county if necessary, to reach the threshold. When possible, IWAs werecombinedthathadthesameexpectedsamplingrate. H.2.d Construction of Weights Initial weights were calculated separately for five groups: persons in households, group quarters residents, service-based enumerations, occupied housing units, and vacant housing units. These weights were the ratio of the complete count to the long-form-sample count for each group in an IWA. Final Person Weights Next, person weighting matrixes were computed for each FWA. The matrix for household members included the complete count, unweighted sample count, and weighted count (based on the initial person weights) for each cell of a 4-dimensional matrix (39,312 cells). Marginal counts (complete count, unweighted, initially weighted) were also produced for each cell of each dimension separately. The four dimensions for household members were as follows (there were simpler matrices for group quarters residents and service-based enumerations):

OCR for page 469
The 2000 Census: Counting Under Adversity three categories of household type by seven categories of household size (21 cells); three categories of sampling type (1 in 2, 1 in 4, 1 in 6, or 1 in 8) (3 cells); two categories of householder status (householder or not) (2 cells); and two categories of Hispanic origin, by six categories of race (American Indian or Alaska Native, Black, Asian, Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander, White, Other, with multiple-race persons assigned to the largest nonwhite single-race category in the FWA), by 13 categories of age, by two categories of sex (312 cells). Type of return (mail, enumerator) was not included as a dimension in the weighting matrix, although almost all non-sample-data-defined records (whole-household nonrespondents) were enumerator returns and not mail returns. Thus, members of non-sample-data-defined occupied housing units were 17.7 percent of total enumerator long-form household member records, compared with only 0.5 percent of total mail long-form household member records (from tabulations by Census Bureau staff provided to the panel spring 2003). The cells of the household member weighting matrix were collapsed as necessary. The entire matrix was collapsed to a single cell if the complete person count in the FWA was more than 40 times the uninflated sample count. One or more cells in a single dimension were collapsed, following the process below (see Hefter, 2000:Section V.I, for the rules for combining categories within a dimension): first, determine if one or more categories of the household type/size dimension needed to be collapsed (each category must have at least 10 sample persons and a ratio of complete-count persons to initially inflated sample persons of less than 3.5); next, determine if the Hispanic origin classification failed (both the Hispanic and non-Hispanic categories must have at least 150 complete-count persons in addition to the criteria above for household type/size);

OCR for page 469
The 2000 Census: Counting Under Adversity next, determine if the race categories (within Hispanic origin, if still present) required collapsing (each category must meet the criteria specified for Hispanic/non-Hispanic); next, determine if the age/sex classifications within Hispanic/race categories must be collapsed (each category must have at least 10 sample persons and a ratio of complete-count persons to initially inflated sample persons of less than 4); next, determine if the householder/nonhouseholder dimension failed (each category must have at least 10 sample persons and a ratio of complete-count persons to initially inflated sample persons of less than 3.5); finally, determine if the sampling type categories required collapsing (each must have at least 10 sample persons and a ratio of complete-count persons to initially inflated sample persons of less than 3.5). After the final person matrix was determined for an FWA, then an iterative proportional fitting (raking) procedure was conducted, in which the initially inflated sample counts in each cell were adjusted so that the marginal cell totals for each dimension were practically equal between the complete counts and the inflated sample counts. This result was accomplished by first adjusting the initially inflated cell counts to equal the complete-count marginals for one dimension, then a second dimension, and, sequentially, through all the dimensions, followed by additional iterations as needed until a specified stopping point was reached. (See National Research Council, 1985:App.3.2, for a general description of iterative proportional fitting, which has been used in every census since 1970.) The last step in constructing person weights was to use a controlled rounding procedure in order to produce integer weights within each state. Before approving these weights, they were tested to be sure they did not exceed specified size criteria. If they did, then a procedure was used to force additional collapsing of the person-weighting matrix, by successively lowering the maximum ratio of complete-count persons to initially inflated sample persons that was permitted. The distribution of final long-form-sample person weights for 2000 is concentrated in the range of 3–30, with a longer upper tail for

OCR for page 469
The 2000 Census: Counting Under Adversity group quarters residents compared with all people, as seen below. It would be useful to analyze weight distributions and average weights for small geographic areas. Cumulative Percent Weight Value All Persons Group Quarters 1 0.45 0.02 2 4.33 0.12 3 7.34 0.44 4–10 70.58 56.76 11–20 98.06 80.23 21–30 99.60 91.70 31–40 99.91 97.89 41–50 99.97 99.22 51–max. 100.00 100.00 (Max =) (320) (180)   SOURCE: Tabulated by panel staff from U.S. Census Bureau, Edit Tallies for Long-Form Population Records (variable WT; see Philipp, 2001). Final Occupied Household Weights The procedure for developing occupied household weights was similar to that for persons. The only difference was in the definition of the weighting matrixes and the criteria for collapsing. The occupied household weighting matrix consisted of three dimensions (1,512 cells): three categories of household type by seven categories of household size (21 cells); three categories of sampling type (3 cells); two categories of tenure by two categories of Hispanic/non-Hispanic origin of householder by six categories of race of householder (as defined for the person weighting) (24 cells). The entire matrix was collapsed to a single cell if the ratio of the complete count to the unweighted sample count was more than 40 to 1 for an FWA. One or more categories of a dimension were collapsed if the marginal unweighted sample count was less than 5 or the ratio of complete-count persons to initially inflated sample persons was greater than 3.5 (for tenure, Hispanic origin, and race, collapsing also occurred if there were fewer than 50 sample cases in a

OCR for page 469
The 2000 Census: Counting Under Adversity cell). The collapsing proceeded by testing, sequentially, household type/size categories, tenure categories, Hispanic origin categories within tenure, race categories within tenure/Hispanic origin, and sampling type categories. Final Vacant Housing Unit Weights The process for developing vacant housing unit weights was not iterative. Vacant units were classified into three categories: vacant for rent, vacant for sale, other vacant. These categories were collapsed as necessary, and weights were calculated for the vacant units in each category in an FWA by inflating the initially inflated sample counts to equal the complete counts. H.3 ITEM IMPUTATION Imputation (using reported values from another person or household in a hot-deck procedure), assignment (using reported values for the same person or household), and editing (changing values according to specified rules for consistency) were used in 2000 for all instances of missing and inconsistent values for members of long-form-sample data-defined households (whether or not the person record was sample data-defined). These procedures were also used for all long-form-sample data-defined group quarters residents. The imputations made during the complete-count processing of basic items were retained and not reimputed in the long-form-sample data processing. The hot-deck imputation procedure is described in broad outline in Appendix G.1; the Census Bureau uses the term “allocation” for item imputation. The edit and imputation specifications for the long-form were quite complex. Generally, related variables (e.g., the set on education, see below) were imputed sequentially so that responses to a specific question would be consistent with responses to a logically preceding question. In the case of income and employment variables, there was a “joint economic edit,” which was the most complex procedure of all (see U.S. Census Bureau, 2002b). It was carried out after all other editing and imputation had been performed and applied to year last worked, industry, occupation, class of worker, work experience in 1999, earnings, and all other income

OCR for page 469
The 2000 Census: Counting Under Adversity types. For yet another example of long-form-sample imputation and edit specifications, see Appendix G.2.b which describes procedures for editing and imputing housing tenure. The long-form procedures were much more complex than the short-form procedures because of the availability of related variables on the long form, such as mortgage payment and rent. For most long-form person variables, there were somewhat different procedures for household members and group quarters residents. H.3.a Example of Edit and Imputation Specifications: Education Variables The three education variables—school enrollment, grade attending, and educational attainment—were edited jointly (see U.S. Census Bureau, 2001a). Variables that were used for the education edits and imputations included age, race, ethnicity, whether worked last week or was on layoff or temporarily absent from work, occupation, and employment status recode. Starting (“cold-deck”) values were specified for 17 different matrices, although these values were superceded by the “warm deck,” and then were continuously updated through the “hot-deck” process (see Appendix G.1). The first steps involved a large number of edits based on age. For example, all three education variables were set to zero (not in universe) if age (which may have been imputed in the complete-count processing) was less than 3 years. One or more of the education variables were also set to zero if the reported or imputed age was not consistent with the educational data (e.g., if age was 18 or more and school enrollment was no, then any reported value for grade attending was set to zero). These edits assumed that age reporting and imputation were reliable. Next were edits to make educational attainment consistent with reported grade attending. For example, if grade attending was grade 1 to grade 4 and age was 8–10, but educational attainment was greater than grade 4, then educational attainment was blanked and imputed at a later step. Sometimes, it was grade attending that was blanked depending on age and reported educational attainment. After the edits were completed, then blank values because of nonresponse or editing were imputed using the specified imputation matrix. Some matrices were simple; for example, when educational

OCR for page 469
The 2000 Census: Counting Under Adversity attainment was missing but school enrollment and grade attending were reported, then the imputed value for educational attainment was the hot-deck value in the appropriate cell of a matrix of categories of age by grade attending. More complex matrices handled situations when all three education variables were missing: matrix 7A imputed all three education variables for unemployed people according to the hot-deck values in the appropriate cell formed by age and race/ethnicity; matrix 7B imputed all three education variables for employed people according to the hot-deck values in the appropriate cell formed by age and occupation group. H.3.b Analysis Chapter 7 analyzes imputation rates for the 2000 and 1990 census long-form samples and the Census 2000 Supplementary Survey. Eight tables supplement those provided in Chapter 7. Tables H.1 through H.7 are for the household population (see National Research Council, 1995b:App.L, for similar tables for 1990): imputation rates for selected population and housing items by self versus enumerator form for 2000 and 1990 (Table H.1); imputation rates for selected population and housing items for 2000 by race and Hispanic origin of the reference person or householder (Table H.2); imputation rates for the worst 10 percent census tracts for selected population and housing items for 2000 by race and Hispanic origin of the reference person (Table H.3); imputation rates for selected population and housing items for 2000 by geographic aggregations (Table H.4); imputation rates for the worst 10 percent census tracts for selected population and housing items for 2000 by geographic aggregations (Table H.5); 2000 imputation rates, 2000 imputation and assignment rates (1990-comparable), and 1990 imputation rates for population items (Table H.6); and 2000 imputation rates, 2000 imputation and assignment rates (1990-comparable), and 1990 imputation rates for housing items (Table H.7). Table H.8 provides 2000 imputation and assignment rates and 1990 imputation rates for population items for group quarters residents by type of group quarters. Figure H.1 graphs comparable imputation rates for 2000 and 1990 for housing items. It shows (as would a similar graph for population items) that 2000 imputation rates are higher than 1990 rates for most items. One reason relates to the fact that the percentage of long

OCR for page 469
The 2000 Census: Counting Under Adversity forms included in sample processing was 2 percentage points higher in 2000 than in 1990 (93.2 percent and 91.2 percent, respectively). It was easier for a household to be sample data-defined in 2000 because of the layout of the questionnaire (see discussion in Chapter 7), but, as a consequence, a larger proportion of sample data-defined forms in 2000 were only minimally completed, which produced higher imputation rates. Another and more important reason for higher imputation rates in 2000 is that the design, in contrast with 1990, precluded telephone and field follow-up for missing content (see discussion in Chapter 4). Users should examine both weighting factors and imputation rates to assess the effects of nonresponse on the variability and possible bias of estimates from the 2000 and 1990 long-form samples.

OCR for page 469
The 2000 Census: Counting Under Adversity Table H.5 Imputation Rates for Selected Population and Housing Items, 2000 Census Long-Form Sample, Household Members, Worst 10% Census Tracts, by Geographic Aggregations (weighted)     In CMSA In MSA Non-MSA Variable Total (23,517) Cent. City (11,136) Other (3,839) Cent. City (3,591) Other (2,978) Urban (659) Rural (1,314) Relationship 4.9 5.2 5.5 4.5 4.1 3.3 3.8 Sex 2.4 2.5 2.7 2.1 2.0 1.5 2.1 Race 8.1 8.6 9.9 7.5 7.0 5.0 4.1 Age 5.0 5.3 5.4 4.9 4.3 3.8 4.1 Hispanic Origin 6.3 7.1 5.8 6.3 4.9 4.9 5.6 Number of Rooms 9.6 10.3 10.2 8.7 8.7 7.3 8.0 Housing Tenure 5.9 6.3 5.2 5.3 5.5 5.0 6.8 Value of Property 17.4 18.7 15.1 16.3 16.7 15.2 19.5 Monthly Rent 20.3 22.0 17.9 18.3 16.5 17.8 17.9 Complete Plumbing 5.3 5.9 4.9 4.5 4.7 3.9 4.7 Complete Kitchen 5.2 5.8 4.8 4.5 4.7 3.9 4.7 Fuel Used for Heating 11.3 12.9 10.0 9.9 9.5 8.6 11.2 Annual Electric Cost 21.2 23.7 19.1 20.2 17.8 16.9 18.8 Property Taxes 42.3 44.5 39.6 43.4 40.4 39.1 42.2 Place of Birth 13.5 15.2 12.2 13.1 11.3 10.3 10.8 Educational Attainment 12.9 14.4 12.8 11.9 11.0 9.0 9.3 English-Speaking Ability 8.7 9.0 8.5 8.5 8.1 7.3 9.6 Veteran Status 11.8 13.3 11.2 11.4 9.9 8.8 8.7 Work Disability 14.8 16.2 13.8 14.4 12.7 11.7 11.6 Physical Activity Disability 11.5 12.7 10.8 11.1 10.1 8.9 9.4 Self-Care Disability 11.8 13.1 11.1 11.4 10.2 9.1 9.6 Employment Status Recode 16.6 18.5 15.9 16.1 14.0 12.5 12.3 Place of Work (Place) 16.5 18.7 16.6 14.4 14.1 11.6 12.2 Occupation Last Year 22.3 24.8 21.7 21.6 18.8 16.4 16.4 All Income Imputed 30.8 32.7 29.3 30.0 27.8 27.1 29.3 Some Income Imputed 36.5 38.9 34.8 35.8 32.7 32.1 34.2 NOTES: Number at the top of each column in parentheses is the population in thousands. Worst 10 percent census tracts are those tracts with the highest number of imputations of basic (complete-count) items. CMSA: Consolidated Metropolitan Statistical Area; MSA: Metropolitan Statistical Area; Cent. City: Central City. SOURCE: Tabulations by U.S.Census Bureau staff from the 2000 Sample Census Edited File (SCEF) and the 1990 Sample Edited Data File (SEDF), provided to the panel spring 2003.

OCR for page 469
The 2000 Census: Counting Under Adversity Table H.6 Imputation Rates for Population Items, 2000 and 1990 Census Long-Form Sample, Household Members (weighted) Variable 2000a 2000b 1990 Variable 2000a 2000b 1990 Relationship 2.3 2.7 1.9 Veteran Status 7.5 7.5 4.8 Sex 0.9 1.6 0.8 Active Duty Periods 9.8 10.3 6.1 Age 2.6 2.6 0.9 Years of Active Duty 9.1 9.1 17.5 Hispanic Origin 3.6 4.0 3.4 Employment Status Recode 11.1 11.1 3.8 Race 3.2 3.2 1.1 Place of Work (State) 9.7 9.7 7.2 Marital Status 2.2 3.4 0.9 Place of Work (County) 10.1 10.1 7.9 Attending School 6.2 6.2 4.2 Place of Work (MCD) 10.8 10.8 10.3 Grade Level Attending 9.0 9.0 — Place of Work (Place) 10.6 10.6 9.7 Educational Attainment 7.2 7.2 4.5 Place of Work (Tract) 10.2 10.2 — Non-English Language 5.2 5.8 4.8 Place of Work (Block) 10.2 10.2 — Language Spoken 11.4 11.4 11.9 Means to Work 7.6 8.2 4.6 English-Speaking Ability 7.6 7.6 8.5 Vehicle Occupancy 10.0 10.0 4.9 Place of Birth 9.2 9.2 5.1 Departure Time 15.0 15.8 10.8 Citizenship 0.8 5.2 4.2 Travel Time 11.8 12.3 6.9 Year of Entry 14.7 14.7 8.9 When Last Worked 11.5 14.8 6.6 Mobility Status 5.8 8.6 5.2 Industry Last Year 14.9 15.2 8.0 Migration (State) 8.6 8.6 5.7 Occupation Last Year 14.9 16.1 9.1 Migration (County) 8.6 8.6 7.5 Class of Worker Last Year 17.0 17.6 9.0 Migration (MCD) — — 7.6 Worked Last Year 9.4 13.6 13.5 Migration (Place) 8.8 8.8 9.6 Weeks Worked 19.3 20.2 14.7 Sensory Disability 6.9 6.9 — Hours per Week Worked 17.4 18.1 14.5 Physical Activity Disability 7.6 7.7 — Wages or Salary Income 20.0 20.0 10.0 Mental Disability 7.5 7.5 — Self Employment Income 9.9 9.9 6.4 Self-Care Disability 7.9 7.9 5.8 Interest Income 20.8 20.8 8.1 Outside Difficulty 9.9 10.0 5.1 Social Security Income 8.7 8.7 8.0 Work Disability 11.4 11.4 7.4 Supplemental Security Income 19.0 19.0 6.4 Grandchildren 4.5 5.1 — Public Assistance Income 18.2 18.2 7.5 Responsible for Grandchildren 15.3 15.3 — Retirement Income 18.8 18.8 7.7 Other Income 18.3 18.3 7.6 How Long Responsible? 17.8 17.8 — All Income Imputed 24.5 24.5 9.1 NOTES: 2000a rates include imputations only, 2000b rates include imputations and assignments (comparable to 1990).—; not available. SOURCE: Tabulations by U.S.Census Bureau staff from the 2000 Sample Census Edited File (SCEF) and the 1990 Sample Edited Data File (SEDF), provided to the panel spring 2003.

