CAPCOG Releases County Demographic and Economic Overviews

On December 14, 2010 the U.S. Census Bureau released 5-year American Community Survey (ACS) estimates for the first time, making social, economic, housing and demographic statistics available for every community in the nation. The 5-year estimates represent the largest single-day release of data in census history, involving 11 billion pieces of information and 670,000 distinct geographic areas. Importantly, the 5-year estimates provide the first new U.S. Census Bureau statistics for the entire CAPCOG region since 2000.

CAPCOG just completed an initial analysis of 9 critical demographic and economic elements: population growth; age distribution; racial and ethnic composition; educational attainment; unemployment; median household income; mode of commute; housing type; and household type.

POPULATION: During the past decade, the population of the CAPCOG region grew four times faster than the national average.

AGE DISTRIBUTION: At the same time, residents 45 and older were the fastest growing population in the CAPCOG region during the past decade.

RACIAL & ETHNIC COMPOSITION: While Hispanics represented the vast majority of non-white population growth during the past decade, Asians are the region’s fastest growing racial/ethnic group.

EDUCATIONAL ATTAINMENT: Today, more than 84 percent of all residents are high school graduates; more than 37 percent possess a bachelor degree; and close to 12 percent hold a professional degree.

UNEMPLOYMENT: At 6.9 percent, the region’s 2009 unemployment rate was 25% below the national average.

MEDIAN HOUSEHOLD INCOME: Although median household income in the Austin metropolitan region exceeds that of Texas and U.S., the region suffered a more severe decline in income than both the state and national average.

TRANSPORTATION: Telecommuting has allowed the region’s workforce to become less auto-dependent; since 2000, the proportion of individuals working from home has jumped 50 percent.

HOUSING: An additional 26 percent of the CAPCOG region’s housing stock consists of multi-family units.

HOUSEHOLD TYPE: Currently, less than 63 percent of all households in the region are families, a 2 percent decline since 2000.

CAPCOG has also created individual county profiles of the 5-Year ACS estimate data. To access these publications, please visit http://www.capcog.org/information-clearinghouse/publications/#capcog-county-profiles-american-community-survey-5-year-estimates. Also, in the coming weeks we’ll be exploring the new data in greater detail.

American Community Survey: Household Income Down from 2008 to 2009

The U.S. Census Bureau released the 2009 American Community Survey (ACS) one year estimates on Tuesday, giving the country a look at how areas with over 65,000 population are doing since the recession started. The numbers weren't very pretty as far as poverty and income levels go for the country and the Austin area for that matter. The Austin American-Statesman has a good article which outlines some of the troubling statistics here.

For the Austin-Round Rock-San Marcos MSA (Austin MSA), the median household income estimate dropped about $2,500 from the 2008 number. Since the ACS is a survey and subject to sampling errors, the true magnitude of the drop is hard to measure, but it is safe to say that the drop is considered statistically significant at the 90% confidence interval. Households brought home less money last year than the year before.

The chart below shows both the estimate and the upper and lower confidence interval for the median household income from 2005-2009 with adjustment for inflation using the Bureau of Labor Statistics inflation calculator. Note the upper confidence bound for the 2009 estimate is below the lower confidence bound for the 2008 estimate.

The Austin MSA's median household income remains above both the figure for TX ($48,259) and the US ($50,221), but the drop seems to be slightly more severe as both the state and national household income estimates only dropped by slightly less just over $1,000. Although, some of the difference could be explained by margin of error.

We've also pulled the Median household income figures by Race/Ethnicity. It is very hard to definitively say that one group has seen a disproportionate drop in income levels based on the fact that the margin of errors of the survey can be quite large. But, it still shows the income disparity between race/ethnic groups pretty clearly.

We've updated our information Clearinghouse with the data profiles for communities that have 2009 ACS data available, you can get that information here.

This is just the beginning of what will be a data filled Fall and Winter! There will be two more American Community Survey releases by January 2011. The 5-year ACS data will come out in December, giving communities with 20,000 or less new socio-economic Census data for the first time since the Census 2000 numbers. The 3-year ACS estimates will come out in January 2011 and of course the big Census 2010 redistricting file (population counts down to the block level) will be released sometime in February or March.

Chris Ramser

Census Bureau Population Estimates for Cities Released

The U.S. Census Bureau released the July 1, 2009 population estimates for incorporated places on Tuesday. The estimates as you might imagine do not incorporate any information collected during Census 2010.

Here are some Highlights:

• Austin added nearly 20,000 residents from July 1, 2008- July 1, 2009 (the fifth most number of new residents of any city in Texas).
• Buda grew by 15.4% from July 1, 2008 - July 1, 2009 (the fifth fastest growing city of any in Texas), while fellow Hays County city Kyle, grew by 9.5% (which was good enough to be the ninth fastest growing city in Texas).
• Bee Cave grew by 12.1% from July 1, 2008 - July 1, 2009, which was the sixth fastest growing city in Texas.
• Georgetown passed the 50,000 mark for the first time in the official U.S. Census Bureau estimates with a population of 50,885. That now makes five cities in the Capital area region over 50K according to these estimates (San Marcos, 53,205; Cedar Park, 64,415; Round Rock, 105,412; & Austin, 786,382).

This excel document includes a spreadsheet of population estimates for all cities in Texas, the percent and numeric change for periods 2000-2009 and 2008-2009, and rankings of Texas Cities for population change. The second spreadsheet in that document includes just those cities within the Capital region.

