The 2025 ACS Data Users Conference will be held on May 29, 2025 (virtual day) and June 3, 2025 (in-person in DC)
American Community Survey Data Users Group
Search for topics, people, or keywords
Sign Up
Log in
Site
Search for topics, people, or keywords
User
Home
Discussion Forum
ACS Resources
Webinars
Conferences
Steering Committee
More
Cancel
Home
Discussion Forum
ACS Resources
Webinars
Conferences
About
More
Cancel
Details
Views
13905 views
Replies
11 replies
Subscribers
543 subscribers
Users
0 members are here
Labels
family
income
PUMS
Related Census Bureau Resources
Related Forum Threads
Family Structure and Income
Todd Sears
over 9 years ago
I am working with a colleague to evaluate the median family income using PUMS data (in this case 2007-2011 5-year data that combines personal and household files based on serialno) and have run into a question about family structure versus household structure versus incomes.
For example, PUMS has some observations that look like the attached file (headers use PUMS variable names). All observations have the same serialno, the sporder 1-4 makes sense, the personal incomes (pincp) seem reasonable, and the household income (hincp) makes sense.
But, npf says the family size is 3 while the family income variable says every member of the household has the same family income? I would expect one member of the household would not have a family income (i.e. sporder = 1 to 4 but nfp=3 so one member of household is not a member of the family), or maybe the household has two families so it should have 2 different family incomes and the family sizes should all say 2. Suggestions about how to interpret this type of outcome, alternative variables to use, or errors in logic?
Parents
Todd Sears
over 9 years ago
Thanks to everyone for the quick feedback. The state code is 18, PUMA is 202.
Between writing it down and thinking about everyone's feedback, I've realized the problem(s). The family income variable (fincp) is by definition a household level variable (i.e. in the household PUMS dataset rather than the person dataset) so there is only one family income for any given household. The same thing is true for the family size variable. When I merge the household dataset with the person dataset based on serialno, all of a household's characteristics are assigned to all of the persons in that household - this explains why I am getting a household size of 4, a family size of 3, all 4 people showing the same family income, etc. It seems like the solution is to create my own family income variable based on combining personal incomes (pincp) according to family unit rules? Make sense?
Cancel
Up
0
Down
Reply
Cancel
Reply
Todd Sears
over 9 years ago
Thanks to everyone for the quick feedback. The state code is 18, PUMA is 202.
Between writing it down and thinking about everyone's feedback, I've realized the problem(s). The family income variable (fincp) is by definition a household level variable (i.e. in the household PUMS dataset rather than the person dataset) so there is only one family income for any given household. The same thing is true for the family size variable. When I merge the household dataset with the person dataset based on serialno, all of a household's characteristics are assigned to all of the persons in that household - this explains why I am getting a household size of 4, a family size of 3, all 4 people showing the same family income, etc. It seems like the solution is to create my own family income variable based on combining personal incomes (pincp) according to family unit rules? Make sense?
Cancel
Up
0
Down
Reply
Cancel
Children
No Data