OCR for page 469
The 2000 Census: Counting Under Adversity Table H.7 Imputation Rates for Housing Items, 2000 and 1990 Census Long-Form Sample, Household Members (weighted) Variable 2000a 2000b 1990 Housing Tenure 4.3 8.0 1.4 Building Type 4.4 4.4 1.6 Year Built 11.7 11.7 23.0 Year Moved In 6.2 6.2 2.9 Number of Rooms 6.2 6.2 0.4 Number of Bedrooms 8.9 10.2 7.5 Complete Plumbing 3.4 3.4 1.7 Complete Kitchen 3.4 3.4 1.8 Telephone Service 4.3 4.3 1.9 Fuel Used for Heating 7.4 7.4 2.9 Automobiles 6.2 6.2 2.2 Business on Property 8.2 8.2 2.4 How Many Acres? 10.6 10.6 4.4 Agricultural Sales 14.3 14.3 13.7 Annual Electric Cost 17.1 18.5 5.5 Annual Gas Cost 23.9 24.7 10.7 Annual Water Cost 19.6 21.8 7.3 Other Fuel Cost 28.7 31.9 17.5 Monthly Rent 15.6 15.6 1.3 Rent Includes Meals? 7.9 7.9 5.1 Mortgage? 6.0 18.6 5.7 Mortgage Payment 19.6 22.4 5.5 Payment Includes Taxes? 16.0 17.1 6.0 Payment Includes Insurance? 17.2 17.4 6.2 Second Mortgage? 11.8 16.0 5.1 Second Mortgage Payment 23.9 23.9 8.1 Property Taxes 32.0 32.0 12.2 Insurance Cost 36.6 36.6 16.8 Value of Property 13.3 13.3 3.3 Mobile Home Installment Loan 0.2 44.5 — Mobile Home Costs 63.5 63.5 41.8 NOTES: 2000a rates include imputations only, 2000b rates include imputations and assignments (comparable to 1990).—; not available. SOURCE: Tabulations by U.S. Census Bureau staff from the 2000 Sample Census Edited File (SCEF) and the 1990 Sample Edited Data File (SEDF), provided to the panel spring 2003.

