of unmarried partners and their relatives reduces the
CSA Qualifications and Titling
number in poverty compared to the CPS family defi-
The current standards link metropolitan and/or mic-
nition.) The consistency of many survey results was
ropolitan areas to combined statistical areas if they
impressive, and an interesting finding was that results
have an employment interchange of 25% or more.
based on only a few income questions were not that
(The measure is the sum of the percent commuting
different from those based on many questions (inter-
from the smaller to the larger area, plus the percent
esting given expectations that multiple questions were
of employment in the smaller area accounted for by
important for accuracy). Also interesting was the
workers residing in the larger area.) The combina-
finding that allocation rates were higher in months
tions are automatic for interchanges of 25% or more,
near tax-filing deadlines—months when one might
but areas with an interchange from 15% to 25%
expect respondents would find it easier to report their
can be combined if that is the preference of local
income. ACS allocation rates were notably low, per-
opinion. The current proposal is to eliminate the
haps because of its status as a mandatory survey. The
use of local opinion, as it disrupts comparability and
study also noted that a large percent of incomes are
introduces ambiguity into the process. Instead, areas
divisible by $5,000, suggesting that many respondents
would be automatically combined if they meet the
are rounding when they report.
15% exchange threshold. Also, local opinion would
Czajka concluded by noting that the study was
no longer be considered in the titling of areas.
not intended to provide recommendations. However,
it provides groundbreaking work they hope will
Scope of Updates
serve as the basis for recommendations for survey
For some purposes, yearly (or more frequent)
improvements. The full study is available at www.
updates to metropolitan and micropolitan areas
mathematica-mpr.com, and Czajka’s presentation is
would be helpful, but for many purposes, stabil-
available at
www.copafs.org/IncomeComparisons.pdf.
ity is appreciated. The question arises now because
Defining Metropolitan and
the American Community Survey will be providing
updated commuting data every year, making the
Micropolitan Statistical Areas
annual redefinition—or re-delineation—of areas a
Fitzsimmons recalled the exhaustive effort that went
possibility that needs to be considered. Balancing the
into revamping the standards in advance of the
interests in stability and frequent updates, the com-
2000 census and noted that, this time, the work of
mittee proposes to conduct yearly updates only on
the Metropolitan and Micropolitan Area Standards
the identification of new metropolitan and micro-
Review Committee has been more focused.
politan statistical areas. The re-delineation of county
Comments are sought on just a few areas and we
components would be limited to once every five
are now mid-way through the comment period for
years (one update between each census).
the Federal Register notice on this topic.
Paul Mackun from the U.S. Census Bureau
Replacing ‘Definition’ with ‘Delineation’
reviewed the current standards and concepts, includ-
The committee is concerned that the term “definition”
ing metropolitan areas, micropolitan areas, metro-
is not intuitive for some users, so they propose substi-
politan divisions, combined statistical areas, and
tuting the term “delineation.” New data and standards
principle cities.
would be used to delineate, rather than define, metro-
Issues for review include the qualifications and
politan and micropolitan statistical areas.
titling of combined statistical areas, the scope of
OMB was seeking comments on these proposals,
metropolitan and micropolitan updates, and replac-
due in writing by April 13, 2009.
ing the term “definition” with “delineation.”
In the discussion that followed, some attendees
expressed concern that the 15% threshold for com-
bination seemed low, significantly lowering the bar
for automatic combination from 25% to 15%. The
Errata
U.S. Census Bureau presenters were not sure what
percent of “15% to 25%” areas had chosen (by local
In “AP Statistics: Students’ Choices After
opinion) to combine under the current standards.
High School,” which appeared in the May
Concern was expressed that the standards still do
issue, the survey question in Table 3 should
not provide guidelines for defining the widely used
have read “Did you take any statistics courses
“suburban” concept. The convention of defining
in college?” We apologize for any confusion
suburban as metro minus central city was noted,
this may have caused.
but the concept remains elusive and there are no
official guidelines. ■
16 AMSTAT NEWS JULY 2009
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84