Introducing a new way to navigate by topics. Access the latest news, data, publications and more around topics of interest.
Our population statistics cover age, sex, race, Hispanic origin, migration, ancestry, language use, veterans, as well as population estimates and projections.
This section provides information on a range of educational topics, from educational attainment and school enrollment to school districts, costs and financing.
We measure the state of the nations workforce, including employment and unemployment levels, weeks and hours worked, occupations, and commuting.
Our statistics highlight trends in household and family composition, describe characteristics of the residents of housing units, and show how they are related.
Health statistics on insurance coverage, disability, fertility and other health issues are increasingly important in measuring the nation's overall well-being.
We measure the housing and construction industry, track homeownership rates, and produce statistics on the physical and financial characteristics of our homes.
The U.S. Census Bureau is the official source for U.S. export and import statistics and regulations governing the reporting of exports from the U.S.
The U.S. Census Bureau provides data for the Federal, state and local governments as well as voting, redistricting, apportionment and congressional affairs.
Search an alphabetical index of keywords and phrases to access Census Bureau statistics, publications, products, services, data, and data tools.
Geography provides the framework for Census Bureau survey design, sample selection, data collection, tabulation, and dissemination.
Geography is central to the work of the Bureau, providing the framework for survey design, sample selection, data collection, tabulation, and dissemination.
Find resources on how to use geographic data and products with statistical data, educational blog postings, and presentations.
The Geographic Support System Initiative will integrate improved address coverage, spatial feature updates, and enhanced quality assessment and measurement.
Work with interactive mapping tools from across the Census Bureau.
Find geographic data and products such as Shapefiles, KMLs, TIGERweb, boundary files, geographic relationship files, and reference and thematic maps.
Metropolitan and micropolitan areas are geographic entities used by Federal statistical agencies in collecting, tabulating, and publishing Federal statistics.
Find information about specific partnership programs and learn more about our partnerships with other organizations.
Definitions of geographic terms, why geographic areas are defined, and how the Census Bureau defines geographic areas.
We conduct research on geographic topics such as how to define geographic areas and how geography changes over time.
Visit our library of Census Bureau multimedia files. Collection formats include audio, video, mobile apps, images, and publications.
Collection of audio features and sound bites.
The Census Bureau packages data and information into easy-to-understand visuals.
Browse Census Bureau images.
Read briefs and reports from Census Bureau experts.
Watch Census Bureau vignettes, testimonials, and video files.
Read research analyses from Census Bureau experts.
Access data through products and tools including data visualizations, mobile apps, interactive web apps and other software.
Developer portal to access services and documentation for the Census Bureau's APIs.
Explore Census Bureau data on your mobile device with interactive tools.
Find a multitude of DVDs, CDs and publications in print by topic.
These external sites provide more data.
Download extraction tools to help you get the in-depth data you need.
Learn more about our data from this collection of e-tutorials, presentations, webinars and other training materials. Sign up for training sessions.
Explore Census data with interactive visualizations covering a broad range of topics.
Learn how we serve the public as the most reliable source of data about the nation's people and economy.
How we provide the best mix of timeliness, relevancy, quality, and cost for the data we collect.
Our researchers explore innovative ways to conduct surveys, increase respondent participation, reduce costs, and improve accuracy.
Our surveys provide periodic and comprehensive statistics about the nation, critical for government programs, policies, and decisionmaking.
Learn about other opportunities to collaborate with us.
Explore the rich historical background of an organization with roots almost as old as the nation.
Explore prospective positions available at the Census Bureau.
Explore Census programs targeted for particular needs.
Discover the latest in Census Bureau data releases, reports, and events.
The Census Bureau's Director writes on how we measure America's people, places and economy.
Find interesting and quirky statistics regarding national celebrations and major events.
Listen to audio files on fun facts, historical figures, and celebrations of the month.
Find media toolkits, advisories, and all the latest Census news.
See what's coming up in releases and reports.