OCR for page 469
The 2000 Census: Counting Under Adversity Table H.8 Imputation/Assignment Rates (percents) for Selected Population Items for Group Quarters Residents, 2000 and 1990 Long-Form Samples, by Type of Group Quarters (weighted) Type of Group Quarters and Year Sex Age Hispanic Origin Race Marital Status Attend School Grade Attend Highest Grade Total   2000 3.0 3.8 8.0 4.5 18.0 31.9 30.0 39.3 1990 0.6 1.5 7.6 1.8 4.2 15.3 — 17.9 Prisons   2000 2.7 5.5 11.8 5.4 30.9 47.7 70.1 53.8 1990 1.1 2.1 16.8 2.7 11.1 28.9 — 24.6 Juvenile Institutions   2000 2.9 3.7 8.2 5.2 21.4 37.4 38.3 43.6 1990 0.6 3.3 5.0 2.0 2.6 12.6 — 13.7 Nursing Homes   2000 3.4 1.8 5.1 1.5 17.7 33.1 89.1 51.7 1990 0.3 0.8 4.7 1.0 2.8 20.0 — 32.6 Hospitals and Schools for Handicapped   2000 4.6 10.9 8.8 4.8 21.9 39.8 65.4 52.8 1990 0.6 1.2 9.4 2.1 4.6 25.8 — 30.7 College Dormitories   2000 1.9 3.4 7.1 5.4 8.1 20.7 20.2 19.2 1990 0.2 1.3 3.4 1.4 1.2 3.2 — 2.8 Military Quarters   2000 1.7 1.7 4.2 4.9 2.9 4.6 99.8 3.8 1990 0.5 0.9 7.1 1.4 1.5 6.4 — 5.4 Shelters   2000 5.1 4.7 15.5 9.2 14.1 24.7 40.9 28.2 1990 2.1 3.3 20.3 5.6 13.3 23.1 — 20.6 Group Homes   2000 4.1 2.9 6.7 3.5 17.6 30.1 49.8 42.2 1990 1.3 1.7 7.8 2.2 3.9 18.3 — 21.2 Other Group Quarters   2000 4.4 3.7 6.6 4.5 19.4 32.0 47.6 42.9 1990 1.3 2.6 7.1 3.4 5.0 16.9 — 17.2

OCR for page 469
The 2000 Census: Counting Under Adversity Type of Group Quarters and Year Speak Another Lang. Language Spoken English Speaking Ability Place of Birth Citizenship Year Entered U.S. Where Lived 5 Years Ago State 5 Yrs. Ago Total   2000 39.2 38.3 33.9 40.2 36.5 29.8 44.9 42.8 1990 18.2 27.7 22.1 19.2 14.0 30.1 18.1 19.3 Prisons   2000 58.3 59.2 56.8 54.0 53.0 50.4 70.6 66.7 1990 29.8 35.7 29.8 31.7 24.7 38.0 33.5 32.8 Juvenile Institutions   2000 44.4 38.0 34.1 46.2 42.1 37.9 49.9 51.5 1990 16.2 25.6 18.6 18.4 12.1 25.2 16.2 21.9 Nursing Homes   2000 46.6 46.0 36.8 49.2 42.4 49.1 47.4 50.7 1990 25.5 34.8 26.8 25.5 18.8 46.2 23.9 29.2 Hospitals and Schools for Handicapped   2000 50.7 47.5 40.2 54.3 47.4 41.1 53.7 59.7 1990 30.3 43.4 34.0 32.4 24.2 46.0 28.7 38.7 College Dormitories   2000 20.6 19.0 16.3 22.2 19.9 11.3 23.7 23.9 1990 5.8 14.2 11.0 6.7 3.9 11.7 4.7 6.5 Military Quarters   2000 4.1 7.7 4.1 5.4 3.8 10.6 12.8 6.3 1990 7.1 12.5 8.1 6.8 5.5 12.2 7.0 7.4 Shelters   2000 28.0 31.4 24.2 35.2 32.9 27.1 45.0 34.1 1990 24.0 40.1 32.0 29.3 19.8 42.1 26.5 29.6 Group Homes   2000 38.3 43.0 35.3 45.3 36.4 33.0 42.3 46.4 1990 20.4 31.3 22.1 24.2 15.7 35.1 21.0 24.4 Other Group Quarters   2000 39.4 34.2 29.7 43.8 38.1 21.6 43.7 47.2 1990 18.3 22.9 20.5 18.7 14.5 26.2 18.9 23.3

