You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
{{ message }}
This repository has been archived by the owner on Jun 26, 2020. It is now read-only.
This tool was able to be more efficient and accurate by using the 080 summary level to identify tracts that are in a specific place, and to only count the fraction of a tract that is in that place. (Place boundaries can divide tracts.)
Beginning with 2013, ACS discontinued 080 tabulations. This means there's no way from ACS Census data to identify tracts that are in a specific place. It should be feasible to only select data for the tracts that are in the xref, which would address the efficiency issue. There's probably no good way to deal with the possibility that a substantial portion of the tract in the xref is outside the place in question.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Sign up for freeto subscribe to this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in.
This tool was able to be more efficient and accurate by using the 080 summary level to identify tracts that are in a specific place, and to only count the fraction of a tract that is in that place. (Place boundaries can divide tracts.)
Beginning with 2013, ACS discontinued 080 tabulations. This means there's no way from ACS Census data to identify tracts that are in a specific place. It should be feasible to only select data for the tracts that are in the xref, which would address the efficiency issue. There's probably no good way to deal with the possibility that a substantial portion of the tract in the xref is outside the place in question.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: