Papers Containing Tag(s): 'Master Address File'
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.
See Working Papers by Tag(s), Keywords(s), Author(s), or Search Text
Click here to search again
Frequently Occurring Concepts within this Search
Authors
Viewing papers 31 through 40 of 49
-
Working PaperInvestigating the Use of Administrative Records in the Consumer Expenditure Survey
March 2018
Working Paper Number:
carra-2018-01
In this paper, we investigate the potential of applying administrative records income data to the Consumer Expenditure (CE) survey to inform measurement error properties of CE estimates, supplement respondent-collected data, and estimate the representativeness of the CE survey by income level. We match individual responses to Consumer Expenditure Quarterly Interview Survey data collected from July 2013 through December 2014 to IRS administrative data in order to analyze CE questions on wages, social security payroll deductions, self-employment income receipt and retirement income. We find that while wage amounts are largely in alignment between the CE and administrative records in the middle of the wage distribution, there is evidence that wages are over-reported to the CE at the bottom of the wage distribution and under-reported at the top of the wage distribution. We find mixed evidence for alignment between the CE and administrative records on questions covering payroll deductions and self-employment income receipt, but find substantial divergence between CE responses and administrative records when examining retirement income. In addition to the analysis using person-based linkages, we also match responding and non-responding CE sample units to the universe of IRS 1040 tax returns by address to examine non-response bias. We find that non-responding households are substantially richer than responding households, and that very high income households are less likely to respond to the CE.View Full Paper PDF
-
Working PaperEffects of a Government-Academic Partnership: Has the NSF-Census Bureau Research Network Helped Improve the U.S. Statistical System?
January 2017
Working Paper Number:
CES-17-59R
The National Science Foundation-Census Bureau Research Network (NCRN) was established in 2011 to create interdisciplinary research nodes on methodological questions of interest and significance to the broader research community and to the Federal Statistical System (FSS), particularly the Census Bureau. The activities to date have covered both fundamental and applied statistical research and have focused at least in part on the training of current and future generations of researchers in skills of relevance to surveys and alternative measurement of economic units, households, and persons. This paper discusses some of the key research findings of the eight nodes, organized into six topics: (1) Improving census and survey data collection methods; (2) Using alternative sources of data; (3) Protecting privacy and confidentiality by improving disclosure avoidance; (4) Using spatial and spatio-temporal statistical modeling to improve estimates; (5) Assessing data cost and quality tradeoffs; and (6) Combining information from multiple sources. It also reports on collaborations across nodes and with federal agencies, new software developed, and educational activities and outcomes. The paper concludes with an evaluation of the ability of the FSS to apply the NCRN's research outcomes and suggests some next steps, as well as the implications of this research-network model for future federal government renewal initiatives.View Full Paper PDF
-
Working PaperA Comparison of Training Modules for Administrative Records Use in Nonresponse Followup Operations: The 2010 Census and the American Community Survey
January 2017
Working Paper Number:
CES-17-47
While modeling work in preparation for the 2020 Census has shown that administrative records can be predictive of Nonresponse Followup (NRFU) enumeration outcomes, there is scope to examine the robustness of the models by using more recent training data. The models deployed for workload removal from the 2015 and 2016 Census Tests were based on associations of the 2010 Census with administrative records. Training the same models with more recent data from the American Community Survey (ACS) can identify any changes in parameter associations over time that might reduce the accuracy of model predictions. Furthermore, more recent training data would allow for the incorporation of new administrative record sources not available in 2010. However, differences in ACS methodology and the smaller sample size may limit its applicability. This paper replicates earlier results and examines model predictions based on the ACS in comparison with NRFU outcomes. The evaluation consists of a comparison of predicted counts and household compositions with actual 2015 NRFU outcomes. The main findings are an overall validation of the methodology using independent data.View Full Paper PDF
-
Working PaperDeveloping a Residence Candidate File for Use With Employer-Employee Matched Data
January 2017
Working Paper Number:
CES-17-40
This paper describes the Longitudinal Employer-Household Dynamics (LEHD) program's ongoing efforts to use administrative records in a predictive model that describes residence locations for workers. This project was motivated by the discontinuation of a residence file produced elsewhere at the U.S. Census Bureau. The goal of the Residence Candidate File (RCF) process is to provide the LEHD Infrastructure Files with residence information that maintains currency with the changing state of administrative sources and represents uncertainty in location as a probability distribution. The discontinued file provided only a single residence per person/year, even when contributing administrative data may have contained multiple residences. This paper describes the motivation for the project, our methodology, the administrative data sources, the model estimation and validation results, and the file specifications. We find that the best prediction of the person-place model provides similar, but superior, accuracy compared with previous methods and performs well for workers in the LEHD jobs frame. We outline possibilities for further improvement in sources and modeling as well as recommendations on how to use the preference weights in downstream processing.View Full Paper PDF
-
Working PaperTwo Perspectives on Commuting: A Comparison of Home to Work Flows Across Job-Linked Survey and Administrative Files
January 2017
Working Paper Number:
CES-17-34
Commuting flows and workplace employment data have a wide constituency of users including urban and regional planners, social science and transportation researchers, and businesses. The U.S. Census Bureau releases two, national data products that give the magnitude and characteristics of home to work flows. The American Community Survey (ACS) tabulates households' responses on employment, workplace, and commuting behavior. The Longitudinal Employer-Household Dynamics (LEHD) program tabulates administrative records on jobs in the LEHD Origin-Destination Employment Statistics (LODES). Design differences across the datasets lead to divergence in a comparable statistic: county-to-county aggregate commute flows. To understand differences in the public use data, this study compares ACS and LEHD source files, using identifying information and probabilistic matching to join person and job records. In our assessment, we compare commuting statistics for job frames linked on person, employment status, employer, and workplace and we identify person and job characteristics as well as design features of the data frames that explain aggregate differences. We find a lower rate of within-county commuting and farther commutes in LODES. We attribute these greater distances to differences in workplace reporting and to uncertainty of establishment assignments in LEHD for workers at multi-unit employers. Minor contributing factors include differences in residence location and ACS workplace edits. The results of this analysis and the data infrastructure developed will support further work to understand and enhance commuting statistics in both datasets.View Full Paper PDF
-
Working PaperEvaluating the Use of Commercial Data to Improve Survey Estimates of Property Taxes
August 2016
Working Paper Number:
carra-2016-06
While commercial data sources offer promise to statistical agencies for use in production of official statistics, challenges can arise as the data are not collected for statistical purposes. This paper evaluates the use of 2008-2010 property tax data from CoreLogic, Inc. (CoreLogic), aggregated from county and township governments from around the country, to improve 2010 American Community Survey (ACS) estimates of property tax amounts for single-family homes. Particularly, the research evaluates the potential to use CoreLogic to reduce respondent burden, to study survey response error and to improve adjustments for survey nonresponse. The research found that the coverage of the CoreLogic data varies between counties as does the correspondence between ACS and CoreLogic property taxes. This geographic variation implies that different approaches toward using CoreLogic are needed in different areas of the country. Further, large differences between CoreLogic and ACS property taxes in certain counties seem to be due to conceptual differences between what is collected in the two data sources. The research examines three counties, Clark County, NV, Philadelphia County, PA and St. Louis County, MO, and compares how estimates would change with different approaches using the CoreLogic data. Mean county property tax estimates are highly sensitive to whether ACS or CoreLogic data are used to construct estimates. Using CoreLogic data in imputation modeling for nonresponse adjustment of ACS estimates modestly improves the predictive power of imputation models, although estimates of county property taxes and property taxes by mortgage status are not very sensitive to the imputation method.View Full Paper PDF
-
Working PaperMatching Addresses between Household Surveys and Commercial Data
July 2015
Working Paper Number:
carra-2015-04
Matching third-party data sources to household surveys can benefit household surveys in a number of ways, but the utility of these new data sources depends critically on our ability to link units between data sets. To understand this better, this report discusses potential modifications to the existing match process that could potentially improve our matches. While many changes to the matching procedure produce marginal improvements in match rates, substantial increases in match rates can only be achieved by relaxing the definition of a successful match. In the end, the results show that the most important factor determining the success of matching procedures is the quality and composition of the data sets being matched.View Full Paper PDF
-
Working PaperDesign Comparison of LODES and ACS Commuting Data Products
October 2014
Working Paper Number:
CES-14-38
The Census Bureau produces two complementary data products, the American Community Survey (ACS) commuting and workplace data and the Longitudinal Employer-Household Dynamics (LEHD) Origin-Destination Employment Statistics (LODES), which can be used to answer questions about spatial, economic, and demographic questions relating to workplaces and home-to-work flows. The products are complementary in the sense that they measure similar activities but each has important unique characteristics that provide information that the other measure cannot. As a result of questions from data users, the Census Bureau has created this document to highlight the major design differences between these two data products. This report guides users on the relative advantages of each data product for various analyses and helps explain differences that may arise when using the products.2,3 As an overview, these two data products are sourced from different inputs, cover different populations and time periods, are subject to different sets of edits and imputations, are released under different confidentiality protection mechanisms, and are tabulated at different geographic and characteristic levels. As a general rule, the two data products should not be expected to match exactly for arbitrary queries and may differ substantially for some queries. Within this document, we compare the two data products by the design elements that were deemed most likely to contribute to differences in tabulated data. These elements are: Collection, Coverage, Geographic and Longitudinal Scope, Job Definition and Reference Period, Job and Worker Characteristics, Location Definitions (Workplace and Residence), Completeness of Geographic Information and Edits/Imputations, Geographic Tabulation Levels, Control Totals, Confidentiality Protection and Suppression, and Related Public-Use Data Products. An in-depth data analysis'in aggregate or with the microdata'between the two data products will be the subject of a future technical report. The Census Bureau has begun a pilot project to integrate ACS microdata with LEHD administrative data to develop an enhanced frame of employment status, place of work, and commuting. The Census Bureau will publish quality metrics for person match rates, residence and workplace match rates, and commute distance comparisons.View Full Paper PDF
-
Working Paper2010 American Community Survey Match Study
July 2014
Working Paper Number:
carra-2014-03
Using administrative records data from federal government agencies and commercial sources, the 2010 ACS Match Study measures administrative records coverage of 2010 ACS addresses, persons, and persons at addresses at different levels of geography as well as by demographic characteristics and response mode. The 2010 ACS Match Study represents a continuation of the research undertaken in the 2010 Census Match Study, the first national-level evaluation of administrative records data coverage. Preliminary results indicate that administrative records provide substantial coverage for addresses and persons in the 2010 ACS (92.7 and 92.1 percent respectively), and less extensive though substantial coverage, for person-address pairs (74.3 percent). In addition, some variation in address, person and/or person-address coverage is found across demographic and response mode groups. This research informs future uses of administrative records in survey and decennial census operations to address the increasing costs of data collection and declining response rates.View Full Paper PDF
-
Working PaperThe Person Identification Validation System (PVS): Applying the Center for Administrative Records Research and Applications' (CARRA) Record Linkage Software
July 2014
Working Paper Number:
carra-2014-01
The Census Bureau's Person Identification Validation System (PVS) assigns unique person identifiers to federal, commercial, census, and survey data to facilitate linkages across and within files. PVS uses probabilistic matching to assign a unique Census Bureau identifier for each person. The PVS matches incoming files to reference files created with data from the Social Security Administration (SSA) Numerical Identification file, and SSA data with addresses obtained from federal files. This paper describes the PVS methodology from editing input data to creating the final file.View Full Paper PDF
