We have a user who insists on using blockgroup ACS data to conduct some exploratory mapping and analysis of hyperlocal conditions. I have recommended against this step, suggesting the use of census tracts instead. My understanding, and opinion, is that blockgroup data is useful insofar as blockgroups combine to form larger geographies. Individual blockgroups often have such relatively large margins of error that the data is insufficiently "stable" to use reliably to draw conclusions and develop policy. (For perspective, the area under discussion includes 32 tracts and about 80 blockgroups.)
Is there any "official" guidance I can point toward to bolster my case that tracts are the better way to go?
In reply to Patty Becker:
In reply to Andrew Beveridge:
In reply to David Nelson:
In reply to MitchCats: