Suspect value

Bernie over 8 years ago

I've found a very suspect value in table B01002D, column B01002D_002, which is MEDIAN AGE BY SEX (ASIAN ALONE), for Males. In Placer County, CA, census tract 210.38, block group 4 (060610210384), the value for the median age is 115+. You can check it out here: factfinder.census.gov/.../0500000US06061.15000

This is the only median age value for any geography in the country greater than 99. I'll e-mail Census, and see if they have any further information.

Parents

Jeffrey Naas over 8 years ago

It wouldn't be so bad if the ACS text files listed the value as "115+" as this coerces the value to text rather than a number which would prevent inclusion from calculations in databases, statistical packages, and GIS applications. But I just downloaded the text files and this value appears as 116 which means it will show up in calculations (unless specifically controlled). I ran a MIN calculation on the same field and found a census tract with a median age of 1.5 with an MOE of +/-16.5. Strangeness abounds.

I couldn't get the link to work so the 1.5 value is in table B01002D, Male. Census Tract 2421, Los Angeles County, California

[Updated on 12/10/2015 4:15 PM]
Cancel
Up 0 Down

Reply

Cancel

Reply

Jeffrey Naas over 8 years ago

It wouldn't be so bad if the ACS text files listed the value as "115+" as this coerces the value to text rather than a number which would prevent inclusion from calculations in databases, statistical packages, and GIS applications. But I just downloaded the text files and this value appears as 116 which means it will show up in calculations (unless specifically controlled). I ran a MIN calculation on the same field and found a census tract with a median age of 1.5 with an MOE of +/-16.5. Strangeness abounds.

I couldn't get the link to work so the 1.5 value is in table B01002D, Male. Census Tract 2421, Los Angeles County, California

[Updated on 12/10/2015 4:15 PM]
Cancel
Up 0 Down

Reply

Cancel

Children

No Data