CREAT: Census Research Exploration and Analysis Tool

Papers Containing Keywords(s): 'survey'

The following papers contain search terms that you selected. From the papers listed below, you can navigate to the PDF, the profile page for that working paper, or see all the working papers written by an author. You can also explore tags, keywords, and authors that occur frequently within these papers.
Click here to search again

Frequently Occurring Concepts within this Search

Current Population Survey - 77

American Community Survey - 69

Internal Revenue Service - 69

Social Security Administration - 58

Center for Economic Studies - 57

Census Bureau Disclosure Review Board - 52

Bureau of Labor Statistics - 51

Protected Identification Key - 50

National Science Foundation - 47

Survey of Income and Program Participation - 45

North American Industry Classification System - 42

Social Security Number - 42

Social Security - 41

Longitudinal Employer Household Dynamics - 37

Business Register - 35

Employer Identification Numbers - 34

Cornell University - 32

Disclosure Review Board - 31

Longitudinal Business Database - 29

Decennial Census - 29

Service Annual Survey - 29

Master Address File - 28

Standard Industrial Classification - 28

Person Validation System - 27

2010 Census - 27

Research Data Center - 27

Economic Census - 26

Federal Statistical Research Data Center - 24

Annual Survey of Manufactures - 22

Quarterly Census of Employment and Wages - 20

Personally Identifiable Information - 20

Census Bureau Business Register - 19

Department of Housing and Urban Development - 19

Alfred P Sloan Foundation - 19

Metropolitan Statistical Area - 18

Quarterly Workforce Indicators - 18

Ordinary Least Squares - 17

Unemployment Insurance - 17

Administrative Records - 17

Bureau of Economic Analysis - 17

Person Identification Validation System - 16

Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program - 16

Computer Assisted Personal Interview - 16

Cornell Institute for Social and Economic Research - 16

Office of Management and Budget - 15

Housing and Urban Development - 15

American Housing Survey - 15

Standard Statistical Establishment List - 13

University of Chicago - 13

Special Sworn Status - 13

Census of Manufactures - 12

Social and Economic Supplement - 12

National Longitudinal Survey of Youth - 12

MAFID - 12

County Business Patterns - 12

Chicago Census Research Data Center - 12

Medicaid Services - 12

Federal Reserve Bank - 12

National Bureau of Economic Research - 12

National Opinion Research Center - 11

Department of Labor - 11

National Center for Health Statistics - 11

W-2 - 11

Individual Taxpayer Identification Numbers - 11

SSA Numident - 11

Temporary Assistance for Needy Families - 11

National Institute on Aging - 11

Department of Health and Human Services - 11

Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality - 11

Longitudinal Research Database - 11

Health and Retirement Study - 10

Local Employment Dynamics - 10

Postal Service - 10

Business Dynamics Statistics - 10

PSID - 10

Computer Assisted Telephone Interviews and Computer Assisted Personal Interviews - 9

Annual Business Survey - 9

Individual Characteristics File - 9

Some Other Race - 9

LEHD Program - 9

Detailed Earnings Records - 9

ASEC - 9

Center for Administrative Records Research and Applications - 9

Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development - 9

Federal Tax Information - 9

Citizenship and Immigration Services - 8

CPS ASEC - 8

Financial, Insurance and Real Estate Industries - 8

Management and Organizational Practices Survey - 8

Census Numident - 8

Small Business Administration - 8

Earned Income Tax Credit - 8

Economic Research Service - 8

Disability Insurance - 8

CATI - 8

Core Based Statistical Area - 8

National Academy of Sciences - 8

Medical Expenditure Panel Survey - 8

Sloan Foundation - 8

1940 Census - 7

Census Edited File - 7

Employment History File - 7

Employer Characteristics File - 7

Accommodation and Food Services - 7

Department of Agriculture - 7

Centers for Medicare - 7

National Center for Science and Engineering Statistics - 7

Census Household Composition Key - 7

Indian Housing Information Center - 7

University of Michigan - 7

Indian Health Service - 7

Department of Defense - 7

Survey of Business Owners - 7

National Health Interview Survey - 7

Bureau of Labor - 7

American Economic Association - 7

Business Master File - 7

American Statistical Association - 7

Composite Person Record - 6

Office of Personnel Management - 6

MAF-ARF - 6

Characteristics of Business Owners - 6

Census Bureau Person Identification Validation System - 6

Center for Administrative Records Research - 6

Social Science Research Institute - 6

Census Bureau Master Address File - 6

Statistics Canada - 6

Public Use Micro Sample - 6

Successor Predecessor File - 6

University of Maryland - 6

Business Employment Dynamics - 6

Business Register Bridge - 6

Securities and Exchange Commission - 6

Permanent Plant Number - 6

Department of Education - 5

Department of Homeland Security - 5

Company Organization Survey - 5

CDF - 5

Cumulative Density Function - 5

Federal Insurance Contribution Act - 5

General Accounting Office - 5

Master Beneficiary Record - 5

National Income and Product Accounts - 5

Journal of Economic Literature - 5

Data Management System - 5

Census of Manufacturing Firms - 5

Duke University - 5

Michigan Institute for Teaching and Research in Economics - 5

Annual Survey of Entrepreneurs - 5

Retail Trade - 5

Survey of Manufacturing Technology - 5

Kauffman Foundation - 5

Probability Density Function - 5

North American Industry Classi - 5

Census 2000 - 5

Establishment Micro Properties - 5

Total Factor Productivity - 4

Department of Economics - 4

General Education Development - 4

Federal Reserve System - 4

Paycheck Protection Program - 4

Adjusted Gross Income - 4

Consumer Expenditure Survey - 4

Department of Commerce - 4

Patent and Trademark Office - 4

Census Bureau Business Dynamics Statistics - 4

HHS - 4

Census Bureau Longitudinal Business Database - 4

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention - 4

European Union - 4

Business Research and Development and Innovation Survey - 4

COMPUSTAT - 4

Information and Communication Technology Survey - 4

PIKed - 4

National Employer Survey - 4

Census Bureau Center for Economic Studies - 4

American Economic Review - 4

Urban Institute - 4

Occupational Employment Statistics - 3

United States Census Bureau - 3

Technical Services - 3

Arts, Entertainment - 3

Survey of Consumer Finances - 3

Supreme Court - 3

Business Formation Statistics - 3

Master Earnings File - 3

New England County Metropolitan - 3

Department of Justice - 3

National Institutes of Health - 3

University of Minnesota - 3

COVID-19 - 3

International Trade Research Report - 3

Journal of Labor Economics - 3

Georgetown University - 3

University of California Los Angeles - 3

Environmental Protection Agency - 3

Pollution Abatement Costs and Expenditures - 3

Wholesale Trade - 3

respondent - 90

census bureau - 59

population - 55

data - 53

statistical - 45

census data - 44

agency - 39

data census - 35

estimating - 33

employed - 33

microdata - 32

report - 29

employ - 28

workforce - 28

payroll - 26

record - 26

employee - 26

earnings - 24

datasets - 23

use census - 21

labor - 21

census survey - 21

imputation - 21

sampling - 19

economic census - 19

research census - 19

expenditure - 18

census employment - 18

coverage - 18

ethnicity - 18

assessed - 18

statistician - 18

hispanic - 17

survey data - 17

aggregate - 17

citizen - 17

resident - 17

household surveys - 17

analysis - 17

longitudinal - 17

survey income - 16

medicaid - 16

minority - 15

irs - 15

poverty - 15

enterprise - 15

enrollment - 15

surveys censuses - 15

census research - 15

disclosure - 14

federal - 14

recession - 14

worker - 14

sample - 13

censuses surveys - 13

2010 census - 13

estimation - 13

tax - 13

1040 - 13

insurance - 13

economist - 13

percentile - 12

employee data - 12

econometric - 12

bias - 11

disadvantaged - 11

census responses - 11

employment statistics - 11

salary - 11

population survey - 11

sector - 11

research - 11

confidentiality - 11

quarterly - 11

database - 11

assessing - 10

revenue - 10

labor statistics - 10

department - 10

work census - 10

provided census - 10

prevalence - 10

gdp - 10

information - 10

income data - 10

aging - 10

employer household - 10

researcher - 10

establishment - 10

study - 10

trend - 9

information census - 9

employment data - 9

ssa - 9

rural - 9

survey households - 9

family - 9

unemployed - 9

income survey - 9

immigrant - 9

matching - 9

manufacturing - 9

longitudinal employer - 9

industrial - 9

workplace - 9

occupation - 8

estimator - 8

census household - 8

linkage - 8

company - 8

privacy - 8

linked census - 8

housing - 8

discrepancy - 8

reporting - 8

business data - 8

firms census - 8

census use - 8

average - 7

hiring - 7

earner - 7

eligibility - 7

filing - 7

taxpayer - 7

census linked - 7

ethnic - 7

records census - 7

medicare - 7

census records - 7

innovation - 7

public - 7

residential - 7

residence - 7

incorporated - 7

healthcare - 7

enrollee - 7

sale - 7

job - 7

employment dynamics - 7

statistical agencies - 7

macroeconomic - 7

census disclosure - 6

disparity - 6

eligible - 6

enrolled - 6

welfare - 6

race - 6

technology - 6

technological - 6

associate - 6

race census - 6

workforce indicators - 6

health - 6

publicly - 6

organizational - 6

employing - 6

market - 6

aggregation - 6

inference - 6

yearly - 6

census 2020 - 5

subsidy - 5

child - 5

pandemic - 5

disability - 5

immigration - 5

citizenship - 5

consumption - 5

state - 5

empirical - 5

entrepreneur - 5

insured - 5

employment estimates - 5

housing survey - 5

census business - 5

metropolitan - 5

policymakers - 5

census years - 5

clerical - 5

census file - 5

statistical disclosure - 5

neighborhood - 4

demand - 4

income individuals - 4

parent - 4

dependent - 4

income households - 4

expense - 4

incentive - 4

socioeconomic - 4

parental - 4

finance - 4

identifier - 4

development - 4

patent - 4

native - 4

employment count - 4

worker demographics - 4

investment - 4

health insurance - 4

home - 4

management - 4

businesses census - 4

proprietorship - 4

economic statistics - 4

uninsured - 4

insurance coverage - 4

model - 4

analyst - 4

manufacturer - 4

tenure - 4

earn - 4

rate - 3

discrimination - 3

decade - 3

rurality - 3

spending - 3

financial - 3

household income - 3

poorer - 3

propensity - 3

adoption - 3

latino - 3

innovator - 3

innovative - 3

indicator - 3

policy - 3

social - 3

racial - 3

employment earnings - 3

classification - 3

environmental - 3

innovate - 3

benefit - 3

insurance plans - 3

employment measures - 3

apartment - 3

imputation model - 3

manager - 3

impact - 3

fiscal - 3

tech - 3

proprietor - 3

classified - 3

migration - 3

country - 3

entrepreneurial - 3

entrepreneurship - 3

matched - 3

establishments data - 3

wage earnings - 3

estimates employment - 3

employment growth - 3

Viewing papers 1 through 10 of 167


  • Working Paper

    Optimal Stratified Sampling for Probability-Based Online Panels

    September 2025

    Working Paper Number:

    CES-25-69

    Online probability-based panels have emerged as a cost-efficient means of conducting surveys in the 21st century. While there have been various recent advancements in sampling techniques for online panels, several critical aspects of sampling theory for online panels are lacking. Much of current sampling theory from the middle of the 20th century, when response rates were high, and online panels did not exist. This paper presents a mathematical model of stratified sampling for online panels that takes into account historical response rates and survey costs. Through some simplifying assumptions, the model shows that the optimal sample allocation for online panels can largely resemble the solution for a cross-sectional survey. To apply the model, I use the Census Household Panel to show how this method could improve the average precision of key estimates. Holding fielding costs constant, the new sample rates improve the average precision of estimates between 1.47 and 17.25 percent, depending on the importance weight given to an overall population mean compared to mean estimates for racial and ethnic subgroups.
    View Full Paper PDF
  • Working Paper

    Job Tasks, Worker Skills, and Productivity

    September 2025

    Working Paper Number:

    CES-25-63

    We present new empirical evidence suggesting that we can better understand productivity dispersion across businesses by accounting for differences in how tasks, skills, and occupations are organized. This aligns with growing attention to the task content of production. We link establishment-level data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics Occupational Employment and Wage Statistics survey with productivity data from the Census Bureau's manufacturing surveys. Our analysis reveals strong relationships between establishment productivity and task, skill, and occupation inputs. These relationships are highly nonlinear and vary by industry. When we account for these patterns, we can explain a substantial share of productivity dispersion across establishments.
    View Full Paper PDF
  • Working Paper

    Estimating the Graduate Coverage of Post-Secondary Employment Outcomes

    September 2025

    Authors: Cody Orr

    Working Paper Number:

    CES-25-61

    This paper proposes a new methodology for estimating the coverage rate of the Post-Secondary Employment Outcomes data product (PSEO), both as a share of new graduates and as a share of total working-age degree holders in the United States. This paper also assesses how representative PSEO is of the broader population of college graduates across an array of institutional and individual characteristics.
    View Full Paper PDF
  • Working Paper

    Revisiting the Unintended Consequences of Ban the Box

    August 2025

    Working Paper Number:

    CES-25-58

    Ban-the-Box (BTB) policies intend to help formerly incarcerated individuals find employment by delaying when employers can ask about criminal records. We revisit the finding in Doleac and Hansen (2020) that BTB causes statistical discrimination against minority men. We correct miscoded BTB laws and show that estimates from the Current Population Survey (CPS) remain quantitatively similar, while those from the American Community Survey (ACS) now fail to reject the null hypothesis of no effect of BTB on employment. In contrast to the published estimates, these ACS results are statistically significantly different from the CPS results, indicating a lack of robustness across datasets. We do not find evidence that these differences are due to sample composition or survey weights. There is limited evidence that these divergent results are explained by the different frequencies of these surveys. Differences in sample sizes may also lead to different estimates; the ACS has a much larger sample and more statistical power to detect effects near the corrected CPS estimates.
    View Full Paper PDF
  • Working Paper

    A Simulated Reconstruction and Reidentification Attack on the 2010 U.S. Census

    August 2025

    Working Paper Number:

    CES-25-57

    For the last half-century, it has been a common and accepted practice for statistical agencies, including the United States Census Bureau, to adopt different strategies to protect the confidentiality of aggregate tabular data products from those used to protect the individual records contained in publicly released microdata products. This strategy was premised on the assumption that the aggregation used to generate tabular data products made the resulting statistics inherently less disclosive than the microdata from which they were tabulated. Consistent with this common assumption, the 2010 Census of Population and Housing in the U.S. used different disclosure limitation rules for its tabular and microdata publications. This paper demonstrates that, in the context of disclosure limitation for the 2010 Census, the assumption that tabular data are inherently less disclosive than their underlying microdata is fundamentally flawed. The 2010 Census published more than 150 billion aggregate statistics in 180 table sets. Most of these tables were published at the most detailed geographic level'individual census blocks, which can have populations as small as one person. Using only 34 of the published table sets, we reconstructed microdata records including five variables (census block, sex, age, race, and ethnicity) from the confidential 2010 Census person records. Using only published data, an attacker using our methods can verify that all records in 70% of all census blocks (97 million people) are perfectly reconstructed. We further confirm, through reidentification studies, that an attacker can, within census blocks with perfect reconstruction accuracy, correctly infer the actual census response on race and ethnicity for 3.4 million vulnerable population uniques (persons with race and ethnicity different from the modal person on the census block) with 95% accuracy. Having shown the vulnerabilities inherent to the disclosure limitation methods used for the 2010 Census, we proceed to demonstrate that the more robust disclosure limitation framework used for the 2020 Census publications defends against attacks that are based on reconstruction. Finally, we show that available alternatives to the 2020 Census Disclosure Avoidance System would either fail to protect confidentiality, or would overly degrade the statistics' utility for the primary statutory use case: redrawing the boundaries of all of the nation's legislative and voting districts in compliance with the 1965 Voting Rights Act.
    View Full Paper PDF
  • Working Paper

    LODES Design and Methodology Report: Methodology Version 7

    August 2025

    Working Paper Number:

    CES-25-52

    The purpose of this report is to document the important features of Version 7 of the LEHD Origin-Destination Employment Statistics (LODES) processing system. This includes data sources, data processing methodology, confidentiality protection methodology, some quality measures, and a high-level description of the published data. The intended audience for this document includes LODES data users, Local Employment Dynamics (LED) Partnership members, U.S. Census Bureau management, program quality auditors, and current and future research and development staff members.
    View Full Paper PDF
  • Working Paper

    Earnings Measurement Error, Nonresponse and Administrative Mismatch in the CPS

    July 2025

    Working Paper Number:

    CES-25-48

    Using the Current Population Survey Annual Social and Economic Supplement matched to Social Security Administration Detailed Earnings Records, we link observations across consecutive years to investigate a relationship between item nonresponse and measurement error in the earnings questions. Linking individuals across consecutive years allows us to observe switching from response to nonresponse and vice versa. We estimate OLS, IV, and finite mixture models that allow for various assumptions separately for men and women. We find that those who respond in both years of the survey exhibit less measurement error than those who respond in one year. Our findings suggest a trade-off between survey response and data quality that should be considered by survey designers, data collectors, and data users.
    View Full Paper PDF
  • Working Paper

    The Rural/Urban Volunteering Divide

    June 2025

    Working Paper Number:

    CES-25-42

    Are rural residents more likely to volunteer than those living in urban places? Although early sociological theory posited that rural residents were more likely to experience social bonds connecting them to their community, increasing their odds of volunteer engagement, empirical support is limited. Drawing upon the full population of rural and urban respondents to the United States Census Bureau's Current Population Survey (CPS) Volunteering Supplement (2002-2015), we found that rural respondents are more likely to report volunteering compared to urban respondents, although these differences are decreasing over time. Moreover, we found that propensities for rural and urban volunteerism vary based on differences in both individual and place-based characteristics; further, the size of these effects differ across rural and urban places. These findings have important implications for theory and empirical analysis.
    View Full Paper PDF
  • Working Paper

    Tapping Business and Household Surveys to Sharpen Our View of Work from Home

    June 2025

    Working Paper Number:

    CES-25-36

    Timely business-level measures of work from home (WFH) are scarce for the U.S. economy. We review prior survey-based efforts to quantify the incidence and character of WFH and describe new questions that we developed and fielded for the Business Trends and Outlook Survey (BTOS). Drawing on more than 150,000 firm-level responses to the BTOS, we obtain four main findings. First, nearly a third of businesses have employees who work from home, with tremendous variation across sectors. The share of businesses with WFH employees is nearly ten times larger in the Information sector than in Accommodation and Food Services. Second, employees work from home about 1 day per week, on average, and businesses expect similar WFH levels in five years. Third, feasibility aside, businesses' largest concern with WFH relates to productivity. Seven percent of businesses find that onsite work is more productive, while two percent find that WFH is more productive. Fourth, there is a low level of tracking and monitoring of WFH activities, with 70% of firms reporting they do not track employee days in the office and 75% reporting they do not monitor employees when they work from home. These lessons serve as a starting point for enhancing WFH-related content in the American Community Survey and other household surveys.
    View Full Paper PDF
  • Working Paper

    The Design of Sampling Strata for the National Household Food Acquisition and Purchase Survey

    February 2025

    Working Paper Number:

    CES-25-13

    The National Household Food Acquisition and Purchase Survey (FoodAPS), sponsored by the United States Department of Agriculture's (USDA) Economic Research Service (ERS) and Food and Nutrition Service (FNS), examines the food purchasing behavior of various subgroups of the U.S. population. These subgroups include participants in the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) and the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children (WIC), as well as households who are eligible for but don't participate in these programs. Participants in these social protection programs constitute small proportions of the U.S. population; obtaining an adequate number of such participants in a survey would be challenging absent stratified sampling to target SNAP and WIC participating households. This document describes how the U.S. Census Bureau (which is planning to conduct future versions of the FoodAPS survey on behalf of USDA) created sampling strata to flag the FoodAPS targeted subpopulations using machine learning applications in linked survey and administrative data. We describe the data, modeling techniques, and how well the sampling flags target low-income households and households receiving WIC and SNAP benefits. We additionally situate these efforts in the nascent literature on the use of big data and machine learning for the improvement of survey efficiency.
    View Full Paper PDF