There are two changes with the Current Population Survey (CPS) that affect both the state and county poverty estimates. (1) All CPS data used in the 2000 estimates had weights controlled to demographic population estimates that were "2000-based," i.e., that used Census 2000 results as the base population from which updated population estimates were constructed. Although the CPS weights were from Census 2000, the initial sample design was developed from the 1990 census. (2) The 2001 and 2002 CPS Annual Social and Economic Supplements (ASEC) significantly expanded the sample of the previous CPS March supplement by also interviewing part of the sample in February and April, yielding direct CPS estimates with more precision (lower variance) than would have been obtained from the traditional March supplement sample. We use the estimates based on the expanded sample for income years 2000 and 2001 (from the 2001 and 2002 CPS ASECs, respectively) whenever ASEC estimates for these years are used in the estimation procedures. Further information on the sample expansion can be found on the CPS website.
State Model Changes
The most important change to the state models for 2000 was the use of estimates from the expanded ASEC sample. The expanded sample yielded direct estimates with lower variances than would otherwise have been obtained, which resulted in model-based estimates for 2000 with lower variances as well.
The use of the ASEC data from the expanded sample also necessitated a re-examination of the sampling error models used to smooth the direct estimates of the ASEC sampling error variances. We had available ASEC estimates and corresponding direct variance estimates for income years (IYs) 2000 and 2001. In previous years, sampling error models for the ASEC variance estimates included state random effects that allowed for systematic state-to-state variations from the fitted generalized variance functions (GVFs). These models, however, were fitted to at least three successive years of ASEC direct estimates of sampling variances and covariances. With the switch to using the expanded sample we felt we needed to refit the sampling error models using only the variances and covariances estimated from the expanded sample, which limited us to two years of this data. We were concerned about trying to estimate the state random effects using only two years of data, and so dropped the state random effects from the sampling error model and used the fitted GVFs without modifications for estimated state random effects. (For further discussion of the sampling error models see "Sampling Error Modeling of Poverty and Income Statistics for States," (Otto and Bell 1995) on the Published Papers section of this web site.)
As was the case for last year's estimates for IY 1999, in the IY 2000 models for age group poverty ratios and median income we used the corresponding Census 2000 estimates for IY 1999 as regression predictor variables. While this aspect of the models thus remained unchanged from last year, it was a departure from what we had planned. Our plan was to let "Census 2000 residuals" replace the Census 2000 estimates as regression predictors in this year's models, analogous to what we had done with 1990 census data in most models before the Census 2000 estimates became available. However, statistical comparisons of the models for IY 2000 favored the use of Census 2000 estimates rather than Census 2000 residuals, and so the Census 2000 estimates have been used in this year's models. We plan to continue to make such model comparisons in the future and will switch to use of Census 2000 residuals when this becomes the favored choice, something that becomes more and more likely the further we move beyond the census IY.
In last year's models for IY 1999, we used informative prior distributions with mean zero for the regression coefficients in the poverty ratio models. (See 1999 State-Level Estimation Details.) This was done because of the special situation that applied in the census year, namely, that Census 2000 and the 2000 ASEC were both estimating poverty for the same year (1999). In this situation, the administrative records regression variables were expected to be less relevant in the models, and empirical comparisons confirmed this (for the poverty ratio models, though not for median income.) The prior distributions were used to "shrink" the corresponding regression coefficient estimates towards zero, and to reduce the uncertainty about these regression coefficients in the model. This year the situation is different. For IY 2000 the administrative records regression variables provide updated information relative to the Census 2000 estimates, so such prior distributions were not felt to be appropriate and were therefore not used.
County Model Changes
The use of CPS ASEC direct estimates of poverty and median household income had a minimal effect in county model-based estimates. Although the sample size for national and state estimates increased significantly, the sample increase in most counties was generally small. Consequently, sample size for all but a handful of counties remained quite small. We observed no meaningful global effect on the SAIPE county estimates. We did observe a greater number of counties in sample and a slight increase in the direct estimate's contribution to the final SAIPE estimate.