Comparison of Census 2000 and American Community Survey 1999-2001 Estimates San Francisco and Tulare Counties, California
Linda Gage California Department of Finance Demographic Research Unit
Research was done under contract with the United States Census Bureau. This paper expresses the views of the author.
1
Background
The American Community Survey (ACS) is a Census Bureau initiative that emerged in the post-1990 period because of Congressional interest in having access more than once each decade to social and economic information for America’s cities, towns and neighborhoods. The statistical design that resulted from these calls for more frequent data is a large, monthly, sample survey of addresses and a survey instrument much like the traditional census long form. These monthly samples, when pooled across time, are designed to provide annual intercensal estimates of social and economic data for all areas of the nation, including small geographic areas, such as villages and census tracts, and small subpopulations, such as race and ancestry groups. The idea for a rolling monthly survey in the U.S. had been discussed among statisticians for several decades. Congressional interest in the matter, however, was sufficient to prompt the Census Bureau in the early 1990s to commence serious work on the idea and to engage its various advisory committees in discussion on the topic. What began as discussion of continuous measurement matured during the decade into a formal American Community Survey initiative. To ensure the wide acceptance of the American Community Survey throughout the data user community and Federal statistical system, the Census Bureau needs to conduct site-by-site comparisons of American Community Survey data to Census long form data for small areas and population groups to fully understand and assess any differences in data quality. In anticipation of the 2000 Census, and the opportunities this census would provide for comparing ACS results with census results from the long form sample, the Census Bureau identified 36 counties where ACS surveys would provide 3 years of pooled ACS survey data centered roughly on 2000. The comparisons must reflect statistical calculations related to the data analysis. In addition, the comparisons must account for the analysis of specific population and housing variables such as income, poverty, and education for small areas. The Census Bureau must understand the explanations for the differences identified through such comparisons. Local knowledge of specific sites and locally available administrative records will contribute to a better understanding of these differences. The development of the American Community Survey (ACS), which the Bureau plans to phase in, with full implementation scheduled for 2005, will be aided through statistical analyses that meet rigorous technical standards and thereby enhance the credibility and acceptance of the American Community Survey as a replacement for the decennial census long-form sample. ACS pilot testing began in late 1998 with a monthly sample, in most sites, sufficient in size that 36 months of pooled ACS surveys, centered on 2000, are believed to provide estimates of social and economic attributes with statistical precision roughly equal to the statistical precision in census long form estimates of these attributes. The recent release of SF3 data and the impending release of the pooled ACS data for the ACS sites counties now make a comparative analysis possible. Two counties in California are included in the ACS comparison sites: San Francisco and Tulare. San Francisco County Census 2000 enumerated 756,990 persons in households and 346,525 housing units within the 175 census tracts in San Francisco County, California. Located in northern California, the city and county of San Francisco is surrounded on three sides by the Pacific Ocean and San Francisco Bay. This cosmopolitan city/county hosts millions of visitors, conventioneers and business travelers each year and attracts residents and students from around the world. The county's compact 46 square miles is home to a total of 776,733 people, a little more than two percent of the state's population. The total population includes the group quarter population of 19,743, which is not included in this study.
2
The population grew 7 percent since the 1990 census. Positive net migration due to a strong flow of foreign immigrants accounted for 74 percent of the growth. San Francisco County is projected to maintain the same population size in 2010 and decrease 4 percent by 2020. Nearly a third of the population is Asian. The Latino population has remained stable at 14 percent compared to a growing Latino population statewide -- now 32 percent. Almost half of the recent legal immigrants to San Francisco were born in China, Philippines, Hong Kong and Vietnam. San Francisco County has a higher proportion of renter-occupied housing units, a lower proportion of vacant units and fewer persons per household than the state. Median income and educational attainment are higher and unemployment is lower in the county than in the state. Tulare County In the state's Tulare County, Census 2000 reported 361,970 household population and 119,640 housing units within 75 census tracts. Tulare County is centrally located in the Central Valley of California. Agricultural activities have allowed Tulare County to become the second-leading producer of agricultural commodities in the United States. Substantial packing and shipping operations, along with light and medium manufacturing plants, are increasing in number and becoming an important factor in the county's economy. This county of 368,000 represents a little more than one percent of the state's total population. The population grew 18 percent since the 1990 census. Natural increase accounted for over 80 percent of that growth. Tulare County is projected to increase an additional 52 percent by 2020. Over half of the county's population is Latino, compared to 39 percent in 1990. Over 80 percent of the recent legal immigrants to Tulare are from Mexico. The large variety of about 250 seasonal agricultural crops also attracts unauthorized immigrants to the county. Tulare County has higher proportions of owner-occupied and vacant units and more persons per household than the state. Median income and educational attainment are lower and unemployment is higher in the county than in the state. Project Data The U.S. Census Bureau provided 82 demographic, 92 social, 93 economic and 97 housing characteristics by census tract in four profiles to allow comparison of these characteristics from the 2000 Census longform sample and American Community