2012-2016 Language - no local geographies

Thanks for bringing this to our attention. C16001 is better than nothing, but it doesn't calibrate to the number of speakers of different languages in different geographies. We have more Hindi and Japanese speakers than Vietnamese, and now we will no longer know which areas of the City need materials translated into these languages. I understand the privacy issue, but where there isn't a privacy issue, the data should be made available. I guess it comes down to not being able to suppress data at the scale of an estimate. Why isn't that possible currently?

What would be really nice is a table that lists the top five or ten languages other than English spoken in a given tract. That table structure could be standardized, but Census tables don't usually have text for values, and of course we would want the estimates along with the names of the languages. Is a solution possible?

Thanks for bringing this to our attention. C16001 is better than nothing, but it doesn't calibrate to the number of speakers of different languages in different geographies. We have more Hindi and Japanese speakers than Vietnamese, and now we will no longer know which areas of the City need materials translated into these languages. I understand the privacy issue, but where there isn't a privacy issue, the data should be made available. I guess it comes down to not being able to suppress data at the scale of an estimate. Why isn't that possible currently?

What would be really nice is a table that lists the top five or ten languages other than English spoken in a given tract. That table structure could be standardized, but Census tables don't usually have text for values, and of course we would want the estimates along with the names of the languages. Is a solution possible?