USA 2020 Census Results Thread (Release: Today, 26 April)

[cinyc]

Interactive for Census Places, this time with a background map. Alaska is up top due to this.

https://cinycmaps.com/index.php/2-uncategorized/96-2020-census-place-population-change-2010-20

[cinyc]

Interactives:

County:
https://cinycmaps.com/index.php/2-uncategorized/94-2020-census-county-population-change-map


County Sub (still somewhat experimental. There are a few issues with the data set):
https://cinycmaps.com/index.php/2-uncategorized/95-2020-census-county-sub-population-change-map

Have you done a comparison of 2020 estimate to 2020 Census?

Yes. Click Menu-->vs Apr 20 Estimate (linear backdated July Estimate) or vs July 20 Estimate on the interactive. The County Sub version includes fewer geos because county subs outside the Northeast and Midwest are generally not included in the PEP estimates dataset.

The Census Estimates have both an April 1, 2020 and July 1, 2020 estimates (but maybe they simply interpolated and you knew that?).

Interesting they were way off for places like Cape Cod and the Islands. That suggests they were picking up people at their summer homes. The same thing is true in northern Wisconsin and the Adirondacks (Hamilton). Back in '020, these areas were notable for their low response rate which was based on responses per housing unit. If nobody was there in April, no one would respond. Someone from middle class Milwaukee might not be able to fully retire, but could run an ice cream stand up North, and stay through hunting season and the Holidays, and then head South for the winter.

The worst underperformers in Arizona were Pinal and La Paz, which likely have a larger share of winter visitors. There are actually people who live in Phoenix year round, as unlikely as that seems when it is 110F.

A couple of fun examples. Concho County, Texas.

2010	4101
2011	4121
2012	4082
2013	4118
2014	4080
2015	4065
2016	4134
2017	2701
2018	2679
2019	2749
2020	2827

There was (is) a private prison in Eden which had a federal contract that was not renewed at the end of the contract. The 2017 estimate reflects the closure. But the Census shows a population 3303.

Terrell County

2010	1007
2011	945
2012	917
2013	887
2014	906
2015	863
2016	815
2017	810
2018	792
2019	752
2020	702

It used to be the case that days of work for railwaymen was measured in miles rather than hours. Southern Pacific crews would work until Sanderson, when a new crew would get on and continue. The first crew would overnight in Sanderson and then work the return train the next day. As this practice has ended Sanderson has been dwindling away. In addition, transcontinental road traffic uses I-10, and few still use US 90.

The Census population was 760. It turns out the county had only lost 1/4 of its population, rather than 1/3.

Which Census estimates had April 1 estimates? I don't think it was in the PEP release from May -at least in May.

[DarkShard]

So basically no real suprises in the census; cities and well off rural areas generally grew while rural areas shrunk.

[danny]

Then there is the case of Bloomingburg, where 10 years ago there were no Hasidic Jews, but in the last few years Hasidic Jews have been moving in to a new development, and the village now has enough Hasidim that they voted out the entire incumbent village board and mayor. Despite this new population, the estimates went from 420 in 2010 to 412 in 2019.

Actual population: 1,032 for a growth rate of 146%...
Not surprising if you follow the news, but it does mean that the census bureau didn't and their estimates missed entirely.

[cinyc]

Then there is the case of Bloomingburg, where 10 years ago there were no Hasidic Jews, but in the last few years Hasidic Jews have been moving in to a new development, and the village now has enough Hasidim that they voted out the entire incumbent village board and mayor. Despite this new population, the estimates went from 420 in 2010 to 412 in 2019.

Actual population: 1,032 for a and a growth rate of 146%...
Not surprising if you follow the news, but it does mean that the census bureau didn't and their estimates missed entirely.

That's not the only Orthodox Community whose growth the Census Bureau's estimates missed entirely. It's probably the rule, not the exception here.

[jimrtex]

Which Census estimates had April 1 estimates? I don't think it was in the PEP release from May -at least in May.

There was another release in July. I can only find them by clicking through the July 27 press release at:

https://www.census.gov/programs-surveys/popest.html

https://www.census.gov/newsroom/press-releases/2021/vintage-2020-populaton-evaluation-estimates.html

Then click on "evaluation estimates"

I just check the data set for Texas counties, and the April 1, 2020 estimate is not 3/4 of the way between July 1, 2019 and July 1, 2020.

I assume they don't consider the "evaluation estimates" the standard continuation of 2020 estimates, but a special version which they can compare with the Census.

BTW, I don't know if you remember back in '020 and Alabama had a relative high return for a southern state. It looks like a public effort to return forms may have saved the 7th congressional seat. Notice the Black Belt on the county map.

[Adam Griffin]

Interactive for Census Places, this time with a background map. Alaska is up top due to this.

https://cinycmaps.com/index.php/2-uncategorized/96-2020-census-place-population-change-2010-20

With all the data you've collected thus far, is there anyway to "unify" a national map (i.e. include unincorporated areas' population changes along with the above map)?

[jimrtex]

Interactive for Census Places, this time with a background map. Alaska is up top due to this.

https://cinycmaps.com/index.php/2-uncategorized/96-2020-census-place-population-change-2010-20

It is so mouse over Houston, TX. It is like when they use a fluorescent marker that binds to cancer cells.

I think there may be a systemic bias in how they distribute county estimates to cities within a county.

According to this (PDF) they create the county-level estimates using demographic methods, and then divvy it up among cities.

If you go to counties with lots of cities, you may find some that are overestimated, and others that are underestimated. The overestimated tend to be older cities that are landlocked and not many opportunities to add housing units.

This first showed up in Bexar County (which only has one city). Bexar County was overestimated by less than 1% bus San Antonio was overestimated by 8% and outside the city underestimated by 25% (about 3/4 of the county is in the city). So there allocation method was moving people into the city.

Maricopa: Phoenix and Scottsdale overestimated, while Buckeye underestimated.

Los Angeles: Santa Clarita, Lancaster, Palmdale underestimated.

Cities that have space for new housing units tended to be underestimated.

Cook (Illinois): Though Chicago was underestimated, all the cities outside the city were even worse.

[bagelman]

Biggest losing county is Alexander IL, home of the ruins of Cairo IL. With the demolition of the housing projects the city, declining since around WWII or even before, plunged by 39% which is the biggest percentage loss ever, from 2831 to 1733. The county dropped from 8238 to 5240, a decrease of 36%. I found a small village, Thebes, in the county that lost more than half its population, including almost all the black people.

The dangerous ghetto of East St. Louis IL has declined from 27k to 18.5k, a decline of over 30%.

I wonder if stimmys helped get people out of the ghetto before the census canvassing in the late summer and fall. Of course all of downstate IL is declining and is the main reason the state as a whole lost people even as Chicago was doing OK.

[cinyc]

Interactive for Census Places, this time with a background map. Alaska is up top due to this.

https://cinycmaps.com/index.php/2-uncategorized/96-2020-census-place-population-change-2010-20

With all the data you've collected thus far, is there anyway to "unify" a national map (i.e. include unincorporated areas' population changes along with the above map)?

That would involve math to figure out the "balance of" each geo. I'm not sure whether that's even possible. Census didn't provide that data in the release. I'd have to calculate it on my own.

[cinyc]

Which Census estimates had April 1 estimates? I don't think it was in the PEP release from May -at least in May.

There was another release in July. I can only find them by clicking through the July 27 press release at:

https://www.census.gov/programs-surveys/popest.html

https://www.census.gov/newsroom/press-releases/2021/vintage-2020-populaton-evaluation-estimates.html

Then click on "evaluation estimates"

I just check the data set for Texas counties, and the April 1, 2020 estimate is not 3/4 of the way between July 1, 2019 and July 1, 2020.

I assume they don't consider the "evaluation estimates" the standard continuation of 2020 estimates, but a special version which they can compare with the Census.

BTW, I don't know if you remember back in '020 and Alabama had a relative high return for a southern state. It looks like a public effort to return forms may have saved the 7th congressional seat. Notice the Black Belt on the county map.

Thanks, Jim! I'll update the map with the "official" Census 2020 estimates some time this weekend.

[Annatar]

I have a question, Dave Wasserman tweeted out the black population share was 12.1% but looking on the census website it says 12.4%, his other numbers were correct but is the 12.1% figure right or 12.4%

[Adam Griffin]

Interactive for Census Places, this time with a background map. Alaska is up top due to this.

https://cinycmaps.com/index.php/2-uncategorized/96-2020-census-place-population-change-2010-20

With all the data you've collected thus far, is there anyway to "unify" a national map (i.e. include unincorporated areas' population changes along with the above map)?

That would involve math to figure out the "balance of" each geo. I'm not sure whether that's even possible. Census didn't provide that data in the release. I'd have to calculate it on my own.

To be clear, I was referring to the unincorporated remainder at the county/parish/borough level (and not each tract, block, etc). Maybe this is what you inferred and maybe it would still be difficult, but I just wanted to clarify. Minus any cities that may cross county borders, I would think this would be relatively simple to calculate.

[cinyc]

Interactive for Census Places, this time with a background map. Alaska is up top due to this.

https://cinycmaps.com/index.php/2-uncategorized/96-2020-census-place-population-change-2010-20

With all the data you've collected thus far, is there anyway to "unify" a national map (i.e. include unincorporated areas' population changes along with the above map)?

That would involve math to figure out the "balance of" each geo. I'm not sure whether that's even possible. Census didn't provide that data in the release. I'd have to calculate it on my own.

To be clear, I was referring to the unincorporated remainder at the county/parish/borough level (and not each tract, block, etc). Maybe this is what you inferred and maybe it would still be difficult, but I just wanted to clarify. Minus any cities that may cross county borders, I would think this would be relatively simple to calculate.

There are some incorporated places that cross county lines. I'd have to think about how to calculate that. That should be in the dataset, but I'd have to figure out the summary level.

Doing what I'd like to do - within County Sub - seems to not be available, but I'll have to double check.

[jimrtex]

Interactive for Census Places, this time with a background map. Alaska is up top due to this.

https://cinycmaps.com/index.php/2-uncategorized/96-2020-census-place-population-change-2010-20

With all the data you've collected thus far, is there anyway to "unify" a national map (i.e. include unincorporated areas' population changes along with the above map)?

That would involve math to figure out the "balance of" each geo. I'm not sure whether that's even possible. Census didn't provide that data in the release. I'd have to calculate it on my own.

To be clear, I was referring to the unincorporated remainder at the county/parish/borough level (and not each tract, block, etc). Maybe this is what you inferred and maybe it would still be difficult, but I just wanted to clarify. Minus any cities that may cross county borders, I would think this would be relatively simple to calculate.

There are some incorporated places that cross county lines. I'd have to think about how to calculate that. That should be in the dataset, but I'd have to figure out the summary level.

Doing what I'd like to do - within County Sub - seems to not be available, but I'll have to double check.

155 State-Place-County

It is kind of inverted, but you want intersections of Place and County anyway.

How close are the CDP's between the the two Censuses?

[cinyc]

Interactive for Census Places, this time with a background map. Alaska is up top due to this.

https://cinycmaps.com/index.php/2-uncategorized/96-2020-census-place-population-change-2010-20

With all the data you've collected thus far, is there anyway to "unify" a national map (i.e. include unincorporated areas' population changes along with the above map)?

That would involve math to figure out the "balance of" each geo. I'm not sure whether that's even possible. Census didn't provide that data in the release. I'd have to calculate it on my own.

To be clear, I was referring to the unincorporated remainder at the county/parish/borough level (and not each tract, block, etc). Maybe this is what you inferred and maybe it would still be difficult, but I just wanted to clarify. Minus any cities that may cross county borders, I would think this would be relatively simple to calculate.

There are some incorporated places that cross county lines. I'd have to think about how to calculate that. That should be in the dataset, but I'd have to figure out the summary level.

Doing what I'd like to do - within County Sub - seems to not be available, but I'll have to double check.

155 State-Place-County

It is kind of inverted, but you want intersections of Place and County anyway.

How close are the CDP's between the the two Censuses?

Yup. I found and calculated the data. I'm getting ready to update the map.

How close the CDPs are between the 2 Censuses I don't know. There may be boundary changes, and the raw 2010 Census data won't pick that up. I'd have to use the April 2010 estimates base, which I've been loathe to do, except to fill in blanks due to no 2010 pop. And the 2010 estimates base doesn't have CDPs at all, unless you know of a source other than the PEP.

When I re-make the county sub map with the "official" April 1, 2020 estimates, I'm going to have to think about all of this. But I will update the incorporated place map with county remainders soon.

[cinyc]

Interactive for Census Places, this time with a background map. Alaska is up top due to this.

https://cinycmaps.com/index.php/2-uncategorized/96-2020-census-place-population-change-2010-20

With all the data you've collected thus far, is there anyway to "unify" a national map (i.e. include unincorporated areas' population changes along with the above map)?

That would involve math to figure out the "balance of" each geo. I'm not sure whether that's even possible. Census didn't provide that data in the release. I'd have to calculate it on my own.

To be clear, I was referring to the unincorporated remainder at the county/parish/borough level (and not each tract, block, etc). Maybe this is what you inferred and maybe it would still be difficult, but I just wanted to clarify. Minus any cities that may cross county borders, I would think this would be relatively simple to calculate.

Try this link:
https://cinycmaps.com/index.php/2-uncategorized/98-2020-census-place-with-county-remainder-population-change-map

Let me know if it's too big to work on phones and the like & I'll zoom in as default.

I still need to identify places that have 2020 but no 2010 populations due to GEOID changes.

[Storebought]

I'm kind of gutted that Camden still lost population over 2010-20. Given its site and situation it deserves better than just being another East St Louis.

I think the east coast, in general though, turned a corner by the late 2000s: the revival started first in MA in the 1970s, then New York and DC in the 1990s, and Philadelphia a decade later. The still-declining east coast cities like Baltimore are the exceptions now more than the rule -- examples of willful neglect and intentional demolition rather than places succumbing to a general economic decline.

[Adam Griffin]

Interactive for Census Places, this time with a background map. Alaska is up top due to this.

https://cinycmaps.com/index.php/2-uncategorized/96-2020-census-place-population-change-2010-20

With all the data you've collected thus far, is there anyway to "unify" a national map (i.e. include unincorporated areas' population changes along with the above map)?

That would involve math to figure out the "balance of" each geo. I'm not sure whether that's even possible. Census didn't provide that data in the release. I'd have to calculate it on my own.

To be clear, I was referring to the unincorporated remainder at the county/parish/borough level (and not each tract, block, etc). Maybe this is what you inferred and maybe it would still be difficult, but I just wanted to clarify. Minus any cities that may cross county borders, I would think this would be relatively simple to calculate.

Try this link:
https://cinycmaps.com/index.php/2-uncategorized/98-2020-census-place-with-county-remainder-population-change-map

Let me know if it's too big to work on phones and the like & I'll zoom in as default.

I still need to identify places that have 2020 but no 2010 populations due to GEOID changes.

Awesome!

I have an older, crappy phone at the moment and it's definitely very laggy (takes a couple of seconds to pan each time (starts over AK) and several seconds to register a zoom) but it works. I imagine newer mobile devices will have little to no issue with it.