Survey estimates (three years, 1999 through 2001, averaged). The demographic characteristics are in the broad categories of sex and age; race; Hispanic origin and race; relationship; households by type; housing occupancy; and housing tenure. Social characteristics include: school enrollment; educational attainment; marital status; grandparents; veteran status; disability status; place of birth, citizenship, and year of entry; region of birth of foreign born; language spoken at home; and ancestry. Economic categories are: employment status; commuting to work; occupation; industry; class of worker; income and benefits; and number below poverty. Housing characteristics include: units in structure; year structure built; rooms; year householder moved into unit; vehicles available; house heating fuel; selected characteristics; occupants per room; value; mortgage status and monthly owner costs; monthly owner costs as percentage of household income; gross rent; and gross rent as percentage of household income. In addition to the census and survey data, several data quality measures are available including: standard errors, self-response rates, sample unit nonresponse rates, sample completeness rates, and self-response and interviewer-response population and housing item allocation rates. The Bureau also provided tests of statistical significance for most of the comparison characteristics and professional, technical and collegial support from ACS research staff.
3
364 Demographic, Social, Economic, and Housing Characteristics in Four Profiles Demographic (82) Total Population (1) Sex and Age (22) Race (24) Hispanic Origin and Race (8) Relationship (7) Households by Type (12) Housing Occupancy (3) Housing Tenure (5) Social (92) School Enrollment (6) Educational Attainment (10) Marital Status (8) Grandparents (2) Veteran Status (2) Disability Status (9) Place of Birth, Citizenship, and Year of Entry (10) Region of Birth of Foreign Born (7) Language Spoken at Home (10) Ancestry (28) Economic (93) Employment Status (14) Commuting to Work (8) Occupation (7) Industry (13) Class of Worker (4) Income and Benefits (37) Number Below Poverty (10) Housing (97) Total Housing (1) Units in Structure (9) Year Structure Built (8) Rooms (10) Year Householder Moved into Unit (6) Vehicles Available (4) House Heating Fuel (9) Selected Characteristics (3) Occupants per Room (3) Value (10) Mortgage Status and Monthly Owner Costs (11) Monthly Owner Costs as Percent of Household Income (6) Gross Rent (10) Gross Rent as Percent of Household Income (7)
3
Data Comparability and Analysis
In each of the four profiles for San Francisco and Tulare counties, the majority of data values obtained from the 2000 decennial census long-form sample and the average of the 1999-2001 ACS estimates were statistically comparable. Although there was a high degree of agreement, some variables were significantly different and have prompted additional research and analysis by Census Bureau staff. The most striking and universal differences occur in the collection of data on race, disability status, vacancy status, number of rooms in structure, and grandparents as caregivers. This was true in the California sites. Research on possible differences due to the collection instruments and collection methods have been reported at professional meetings and are available on the Bureau's website. Though there were differences by profile, overall around 80 percent of the total variables were comparable. The somewhat lower agreement in the demographic and economic variables in Tulare County is understandable given the difference in the population during a Census snapshot on April 1 compared to averaged annual population data that may include a seasonal migrant labor force. Other differences may occur when comparing a variable like school enrollment collected on April 1 to averaged school enrollment including the summer months when many fewer children are enrolled. Data for "seasonal" variables and populations will be much more difficult to understand, more difficult to use, and for some data users not useful.
The Census Bureau supplied single year data for the 1999, 2000, and 2001 ACS as well as the three-year data averaged on 2000 to assist in identifying possible sources of disagreement, such as an unusually high or low value in one year that would affect the average, between the census and the averaged survey results. The single year data do not contain a sufficient sample size to approximate the quality of the census long-form sample at the tract level. However, after graphing several variables in each county, the ACS data appeared fairly stable on an annual basis, yielding results that followed the general pattern of the census responses. In Tulare County, three age groups were found to be significantly different. Many more examples of the distributions of variables in each county are in the accompanying graphs at the end, many show some level of difference between the census and the ACS. In many cases, even when statistical tests identified differences as significant, the ACS data generally appeared useful and usable. Simply observing a statistically significant difference provides no guidance as to which data are better. It is easy and perhaps natural to assume that the census data are superior; but that bears examination. For practical purposes, it appears that most of the ACS data could, on an annual basis, be used in place of the census data and should provide a more current measurement, especially as the census count ages and remains static throughout the decade. Many more examples of the distributions of variables in each county are in the accompanying graphs at the end. 4
Tables and graphs worked well to examine the county level data. Maps were more effective in providing comparison of data at the census tract level. All examples in this paper are for Tulare County. San Francisco County had a reduced sample size that does not support tract level analysis. Tracts in that county were aggregated to neighborhoods and will be analyzed in subsequent work. In Tulare County the Census estimated 51.3 percent of the population as Hispanic or Latino and the ACS estimated 51.4 percent. This is not a significant difference. The Census reported 185,170 Latino persons compared to the ACS estimate of 186,543. This difference is not statistically significant; this difference of 1,373 persons may or may not be meaningful to a local planner. Four of the county's 75 tracts did show significant differences; however this could be important for needs analysis and program planning. The maps show overall similarity in the distribution of the Latino population in the county.
Tulare County Percent Latino
5
The following table displays the significant differences for 4 census tracts: 3-Year Average ACS Estimate 737 642 920 2,807
Tract 1400 1704 2304 2903
Census Estimate 1,320 370 470 1,740
Percent of Census Universe 30.8% 17.1% 26.4% 34.5%
Percent of ACS Universe 17.8% 35.2% 48.4% 49.5%
Census Universe 4,280 2,160 1,780 5,040
ACS Universe 4,147 1,824 1,902 5,668
Z Score -3.0143 2.0439 1.9501 1.8975
There were significant differences in the percentage of the foreign-born population. The Census estimated 22.9 percent foreign-born compared to the ACS estimate of 21.5 percent. This translates to 82,800 compared to 78,000 persons. Again, the distribution in the Census and ACS are very similar, 80 percent of the census tracts did not have significant differences in the estimates of the foreign-born.
Tulare County Percent Foreign-Born
Another data comparison will be presented before moving to the data quality measures. There were significant differences in the estimation of median household income. In Tulare County, the Census reported a value of $33,983 compared to the ACS estimate of $31,467. This is consistent with Census Bureau research in other ACS sites that generally found lower income values reported in the ACS and is theoretically consistent with an annualized income figure including seasonal population with lower earnings.
6
Tulare County Percent Median Household Income ($)
Data Quality Measures
The measures provided to assess the relative quality of the ACS and census long-form sample estimates included self-response rates (households sending back the form), housing unit and household population sample completeness rates (how well the sample represented the universe), various nonresponse rates (incomplete answers that were allocated or "filled in"), and unit nonresponse.
Self-Response Rates The Census, with a national media campaign and extensive partnerships, had much higher self-response rates than the ACS overall and in the California test sites. Why is self-response a quality measure? Traditionally, questionnaires mailed in by participating households were more complete than those supplied by census interviewer or enumerators who visited households that had not sent back the census form. The Census achieved a self-response rate if 65.7 in San Francisco and 63.4 in Tulare, compared to ACS rates of 57.9 and 50.1 respectively. The darker shades indicate lower levels of cooperation. The large white area in San Francisco is Golden Gate Park.
7
San Francisco County Self-response Rates
Tulare County Self-response Rates
Sample Completeness Rates This is not a familiar measure. Basically, it assesses how well the census or survey sample represents the area's population and housing counts. Technically, "the Census 2000 sample completeness rates are based on the comparison of the number of long form sample data defined units and their population weighted by their probabilities of selection to the 100 percent housing unit and household population count" while the ACS rates were "based on the comparison of the initially weighted (without the population and housing controls and removing the noninterview adjustments) total housing and household population estimates to the final ACS estimates of total housing and household population." 8
The ACS outperformed the Census relative to housing units but was comparable relative to household population.
Housing Unit and Household Population Sample Completeness Rates
ACS Average San Francisco County Housing Unit Household Population Tulare County Housing Unit Household Population .94 .88 .89 .89 .93 .88 .88 .88 Census 2000
Nonresponse Rates The occupied unit nonresponse rate is a measure of the percentage of occupied housing units for which there was not enough information obtained to be considered an interview. The census nonresponse rate was considerable higher than the ACS rate. In San Francisco, the census had an occupied nonresponse rate of 12.0 compared to the ACS rate of 6.4. The difference was even greater in Tulare County where the census rate was 10.1 compared to the ACS rate of 3.9. In the maps, deep shading indicates high nonresponse rates.
San Francisco County Occupied Unit Nonresponse Rates
9
Tulare County Occupied Unit Nonresponse Rates
Housing units with a "complete" interview may still have missing data where the householder did not respond to one or more of the questions. When there was no response an imputation was made to complete the information. Typically, in the Census self-response questionnaires are more complete than interviewer-response questionnaires. This was true in the 2000 Census. Average Population Allocation Rates by Collection Mode San Francisco Tulare ACS Census ACS Census Total Item Allocation Rate 7.5 12.3 7.1 13.2 Self-response Item Allocation Rate 8.8 10.3 9.8 12.0 Interviewer-Response Item Allocation Rate 6.0 17.6 4.9 15.7 The Census had higher allocation rates in both counties in every mode. When ACS interviewers collected the information from the household the allocation rates were significantly lower than those for census interviewers. The ACS interviewers got such complete responses that the allocation rates for their questionnaires were substantially lower than the allocation rates on the self-response questionnaires. Some data are more easily obtained than others. There is great variation in the allocation rates by item. Some population items, like gender, had very low allocation rates. Items such as income or grandparents status as caregiver often had allocation rates above 20. Self-response item allocation rates for the ACS and census were very similar in both of the California sites. The upper range of the interviewer-response allocation rates was notably higher in the census compared to the ACS. Range of Item Allocation Rates by Collection Mode San Francisco Tulare ACS Census ACS Census Total Item Allocation Rate 0.7 - 23.8 1.6 - 28.1 0.4 - 23.3 1.8 - 32.2 Self-response Item Allocation Rate 1.0 - 24.7 1.8 - 23.5 0.6 - 24.6 1.6 - 28.7 Interviewer-Response Item Allocation Rate 0.3 - 28.1 1.1 - 39.7 0.3 - 24.7 0.7 - 39.4
10
The pattern of item allocation rates was similar for both the ACS and the census in both California ACS sites. Items difficult to collect were still difficult to collect. The interviewer-response item allocation rate for every population item in the data set, except grandparent's status as caregiver, was lower in the ACS than the census in both counties. The differences in this variable were ultimately due to a universe/edit inconsistency when corrected showed a lower allocation rate in the ACS. The response rates were substantially improved for some of the most difficult items like income. The variables below and in the following tables of population and housing item nonresponse rates are in alphabetical order of the Census Bureau's acronym for the item. Blue arrows indicate the items educational attainment and language spoken at home that will be discussed further. They were selected based on the author's interest.
The tables below show total item population and housing allocation rates and differ from the interviewerresponse item allocation rates discussed previously. The further discussion of educational attainment and language spoken at home allocation rates is based on total, rather than interviewer-response rates. Interviewer-response rates were not available at the tract level.
11
Comparison of Allocation Rates (Item Nonresponse) for Population Items
Total Item Nonresponse San Francisco County Tulare County Census ACS Allocation Census ACS Allocation Allocation Rates Rates Allocation Rates Rates 11.7 9.0 9.5 12.9 4.1 8.6 13.1 3.0 10.4 18.1 12.8 8.0 12.8 15.4 5.8 10.3 21.9 21.1 18.7 18.8 19.2 11.1 19.6 19.4 28.1 18.7 16.5 10.9 12.8 15.7 9.2 7.7 10.2 10.3 10.1 12.3 9.5 12.4 4.4 16.2 10.9 10.9 11.2 10.7 5.1 3.8 18.3 8.6 1.6 5.8 6.4 18.6 20.4 14.1 5.0 4.3 4.4 5.2 2.5 4.1 6.0 1.6 4.6 8.1 8.7 4.9 5.8 7.3 3.5 5.5 16.3 12.5 9.6 9.5 9.8 6.2 10.3 9.3 22.3 15.1 9.5 5.6 6.2 10.6 4.6 4.0 12.8 12.8 12.0 13.5 4.6 7.2 2.2 9.4 5.5 5.4 5.6 5.0 2.5 1.8 23.8 4.5 0.7 3.4 3.7 8.8 9.3 6.8 10.8 9.2 9.6 12.3 3.6 8.8 13.0 1.8 10.5 21.6 15.0 8.2 14.4 11.9 6.4 10.8 20.3 22.3 20.3 21.0 20.9 12.2 21.6 21.3 32.2 21.5 19.1 9.7 14.6 18.2 9.3 8.5 10.3 10.7 10.5 12.1 9.9 11.9 4.1 19.1 10.9 12.2 13.1 12.0 9.6 3.9 17.4 8.8 1.8 4.3 6.4 21.5 24.9 18.9 4.0 3.3 3.4 4.2 2.1 2.9 5.0 0.5 3.6 6.8 11.7 3.0 4.9 5.5 3.5 4.8 15.0 9.1 8.4 8.5 8.7 5.4 9.4 8.0 23.3 15.9 7.7 3.9 5.1 17.5 3.7 3.0 12.0 12.5 11.2 13.6 3.7 6.3 1.4 7.9 4.1 5.1 5.8 4.7 4.5 2.1 21.9 3.7 0.4 2.4 3.2 9.1 9.8 13.3
Total Allocations in Census 2000 and the Averaged 1999-2001 American Community Survey Population Items Difficulty going out Mental difficulty Self-care difficulty Difficulty working at a job Age School enrollment Carpool size Citizenship Transportation to work Class of worker Commuting time English ability Employment status recode Grade attending Grandchildren living in home Educational attainment Months responsible for grandchildren Interest, dividend, etc. income Other income Public assistance Retirement income Self-employment income Social security/railroad retirement Supplemental security income Some income allocated Wages & salary income Industry Language spoken When last worked Time of departure Physical difficulty Mobility status Migration – county Migration – place Migration – state Periods of military service Served in armed forces Years of active duty Marital status Occupation Place of birth Place of work - county Place of work – place Place of work – state Race Relationship Responsible for grandchildren Vision or hearing difficulty Sex Hispanic Non-English language Hours worked each week Weeks worked last year Year of entry
12
Comparison of Allocation Rates (Item Nonresponse) for Housing Items
Total Item Nonresponse San Francisco County Tulare County Census ACS Allocation Census ACS Allocation Allocation Rates Rates Allocation Rates Rates 36.1 11.5 22.3 11.4 12.7 3.6 7.1 3.6 7.1 15.8 20.9 9.2 18.6 10.7 7.1 25.9 15.5 42.5 7.0 23.0 6.0 25.7 17.2 16.8 7.3 21.8 29.0 4.2 3.8 90.4 4.8 2.2 1.1 13.0 23.3 16.7 13.1 16.2 6.3 32.8 28.4 10.0 6.5 9.2 3.4 77.9 0.8 6.3 0.8 5.8 6.4 9.3 2.9 5.7 1.3 3.7 9.1 5.0 33.6 2.3 12.3 1.2 10.6 9.9 5.4 3.4 9.0 26.9 0.8 1.0 66.3 1.5 3.1 2.7 11.6 10.9 6.3 14.1 18.1 3.2 23.0 20.2 21.9 19.8 31.7 9.9 5.2 4.3 11.0 4.4 10.8 18.4 19.6 10.7 13.3 10.3 9.9 39.7 16.3 53.0 7.8 21.3 8.2 30.2 18.9 18.5 8.7 30.7 25.6 5.7 5.5 63.4 5.8 2.6 0.1 14.6 25.7 19.8 15.3 36.3 7.9 42.3 38.7 8.7 6.5 30.5 2.3 95.5 0.8 13.4 0.8 13.6 8.2 9.2 2.1 3.4 4.5 3.3 13.5 3.5 50.0 2.1 11.3 1.2 12.8 10.7 6.2 2.4 32.7 24.0 0.8 1.0 50.4 1.1 1.4 4.2 11.7 39.7 7.2 16.5 44.3 3.1 34.5 30.3
Total Allocations in Census 2000 and the Averaged 1999-2001 American Community Survey Housing Items Agricultural sales Bedrooms Bedrooms - Vacant Business on property Business on property - Vacant Complete kitchen Complete kitchen - Vacant Complete plumbing Complete plumbing - Vacant Electricity cost Gas cost Heating fuel Lot size Lot size - Vacant Meals in rent Meals in rent - Vacant Monthly rent Monthly rent - Vacant Mortgage Mortgage payment Number of vehicles Other fuel cost Payment includes insurance Payment includes property taxes Rooms Rooms - Vacant Second mortgage payment Telephone Tenure Total cost on mobile home Units in structure Units in structure - Vacant Vacancy Status - Vacant Value Value - Vacant Water and sewer cost Year built Year built - Vacant Year moved in Yearly property insurance Yearly real estate taxes
13
The measurement of educational attainment and language spoken at home in the Census and ACS showed significant differences in some of the response categories in each of the California counties. In San Francisco and Tulare counties, there were significant differences in several of the educational attainment categories between the Census and the ACS. The census portrayed lower proportions of persons as high school graduates or as holder's of a bachelor's degree. The total allocation rates for education attainment may cause some of the differences. Allocation rates in the ACS were around 5 percent while the rates in the Census exceed 10 percent.
San Francisco County Educational Attainment Allocation Rates
Tulare County Educational Attainment Allocation Rates
14
The same pattern holds in the allocation rates for language spoken at home. In San Francisco the Census allocation rate of 10.8 was reduced to 5.6 in the ACS and in Tulare County the Census rate of 9.7 was reduced to 3.9.
San Francisco County Language Spoken Allocation Rates
Tulare County Language Spoken Allocation Rates
15
Strategies for Analyzing and Using ACS Data
The data available to make your own assessment of the comparability, quality usefulness, and potential benefits of the American Community Survey is initially overwhelming. The data, quality measures, and geography make analysis a challenge. Statistical measures like the differences, standard errors, z-scores and p-values can help to quickly look for significant differences but some statistically significant differences may not be meaningful differences in the world of the data user. In general the ACS appears to be measuring the same things in much the same ways as the census and getting similar results. There is still much to learn about data comparability, reasons for differences and whether "different" is better, worse or just different. There are differences between the Census and the ACS, some statistically significant differences. These may ultimately be welcome differences if the ACS data are consistent, more current and of higher quality than data from the decennial census long-form sample. A few suggestions as you proceed to use the ACS data: As you do your own analysis, don't try to analyze all the data all at once even if you use all the items or must supply them to others. Concentrate on the data items that you already use in your work or frequently. Compare those items with the census data. Don't assume the census picture is more accurate. Check the quality measures. Compare ACS and census data to administrative records that you may have available. Consider whether the data make sense. Learn to use and provide standard errors supplied with ACS data. Communicate your findings with the Census Bureau and others evaluating the ACS data. This will improve the survey as it matures.
Prospects and Predicaments
The American Community Survey has been designed to collect and provide more complete and more current demographic, social, economic and housing information between censuses and to replace the Census 2010 long-form. The success of this endeavor depends upon continuous and adequate funding, sufficient sample sizes, and a current and accurate Master Address File. Shortfalls in any of these areas could reduce data quality. The decennial Census is subject to the same perils. The ACS faces additional challenges as it continues to evolve and improve: Including the population residing in facilities like prisons and dormitories (group quarters). Improving the Census Bureau's population estimates that are used as the population controls for the ACS. Assisting data users to use series of averaged data and data for small jurisdictions and seasonal areas. The American Community Survey, in its infancy, can be modified and improved. It is critical that those who use Census data evaluate the ACS survey data and communicate any major issues to the Census Bureau. The result will be more timely, more accurate data for all communities.
16
Blue arrows denote statistically significant differences in the Census 2000 and Averaged ACS data.
Tulare County - Gender
60
50
40
30
20
10
0 Male Female
ACS99
ACS00
Census 2000
ACS Ave.
ACS01
Tulare County - Age Groups
16
14
12
10
8
6
4
2
0 Under 5 5 to 9 10 to 14 15 to 19 20 to 24 25 to 34 35 to 44 45 to 54 55 to 59 60 to 64 65 to 74 75 to 84
ACS00
85 +
ACS99
Census 2000
ACS Ave.
ACS01
Tulare County - Race Groups
90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 White Black AIAN Asian NHOPI Other
ACS99
ACS00
Census
ACS Ave.
ACS01
Tulare County - Household Relationship Estimates
40
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0 Householder Spouse Child Other relatives Nonrelatives
ACS99
ACS00
Census
ACS Ave.
ACS01
Tulare County - Household Type
90
ACS99
80
ACS00
Census
ACS Ave.
ACS01
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0 Families With Children Married Couples With Children Female Householder With Children Nonfamily Living Alone
Tulare County - Occupany Status
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0 Occupied Vacant
ACS99
ACS00
Census
ACS Ave.
ACS01
Tulare County - Owner/Renter Occupancy
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0 Owner Renter
Series1
Series2
Series3
Series4
Series5
Tulare County - Average Household Size of Owner and Renter-Occupied Housing Units
4.0
3.5
3.0
2.5
2.0
1.5
1.0
0.5
0.0 Owner Renter
ACS99
ACS00
Census
ACS Ave.
ACS01
Tulare County - School Enrollment
60
50
40
30
20
10
0 Nursery, preschool Kindergarten Grades 1-8 Grades 9-12 College, graduate school
ACS99
ACS00
Census
ACS Ave.
ACS01
Tulare County - Educational Attainment
30
25
20
15
10
5
0 LT 9th grade 9-12th, no diploma HS graduate Some college, no Associate degree degree Bachelor's degree Graduate, professional degree
ACS99
ACS00
Census
ACS Ave.
ACS01
Tulare County - Civilian Population and Civilian Veterans
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0 Civilian population 18 years and over Civilian veterans
ACS99
ACS00
Census 2000
ACS Ave.
ACS01
Tulare County - Disability
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0 Aged 5-20 Aged 21-64 Aged 65+ % Employed - Disability % Employed - No Disability
ACS99
ACS00
Census 2000
ACS Ave.
