The goal of this paper was to examine whether the SEdf was an acceptable approximation for the SErw. At the state level, the SEdf is an acceptable approximation to the SErw for counts with roughly 80 percent of the SE estimates lying within the acceptable range with a relative difference of -0.4 to 0.4. At the PUMA level there is some evidence of over-estimation of the SEs, however about 60 percent of the the SEs estimates are acceptable. The SEdf over-estimates the SErw for means at both the state and PUMA level with less than one percent and three percent of the estimated SEs, respectively, falling in the acceptable range. However, while the CVs using the SEdf are larger than those using the SErw, both are relatively small. An over-estimate with a small CV is less catastrophic than if the CVs were larger. For medians, roughly 60 percent of both the state and PUMA level data are in the acceptable range. However, the SEdf both over- and under-estimates the SErw for medians. Under-estimates (especially large under-estimates) and large over-estimates make the SEdf an inadequate approximation to the SErw for medians. Using alternate DFs to correct for over- and under-estimation of the SEs shifts a small amount of the data into the acceptable range for all three statistics but fails to make a relevant impact. Thus, future research may explore new methods for producing DFs for the means and medians.