aisa 2013 deweaverpm

To understand aCommunity - know itsnumbers

Presentation to American Indian Studies Association Annual Conference, Panel on Census and ACS Data Analysis 2013

Changes in Census

Self identificationfrom

Enumerator identification

1960 – 1980

1940 1950 1960 1970 19800

200,000

400,000

600,000

800,000

1,000,000

1,200,000

1,400,000

1,600,000

Total Indian, Eskimo, Aleut Population

Self identificationGenealogy

(Who are your grandparents?)

Tribal enrollmentPolitical Status

(Are you on the tribal rolls?)

Another Change

Special ReservationQuestionnaire

1980

1980 American Indian Supplementary Questionnaire:

Used on all reservations and in “historic areas” of Oklahoma

for all households where at least one person identified as American Indian

to obtain information to be used by tribal governments and federal agencies

In 2000Another Change

Multiple ResponsesPermitted

to the Race Question

In 1990 the Censusquestionnaire asked:

“Fill ONE circle for the racethat the person considers

himself/herself to be”

In 2000 the racequestion read:

The result:

1990 2000 20100

1,000,000

2,000,000

3,000,000

4,000,000

5,000,000

6,000,000

1,959,2342,475,956

2,932,248

1,643,345

2,288,331

Growth in AI/AN Population

AI-AN Alone AI-AN Multi-Racial

Are there population characteristic

differencesbetween the

AI/AN “alone” and theAI/AN “in combination”

(multi-racial) populations?

Who Lived Where in 2010?

18.5%

9.3%

2.2%

70.0%

Residence of AI/AN Alone in 2010

Fed Res OTSAsANVs Other

1.3% 5.4%0.5%

92.8%

Residence of AI/AN "in Comb" in 2010

Fed Res OTSAsANVs Other

AI/AN A

lone -

Fed Res/T

L

AI/AN A

lone -

National

AI/AN M

R - Natio

nal

Total P

op - Natio

nal

18.8%

13.9%13.0%

7.9%

Official Unemployment Rate

AI/AN Alone - Fed Res/TL

AI/AN Alone - National AI/AN MR - National Total Pop - National

36.8%

26.4%

19.7%

13.8%

Poverty Rate

2010 ACS

American Community Survey

Population Characteristics

1940 to 2000 – “Long Form” used to sample for socio-economic characteristics

2010 – No Long Form; only ACS

ACS is Different• Continuous survey

• Annual results, but aggregated over 5 years for smaller communities

• Smaller sample, with greater sampling error, particularly for small areas and small populations

Is the ACS Counting the Entire AI/AN Population?

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 20112,250,000

2,350,000

2,450,000

2,550,000

2,650,000

2,750,000

2,850,000

2,950,000

AI/AN Alone Population

2010 Census ACS Estimates

AI/A

N A

lon

e P

op

ula

tio

n

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011600000

625000

650000

675000

700000

725000

750000

775000

800000

825000

850000

875000

900000

AI/AN Alone Youth Population

2010 Census ACS Estimates

AI/A

N A

lon

e Y

ou

th P

op

ula

tio

n

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 20111500000

1600000

1700000

1800000

1900000

2000000

2100000

2200000

2300000

2400000

2500000

2600000

2700000AI/AN Multi-Racial Population

2010 Census ACS Estimates

AI/A

N M

ult

i-R

ac

ial P

op

ula

tio

n

Who’s Missing?

Overall, the reservation counts in the ACS match the 2010 Census counts, but there appears to be an AI/AN ‘alone’ undercount on 30% of the larger reservations

Who’s Missing?

The AI/AN alone undercounts in the ACS appear to be the largest in the biggest metro area counties

If the ACS is about characteristics data, how

accurate is the data, particularly at the

reservation and county levels?

Analysis of:

• Sampling Error

• Non-Sampling Error

Summary Statistics for Sampling ErrorCV for Number of AI/AN Alone Unemployed 16 to 64

Reservations in US with AI/AN Alone Population 1,000 or More

CV RangeNumber of

ReservationsPercent of Reservations in

Universe

0% to 15% 14 17.1%15% to 30% 45 54.9%Over 30% 23 28.0%

Total Reservations 82 100.0%

Summary Statistics for Sampling ErrorCV for Number of AI/AN Alone Unemployed 16 to 64Counties in US with AI/AN Alone Population 1,000 or

Moreand AI/AN Alone Percent of Total Pop 10% or Less

CV RangeNumber of Counties

Percent of Counties in Universe

0% to 15% 21 5.8%15% to 30% 110 30.6%Over 30% 229 63.6%

Total Counties 360 100.0%

Summary Statistics for Sampling ErrorCV for Number of AI/AN Alone in Poverty

Reservations in US with AI/AN Alone Population 1,000 or More

CV RangeNumber of

ReservationsPercent of Reservations in

Universe

0% to 15% 31 37.8%15% to 30% 46 56.1%Over 30% 5 6.1%

Total Reservations 82 100.0%

Summary Statistics for Sampling ErrorCV for Number of AI/AN Alone Persons in Poverty

Counties with AI/AN Alone Population of 1,000 or Moreand AI/AN Alone Percent of Total Population of 10% or

Less

CV Range Number of CountiesPercent of Counties in

Universe

0% to 15% 44 12.2%15% to 30% 178 49.4%Over 30% 138 38.3%

Selected Counties 360 100.0%

Non-sampling error: the case of the Navajo Reservation

Is the AI/AN alone unemployment rateon Navajo

• 52%• 26%• 19%

ACS: Use with Caution

For tribal planning

For federal programfund allocation

Innovation

Tribal and Urban IndianCollaboration with Universities

on Data Issues

Recent Decades

WINDSShoshone and Arapaho Tribes

University of Wyoming

Nez PerceNez Perce Tribe

Washington State University

Los AngelesUrban Indian Community

UCLA

To understand acommunity, know itsnumbers

and how to interpret them