ACS01
Tulare County - Nativity
90 80 70 60 50 40 30 22.87482388 21.68128254 21.60616609 21.48367675 21.15730102 20 10 0 Native Foreign-born 78.84269898 78.51632325 78.39383391 78.31871746 77.12517612
ACS99
ACS00
Census 2000
ACS Ave.
ACS01
Tulare County - Language
60
50
40
30
20
10
0 English only Language other than English Spanish Other Indo-European languages Asian and Pacific Islander languages
ACS99
ACS00
Census 2000
ACS Ave.
ACS01
Tulare County - Persons Who Speak English Less Than Very Well By Primary Language
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0 Non-English Spanish Other Indo-European languages Asian and Pacific Islander languages
ACS99
ACS00
Census 2000
ACS Ave.
ACS01
10
0 Arab Czech Danish
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ACS99
Dutch English
ACS00
French Fr. Canadian
Tulare County - Ancestry Group 1
Census ACS Ave. ACS01
German
Greek
Hungarian
Irish
Italian
Lithuanian
Norwegian
Tulare County - Ancestry Group 2
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
Po lis h Po r s ue tu g e s Ru s ia n Sc o -I t ch h ris S tt co is h S lo va k Su b. ric Af an S d we is h Sw is s U i kra n ia n US A We ls h We s ia n In d t
ACS99
ACS00
Census
ACS Ave.
ACS01
Tulare County - Employment Status
100
?
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0 Not in labor force In labor force Civilian labor force Employed Unemployed
ACS99
ACS00
Census
ACS Ave.
ACS01
Tulare County - Transportation to Work
90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 Drove Alone Carpooled Public Trans. Walked Other means Worked at home Mean travel time
ACS99
ACS00
Census
ACS Ave.
ACS01
Tulare County - Occupation
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
Management, professional
Service
Sales, office
Farming, fishing, forestry
Construction, extraction, maintenance ACS01
Production, transportation, material moving
ACS99
ACS00
Census
ACS Ave.
A
10 15 20 25 0 5
ACS99 ACS00 Census
Pr of Fi na nc e
gr ic ul tu re C on st ru ct io M n an uf ac tu rin W ho g le sa le tr ad e R et ai lt ra Tr de an sp or ta tio n In fo rm at io n
Tulare County - Industry
ACS Ave. ACS01
es si on al Ed uc A at rt io s, na en l te rt ai nm en O t th er Pu se bl rv ic ic es ad m in is tr at io n
Tulare County - Class of Worker
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
Private wage, salary ACS99
Government ACS00 Census
Self-employed ACS Ave.
Unpaid family workers ACS01
Tulare County - Percent of Households in Household Income Category
25
20
15
10
5
0 LT $10,000 $10-14,999 $15-24,999 $25-34,999 $35-49,999 $50-74,999 $75-99,999 $100149,999 $150199,999 $200,000+
ACS99
ACS00
Census 2000
ACS Ave.
ACS01
Tulare County - Housing Units
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0 1-unit, detached 1-unit, attached 2 units 3 or 4 units 5 to 9 units 10 to 19 units 20 or more units Mobile home Boat, RV, van, etc.
ACS99
ACS00
Census 2000
ACS Ave.
ACS01
Tulare County - Year Structure Built
25
20
15
10
5
0 1999 or later 1995 to 1998 1990 to 1994 1980 to 1989 1970 to 1979 1960 to 1969 1940 to 1959 1939 or earlier
ACS99
ACS00
Census 2000
ACS Ave.
ACS01
Tulare County - Number of Rooms
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9+
ACS99
ACS00
Census 2000
ACS Ave.
ACS01
Tulare County - Year Householder Moved into Unit
60
50
40
30
20
10
0 1995 or later 1990 to 1994 1980 to 1989 1970 to 1979 1969 or earlier
ACS99
ACS00
Census 2000
ACS Ave.
ACS01
Tulare County - Vehicles Available
45 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 0 1 2 3+
ACS99
ACS00
Census 2000
ACS Ave.
ACS01
Tulare County - House Heating Fuel
80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 Utility gas Bottled, tank, or LP gas Electricity Fuel oil, kerosene, etc. Coal or coke Wood Solar energy Other fuel No fuel used
ACS99
ACS00
Census 2000
ACS Ave.
ACS01
Tulare County - Occupied Units Lacking Complete Facilities or Telephone Service
6
5
4
3
2
1
0 Plumbing Kitchen Telephone
ACS99
ACS00
Census 2000
ACS Ave.
