Question

Status:Closed    Asked:Jul 18, 2014 - 05:57 PM

2000 PUMA list for LA county?

Hi IPUMS,


First, thanks for the wonderful resouce. I'm a first time ACS user and it's very helpful.


I'm having trouble with my population estimates and I think I might be using the wrong PUMA list. I'm working with 2008-2012 5 year ACS and, as a check, I'm trying to recreate the total population of Los Angeles County. Using the PUMA list from your ASCII file, I came up with 67 PUMAs that are "equivalent" to LA county. Yet, when I run my frequency using perwt I come up with 7,938,772 for the total. What I am doing wrong?


Thanks!


The PUMA list I'm using:


4500
4600
4700
4800
4900
5000
5100
5200
5300
5401
5402
5403
5404
5405
5406
5407
5408
5409
5410
5411
5412
5413
5414
5415
5416
5417
5418
5419
5420
5421
5422
5423
5424
5500
5600
5701
5702
5703
5800
5900
6000
6101
6102
6103
6104
6105
6106
6107
6108
6109
6110
6111
6112
6113
6114
6115
6116
6117
6118
6119
6120
6121
6122
6123
6124
6125
6126

 
Do you have the same question? Follow this Question
 

Staff Answer

avatar

Joe_Grover

Staff

The discrepancy in LA County's population that you are seeing in the 2008-2012 5-year ACS file is due to the fact that the 2012 multi-year ACS files actually correspond to two different sets of PUMA Codes and definitions (see the Multi-Year Note in the PUMA Description). So, the PUMAs you list are correct for identifying LA County, but only for respondents from MULTYEAR = 2008, 2009, 2010, and 2011. The PUMAs that identify LA County for respondents from MULTYEAR = 2012 are:

3701 3702 3703 3704 3705 3706 3707 3708 3709 3710 3711 3712 3713 3714 3715 3716 3717 3718 3719 3720 3721 3722 3723 3724 3725 3726 3727 3728 3729 3730 3731 3732 3733 3734 3735 3736 3737 3738 3739 3740 3741 3742 3743 3744 3745 3746 3747 3748 3749 3750 3751 3752 3753 3754 3755 3756 3757 3758 3759 3760 3761 3762 3763 3764 3765 3766 3767 3768 3769

For both sets of PUMAs, be sure to control for State (STATEFIP = 6 for California) as PUMAs depend on State.

I hope this helps.

 

Jul 21, 2014 - 11:43 AM

0
0
Report it

OTHER QUESTIONS NEEDING ANSWERS

Potential effects of sample size expansion in CPS: March 2000 to March 2001
In IHIS what does "not ascertained" mean for BIDIEV, PIPEV etc in 2000 and 20...
Why are not all the "not in the labour force" categories filled for the EMPST...
I am getting strange numbers for NIU persons in the sixties, especially 1962-...
Children living alone?
Login   |   Register

Recently Active Members

View More »

Share |