Prepared by the North Dakota Kids Count Sept Using the American Community Survey for Children’s Research Dr. Richard Rathge Policy Analyst North Dakota Kids Count Kids Count Annual Meeting Baltimore, Md Sept. 24, 2010

Presentation Objectives: 1. Highlight some key challenges of using ACS for children’s research 2. Illustrate the need for a conceptual shift in the way we approach children’s research when using ACS data 3. Initiate dialogue of implications for research and policy 2 Prepared by the North Dakota Kids Count Sept. 2010

Key Challenges for children’s research  Effects of longer period estimates  Consequences of smaller sample size  Rule changes and their impact on trend analyses 3 Prepared by the North Dakota Kids Count Sept. 2010

Period Estimates … ACS vs. Census  Census (conceptually point in time April 1 st )  ACS accumulates 12 months (1-year estimate) 36 months (3-year estimate) 60 months (5-year estimate)  Think of shutter speed on camera 4 Prepared by the North Dakota Kids Count Sept. 2010

5

Nebraska ACS Data  Thanks to Jerry Deichert for data  Omaha city was an ACS test sites: Can examine 1, 3, 5-year data 6 Prepared by the North Dakota Kids Count Sept. 2010

7

8

9

10 Prepared by the North Dakota Kids Count Sept. 2010

11 Prepared by the North Dakota Kids Count Sept. 2010

Key Challenges for rural areas  Effects of longer period estimates  Consequences of smaller sample size  Rule changes and their impact on trend analyses 12 Prepared by the North Dakota Kids Count Sept. 2010

ACS sample size is smaller than Census  One-year sample is 2.5 % of HHs vs 16.7% for Census long form Over five-year period, ACS sample size is 12.5 percent  Therefore ACS sampling error will be larger 13 Prepared by the North Dakota Kids Count Sept. 2010

Cass County, North Dakota (population 132,585) 14 Prepared by the North Dakota Kids Count Sept. 2010

People Moving to North Dakota Within the Past Year by State of Origin: 2006 ACS

Comparison of 1-year, 3-year, and 5-year Estimates of the Percentage of Persons in Poverty for Omaha, NE: ACS Single-year estimate Single-year MOE Three-year estimate Three-year MOE Five-year estimate Five-year MOE

Suppression Issues  ACS using suppression similar to the 1970 and 1980 decennial census  Applied to base tables in 1 and 3- year data  Use “data release rules” to protect user from tables “whose reliability is unacceptable”  Suppresses entire table not just unreliable cells 17 Prepared by the North Dakota Kids Count Sept. 2010

41 cells which will cause suppression for smaller counties 18 Prepared by the North Dakota Kids Count Sept. 2010

Key Challenges for rural areas  Effects of longer period estimates  Consequences of smaller sample size  Rule changes and their impact on trend analyses 19 Prepared by the North Dakota Kids Count Sept. 2010

ACS income not compatible with decennial census data  Decennial census asks income in previous calendar year  ACS asks income in previous 12 months Both are inflation adjusted However, Bureau test results show decennial income consistently lower than ACS (4.4% nationwide)  Bureau suggests users “exercise caution” 20 Prepared by the North Dakota Kids Count Sept. 2010

Residency rules very different  Decennial census- “usual place of residence “using 6+ month” rule.  ACS – current residence during the last 2-months. Attempting to better count seasonal residents 21 Prepared by the North Dakota Kids Count Sept. 2010

What lessons have we learned thus far?  Need to be more mindful of our data users  Rethink how we interpret and disseminate data to the public  Examine ways in which we can better educate ourselves and data user 22 Prepared by the North Dakota Kids Count Sept. 2010

ACS Presentation 2010  Dr. Richard Rathge, Policy Analyst North Dakota Kids Count, Fargo, ND NDSU, IACC 424, Fargo, ND Phone: (701) Fax: (701) URL: 23 Prepared by the North Dakota Kids Count Sept. 2010