OCR for page 469
The 2000 Census: Counting Under Adversity   Disability Grandchildren Type of Group Quarters and Year Senses Physical Activity Mental Self Care Mobility Work In Home Responsible for Total   2000 44.2 45.4 45.1 45.6 46.9 47.7 30.0 25.2 1990 — — — 17.3 16.7 18.1 — — Prisons   2000 58.2 63.5 63.7 64.8 66.2 66.7 36.5 18.7 1990 — — — 33.1 31.5 34.2 — — Juvenile Institutions   2000 43.3 45.1 45.9 46.2 47.9 48.4 — — 1990 — — — 19.8 18.7 18.2 — — Nursing Homes   2000 46.9 45.4 45.3 45.2 47.4 49.0 44.0 48.6 1990 — — — 21.6 21.2 23.0 — — Hospitals and Schools for Handicapped   2000 56.0 55.3 54.6 55.1 56.2 57.3 47.4 25.3 1990 — — — 28.1 27.3 27.7 — — College Dormitories   2000 21.8 22.1 21.9 22.1 22.3 22.7 0.5 15.7 1990 — — — 6.6 6.3 6.0 — — Military Quarters   2000 — — — — — — 83.3 14.8 1990 — — — — — — — — Shelters   2000 30.5 32.1 29.7 30.8 32.2 33.3 39.3 14.9 1990 — — — 26.5 25.1 32.8 — — Group Homes   2000 38.8 38.7 37.4 38.3 39.1 40.1 31.2 28.5 1990 — — — 20.0 19.2 25.8 — — Other Group Quarters   2000 40.8 41.3 40.3 40.8 42.5 43.8 33.2 23.9 1990 — — — 18.2 17.4 21.2 — —  

OCR for page 469
The 2000 Census: Counting Under Adversity Type of Group Quarters and Year Veteran Status Years Served Employment Recode Place of Work (State) How Get to Work Use Carpool? Time Leave for Work When Last Worked Total   2000 39.6 35.7 5.5 11.4 12.0 14.4 20.0 45.8 1990 18.0 32.1 5.1 14.1 12.1 14.6 21.9 30.1 Prisons   2000 57.5 54.5 — — — — — 70.2 1990 29.2 37.4 4.7 73.7 84.6 86.7 85.8 60.7 Juvenile Institutions   2000 41.6 62.7 — — — — — 51.9 1990 16.0 59.3 0.2 14.3 14.2 50.9 41.1 44.5 Nursing Homes   2000 48.6 52.7 — — — — — 50.1 1990 27.1 46.5 0.1 17.0 17.8 17.7 23.0 38.8 Hospitals and Schools for Handicapped   2000 50.5 39.0 — — — — — 54.5 1990 27.9 43.6 — 21.7 28.0 71.4 44.6 47.8 College Dormitories   2000 21.6 30.1 9.3 9.6 10.3 13.0 18.0 24.8 1990 5.7 20.8 6.6 10.2 7.7 8.3 17.8 9.7 Military Quarters   2000 1.8 9.4 3.8 9.0 8.7 10.0 18.0 15.1 1990 2.5 26.3 — 10.0 8.4 11.3 18.1 4.1 Shelters   2000 31.1 30.5 20.5 21.3 20.5 22.2 29.1 35.6 1990 25.8 32.9 27.6 36.0 30.9 33.6 44.2 35.1 Group Homes   2000 38.3 43.6 10.8 12.5 13.8 15.0 20.5 43.4 1990 20.1 28.2 14.1 27.3 24.7 26.6 32.0 33.9 Other Group Quarters   2000 40.2 49.7 22.1 24.9 28.5 33.9 36.3 46.2 1990 18.7 42.9 20.6 24.2 23.1 26.7 33.6 23.5

OCR for page 469
The 2000 Census: Counting Under Adversity Type of Group Quarters and Year Industry Occupation Class of Worker Work Last Year Number Weeks Worked Usual Hours Worked Wage/Salary Income Self-Employ. Income Total   2000 46.2 46.9 54.4 47.7 42.8 41.3 50.1 42.7 1990 20.9 21.3 22.5 26.9 21.4 20.6 27.4 23.2 Prisons   2000 75.2 75.4 78.3 70.6 72.5 71.2 74.3 67.4 1990 46.4 44.2 46.6 43.3 40.2 38.6 49.7 42.6 Juvenile Institutions   2000 54.9 55.6 58.1 55.1 50.7 49.6 43.7 38.1 1990 25.2 25.1 25.8 26.0 23.2 23.2 21.6 18.5 Nursing Homes   2000 78.6 78.2 80.4 52.6 69.9 69.5 48.2 47.7 1990 35.6 32.0 35.6 32.2 23.3 22.5 27.3 26.9 Hospitals and Schools for Handicapped   2000 51.5 52.0 65.5 57.3 43.5 42.6 56.1 51.0 1990 36.9 35.9 37.1 37.8 33.9 32.5 36.6 32.5 College Dormitories   2000 29.3 30.7 32.4 26.8 29.1 27.4 34.7 23.4 1990 9.9 11.1 11.5 11.2 13.2 12.7 15.0 10.1 Military Quarters   2000 5.7 5.9 80.4 16.4 20.3 18.6 17.4 3.1 1990 1.1 5.7 7.8 21.3 17.5 17.2 15.8 9.6 Shelters   2000 38.9 38.6 42.1 38.8 40.9 38.5 41.2 32.1 1990 38.2 36.4 37.2 36.6 39.0 38.1 37.1 33.3 Group Homes   2000 42.8 43.8 44.9 46.1 46.1 44.6 50.5 39.9 1990 30.6 29.5 30.3 29.5 31.9 31.1 32.4 25.8 Other Group Quarters   2000 43.3 43.5 46.3 49.0 51.3 50.4 49.8 41.4 1990 30.6 29.0 29.3 29.3 33.1 32.3 30.4 24.1

OCR for page 469
The 2000 Census: Counting Under Adversity Type of Group Quarters and Year Interest Income Social Security SSI Income Public Assist. RetireMent Other Income All Income Imputed Some/All Income Imputed Total   2000 54.5 57.4 55.5 55.2 55.5 54.5 59.9 63.1 1990 29.9 30.7 — 29.0 29.1 29.6 35.4 37.5 Prisons   2000 74.1 74.1 74.1 74.2 74.2 73.8 78.3 79.7 1990 46.8 46.7 — 46.5 46.7 46.7 54.4 56.1 Juvenile Institutions   2000 61.0 61.2 61.4 61.4 61.2 60.7 65.0 66.1 1990 29.1 29.1 — 29.0 28.9 28.9 32.4 33.4 Nursing Homes   2000 68.1 75.9 68.7 68.3 69.4 67.1 76.9 79.0 1990 44.9 50.8 — 45.3 45.5 44.2 51.8 53.4 Hospitals and Schools for Handicapped   2000 61.5 64.8 63.9 63.3 62.9 61.9 65.9 70.5 1990 38.8 40.0 — 39.2 39.0 38.8 41.3 46.6 College Dormitories   2000 31.8 31.2 31.2 31.1 31.2 30.8 35.7 38.2 1990 11.1 10.8 — 10.6 10.6 10.7 14.9 16.5 Military Quarters   2000 15.8 31.1 31.1 31.1 31.1 30.5 18.7 32.9 1990 10.3 0.6 — 0.6 0.6 10.2 15.3 17.2 Shelters   2000 41.1 41.0 41.1 41.2 40.9 39.7 44.9 51.3 1990 37.5 37.7 — 37.1 37.5 37.3 40.9 44.0 Group Homes   2000 51.6 55.1 54.9 53.0 52.6 51.1 58.3 66.0 1990 30.8 32.2 — 31.9 31.1 31.1 35.2 41.2 Other Group Quarters   2000 56.6 59.8 57.4 55.9 57.0 55.3 63.1 67.0 1990 28.0 28.7 — 27.7 27.8 27.8 34.2 36.9

OCR for page 469
The 2000 Census: Counting Under Adversity NOTES: 2000 imputation rates include assignments.—, 100 percent assigned because of group quarters type (e.g., residents of nursing homes are assigned status as out of the labor force); alternatively, for 1990, question not asked (grade attending school, sensory disability, physical activity disability, mental disability, grandchildren in home, whether responsible for grandchildren, Supplemental Security Income [SSI]). Imputation rates for employment status recode include only cases for which none of the half-dozen relevant questions were answered. Some income imputed includes 100 percent and less than 100 percent imputed. SOURCE: Tabulations by U.S.Census Bureau staff from the 2000 Sample Census Edited File (SCEF) and the 1990 Sample Edited Data File (SEDF), provided to the panel summer 2003.

OCR for page 469
The 2000 Census: Counting Under Adversity Figure H.1 Imputation/Assignment Rates for Housing Items, 2000 and 1990 Census, Persons Receiving the Long Form (weighted) NOTES: 2000 rates include imputations and assignments (comparable to 1990), and are the “2000b” figures reported in Table H.7. SOURCE: Tabulations by U.S. Census Bureau staff from the 2000 Sample Census Edited File (SCEF) and the 1990 Sample Edited Data File (SEDF), provided to the panel spring 2003.