Chris Ramser

Capital Area Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy Released

The Capital Area Economic Development District's CEDS Committee, staffed by CAPCOG, has adopted the 5 year economic development plan known as the Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy (CEDS), 2010-2015. This document is done to fulfill a requirement of the Economic Development Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, for the planning funds received by the Capital Area Council of Governments as a designated Economic Development District (EDD).

In preparation for sending the CEDS to the EDA, CAPCOG will post the plan for a 30 day public review and comment period. Any comments should be sent to Chris Ramser by July 1st.

For more information and to view the plan, visit our website.

State of Metropolitan America: Benchmarking Austin Metro Area with New Tool

Comparing metro regions has gotten a little bit easier with the Brookings Institution’s State of Metropolitan America report and accompanying interactive indicator map.

Released in early May, the indicator map brings together a range of data including Population, Demographics, Immigration, Educational Attainment, Work, Commuting Patterns, and Income & Poverty all accessible with only a few clicks of the mouse. Each of the subject areas include a range of indicators that are displayed using graduated symbols grouping the data by both percent and numeric value, depending on the setting. The data is also readily available as a table and downloadable as a .csv file.

The metro areas map includes the indicators for the 100 largest Metropolitan Statistical Areas in the nation, including six in Texas: Dallas-Fort Worth-Arlington, Houston-Sugarland-Baytown, San Antonio, Austin-Round Rock-San Marcos, El Paso, and McAllen-Edinburg-Mission. There is also a map setting to examine the data for selected cities, suburbs, and states. Here is an example of the map interface.

(Click image for larger)


Austin-Round Rock-San Marcos MSA is ranked 1st of the 100 largest metro regions in the percentage of workers that work at home (6.2%). This probably is not a surprise to many who have examined Austin's Creative and Entrepreneurial Culture.

I took a few minutes to play with this tool to see how the Austin metro region stands in a few other interesting indicators. All of these data come from the Census Bureau's American Community Survey 2008 estimates and benchmarked against the 100 metro regions in the Brookings report.

Austin-Round Rock-San Marcos, TX ranks

• Third for highest percentage of the total population that has moved within the last year at 22.3%. This includes migration into the region and those relocating within the region.
• Third highest percentage of the total population that is of working age (defined as 18-64) at 66.3%.
• Eighth highest in percentage of the White population with a high school diploma (95.3%), but only fifty-first for percent of the Hispanic population with a high school diploma (64.2%).
• Eighth highest percentage of the total population with a bachelor's degree at 38.2%.
• Tenth in wage-equality by gender with a male to female ratio of 1.12.
• Ranks near the bottom (84th) in median hourly wage earnings for people with less than a High School degree at $10.18.
• Sixth highest in percentage of total jobs in professional, scientific, and management industries at 14.6%.
• Highest median household income of the six metro regions in Texas that are profiled in the tool. Twenty-Eighth highest in U.S. at $59,400.

And,

• Ninth highest in percentage of workers carpooling to work at 13.2%.

Chris Ramser

Final Participation Rates Released for First Phase of Census

The Census Bureau has released the final Census 2010 participation rates from the mail-out mail-back operation, the first phase of the data collection. On Saturday, Census takers will begin the next phase, non-response follow-up, which includes visiting those addresses that did not respond to the Census forms.

To view more about the final participation rates, visit this posting on the Census coordination blog.

Chris Ramser

National Survey of Household and Small Business Hazardous Waste Collections

Small businesses that generate hazardous waste can be classified as Conditionally Exempt Small Quantity Generators (CESQG) if they produce less than 100 kilograms per month of hazardous materials. The United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) allows collection of these materials through Household Hazardous Waste (HHW) collection programs, as many of the materials are similar or identical to materials already being collected from households. However, the EPA defers to the states on the regulation of this activity, and some states do not allow collection of CESQG material through HHW programs. To gain more information on this issue, the Lone Star Chapter of the North American Hazardous Materials Management Association (NAHMMA) conducted a survey of Household Hazardous Waste (HHW) collection programs nationwide. The purpose of the survey was to determine how many states allow the collection of Conditionally Exempt Small Quantity Generator (CESQG) waste through HHW programs, and to assess the pros and cons of CESQG collection via HHW programs.

(Click image for larger map)

The survey results show that 31 of 50 states, or 62% of states, do allow collection of CESQG through HHW programs. In states allowing such activities, primary reasons given for doing so were to provide a cost-effective disposal option to small businesses, to protect the environment through prevention of illegal dumping, and to mitigate the costs of providing HHW collection to citizens. The primary drawbacks to CESQG collection through HHW programs were a reluctance to accept and handle payments, need for increased capacity and training, and potential for increased liability. Because CESQG collection is not mandatory even in states where it is allowed, the majority, if not all potential drawbacks are avoided by allowing each HHW facility to elect not to collect CESQG materials if they did not wish to do so. The North American Hazardous Materials Management Association (NAHMMA) has recognized that significant environmental, financial and programmatic benefits can be realized by collecting CESQG waste through HHW programs. NAHMMA recommends that states not currently allowing these activities consider reviewing their current policies and regulatory structure. NAHMMA members are available to speak to the benefits and to provide examples of successful collection program options.

Pros of CESQG Collection Via HHW Programs

• Cost-effective disposal option for small businesses
• Protection of the environment
• Prevention of illegal dumping
• Reduces the cost burden of HHW disposal
• Existing resources used to handle greater volume
• Ability to assist with school laboratory cleanouts

Cons of CESQG Collection Via HHW Programs

• Need for increased capacity
• Inability/lack of desire to handle financial transactions
• Need for more training
• Potential for increased liability

To read the complete report which has been endorsed by the North American Hazardous Materials Management Association and the Environmental Quality Company, Click here.