ACS01
Tulare County - Occupants per Room
100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 1.00 or less 1.01 to 1.50 1.51 or more
ACS99
ACS00
Census 2000
ACS Ave.
ACS01
Tulare County - Value of Owner-occupied Units
60
50
40
30
20
10
0 LT $50,000 $50-99,999 $100-149,999 $150-199,999 $200-299,999 $300-499,999 $500-999,999 $1,000,000+
ACS99
ACS00
Census 2000
ACS Ave.
ACS01
Tulare County - Mortgage Status of Owner-occupied Housing Units
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0 With a mortgage Without a mortgage
ACS99
ACS00
Census 2000
ACS Ave.
ACS01
Tulare County - Monthly Owner Costs of Units with a Mortgage
40
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0 Less than $300 $300-499 $500-699 $700-999 $1,000-1,499 $1,500-1,999 $2,000+
ACS99
ACS00
Census 2000
ACS Ave.
ACS01
Tulare County - Monthly Owner Costs as a Percent of Household Income
50 45 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 LT 20% 20-24.9% 25-29.9% 30-34.9% 35+%
ACS99
ACS00
Census 2000
ACS Ave.
ACS01
Tulare County - Gross Rent
40
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0 LT $200 $200-299 $300-499 $500-749 $750-999 $1,000-1,499 $1,500+ No cash rent
ACS99
ACS00
Census 2000
ACS Ave.
ACS01
Tulare County - Gross Rent as a Percentage of Household Income
45 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 LT 15% 15-19.9% 20-24.9% 25-29.9% 30-34.9% 35+%
ACS99
ACS00
Census 2000
ACS Ave.
ACS01
San Francisco County - Gender
60
50
40
30
20
10
0 Male Female
ACS99
ACS00
Census 2000
ACS Ave.
ACS01
San Francisco County - Age Groups
25
20
15
10
5
0 Under 5 5 to 9 ACS99 10 to 14 15 to 19 20 to 24 25 to 34 35 to 44 45 to 54 55 to 59 60 to 64 65 to 74 75 to 84 ACS00 Census 2000 ACS Ave. ACS01 85 +
San Francisco County - Race Groups
60
50
40
30
20
10
0 White ACS99 Black ACS00 AIAN Census Asian ACS Ave. NHOPI Other ACS01
San Francisco County - Household Relationship Estimates
50
45
40
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0 Householder ACS99 Spouse ACS00 Child Census Other relatives ACS Ave. Nonrelatives ACS01
San Francisco County - Household Type
200,000
ACS99
180,000 160,000 140,000 120,000 100,000 80,000 60,000 40,000 20,000 0 Families With Children Married Couples
ACS00
Census 2000
ACS Ave
ACS01
With Children
Female Householder
With Children
Nonfamily
Living Alone
San Francisco County - Occupany Status
400,000
350,000
300,000
250,000
200,000
150,000
100,000
50,000
0 Total housing units ACS99 ACS00 Occupied housing units Census 2000 ACS Ave Vacant housing units ACS01
San Francisco County - Owner/Renter Occupancy
350,000
300,000
250,000
200,000
150,000
100,000
50,000
0 Occupied housing units ACS99 ACS00 Owner-occupied Census 2000 ACS Ave Renter-occupied ACS01
San Francisco County - School Enrollment
90,000
80,000
70,000
60,000
50,000
40,000
30,000
20,000
10,000
0 Nursery, preschool ACS99 Kindergarten ACS00 Grades 1-8 Census Grades 9-12 ACS Ave. College, graduate school ACS01
San Francisco County - Educational Attainment
200,000 180,000 160,000 140,000 120,000 100,000 80,000 60,000 40,000 20,000 0 LT 9th grade 9-12th, no diploma ACS99 HS graduate Some college, no degree Census Associate degree ACS Ave. Bachelor's degree ACS01 Graduate, professional degree
ACS00
San Francisco County - Grandparents (no significant differences)
25,000
20,000
15,000
10,000
5,000
0 under 18 years in households ACS99 ACS00 Census 2000 Responsible for grandchildren ACS Ave ACS01
San Francisco County - NO Significant Differences in Class of Worker
400,000
350,000
300,000
250,000
200,000
150,000
100,000
50,000
0 Private wage, salary ACS99 ACS00 Government Census 2000 ACS Ave ACS01 Self-employed
San Francisco County - Virtually NO Significant Differences in Income
70,000
60,000
50,000
40,000
30,000
20,000
10,000
0 LT $10,000 $10-14,999 $15,-24,999 $25-34,999 $35-49,999 $50-74,999 $75-99,999 $100149,999 ACS01 $150199,999 $200,000+
ACS99
ACS00
Census 2000
ACS Ave