Small Populations, Large Effects Improving the Measurement of the Group Quarters Population in the American Community Survey (2012) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:
5 Sample Allocation and Selection
5 Sample Allocation and Selection
Pages 63-70
The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.
From page 63... ...
The facilities in a state are then sorted by small versus closed on Census Day, GQ type, and geographical order, and a systematic sam ple is selected. In most states, the overall facility sampling rate is approximately 1 in 40, or 2.5 percent in a given year.
|
From page 64... ...
. TABLE 5-1 GQ Facility Annual Sampling Rates and Sample Sizes by State, 2009 Facility Sampling Rate Facility State (percentage)
|
From page 65... ...
If multiple groups of 10 are selected, the groups are assigned to be interviewed during different months (with some exceptions, in the case of GQ types in which the data collection is concentrated in a shorter period of time for logistical reasons)
|
From page 66... ...
Recommendation 5-1: The Census Bureau should conduct a formal evalu ation of sample redesign strategies that would make it possible to control the American Community Survey group quarters sample allocation at the substate level. The evaluation should focus on identifying options that can improve the precision of the estimates at the state and substate levels, without substantially increasing the costs of the data collection.
|
From page 67... ...
sample design in the American Community Survey and should assess the resources allocated for updating the GQ sampling frame in the context of how the measures-of-size information available from the sampling frame affects the effectiveness of the sample design. TABLE 5-2 Differences in 2008 Expected Population and Observed Population Percentage Difference Difference in in Sum of Sum of Sum of Sum of Expected Expected and Expected Observed and Observed Observed Month Population Population Population Population January 287,797 270,204 17,593 6.1 February 288,046 278,728 9,318 3.2 March 270,439 252,692 17,747 6.6 April 301,963 287,009 14,954 5.0 May 294,135 265,257 28,878 10.0 June 275,424 235,003 40,421 14.7 July 298,281 248,065 50,216 16.8 August 288,238 250,172 38,066 13.2 September 438,497 266,501 171,996 39.2 October 287,672 276,236 11,436 4.0 November 279,735 264,367 15,368 5.5 December 301,329 282,236 19,093 6.0 Total 3,611,556 3,176,470 435,086 12.0 SOURCE: U.S.
|
From page 68... ...
The ideal balance between data quality considerations and cost would have to be evaluated to determine the optimal subsample size. A recent Census Bureau project calculated the optimal subsample size
|
From page 69... ...
This is one reason why pursuing this research further is important. Future research could also take into consideration possible differences among the intraclass correlations that characterize different GQ types, given that the correlations are presumably not equally high among all of them.
|
Key Terms
This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
More
information on Chapter Skim is available.