[bagelman]

I'm kind of gutted that Camden still lost population over 2010-20. Given its site and situation it deserves better than just being another East St Louis. 

At least the decline of that city is much slower. Camden is also now majority Hispanic.

[Non Swing Voter]

So basically no real suprises in the census; cities and well off rural areas generally grew while rural areas shrunk.

Yeah.  People here, and even redistricting experts, seem surprised by the magnitude of rural shrink and urban growth, but I am really not sure why.  Anyone who has traveled around this country a fair bit should know that rural areas are in massive decline almost unilaterally and people have been moving into cities all decade.  It seems like that's tempered the last couple of years and now suburbs are the major growth driver, but not enough to change the census numbers.

This is the main reason I think people are overestimating the GOP's chances in 2022.  Yes they will gerrymander (so will Dems), but there are also a lot of places that have some form of non-partisan commission and right now a lot of Republican areas are overrepresented in terms of their actual populations.  This is especially true in state legislatures too.

[jimrtex]

Interactive for Census Places, this time with a background map. Alaska is up top due to this.

https://cinycmaps.com/index.php/2-uncategorized/96-2020-census-place-population-change-2010-20

With all the data you've collected thus far, is there anyway to "unify" a national map (i.e. include unincorporated areas' population changes along with the above map)?

That would involve math to figure out the "balance of" each geo. I'm not sure whether that's even possible. Census didn't provide that data in the release. I'd have to calculate it on my own.

To be clear, I was referring to the unincorporated remainder at the county/parish/borough level (and not each tract, block, etc). Maybe this is what you inferred and maybe it would still be difficult, but I just wanted to clarify. Minus any cities that may cross county borders, I would think this would be relatively simple to calculate.

There are some incorporated places that cross county lines. I'd have to think about how to calculate that. That should be in the dataset, but I'd have to figure out the summary level.

Doing what I'd like to do - within County Sub - seems to not be available, but I'll have to double check.

155 State-Place-County

It is kind of inverted, but you want intersections of Place and County anyway.

How close are the CDP's between the the two Censuses?

Yup. I found and calculated the data. I'm getting ready to update the map.

How close the CDPs are between the 2 Censuses I don't know. There may be boundary changes, and the raw 2010 Census data won't pick that up. I'd have to use the April 2010 estimates base, which I've been loathe to do, except to fill in blanks due to no 2010 pop. And the 2010 estimates base doesn't have CDPs at all, unless you know of a source other than the PEP.

When I re-make the county sub map with the "official" April 1, 2020 estimates, I'm going to have to think about all of this. But I will update the incorporated place map with county remainders soon.

I don't think the Census Bureau makes estimates for CDP's.

I think for comparing Census 2020 with Estimates 2020 you will have to filter incorporated cities on the PLACECC field. All "Cn" are incorporated places. All "Un" and "Mn" are CDP's.

I'd then include all the unincorporated areas in balance of county.

You can compare CDP between 2010 and 2020, though I think there may be a major mismatch between the two. CDP's may become incorporated or decimated by annexation.

I think that the Census Bureau has grown indifferent to CDP's over time. They started in the 1950s when they started defining urban areas, which was when growth began outside cities. Previously, cities tended to expand to include all developed territory. You might have the central cities and a few suburban cities, and then some areas that looked like cities as far as land use.

But now that they have census tracts and census blocks and urban areas being defined automatically, the Census Bureau could care less about defining statistical cities. If the States want to do so they are free to do so. Now a county might want CDP's for all the colonias or settlement areas. It is hard enough to keep up with official annexations. It is hard to define boundaries of CDP's from the Census Bureau perspective. It requires too much context.

So I was thinking it might be fairly hard to match 2010 CDP's to 2020 CDP's..

I would be kind of curious to compare the 2020 Estimates to 2020 Census for counties where cities are substantial (say 20% to 80%) and the counties had substantial growth 10%+. I think the way they estimate city populations is wrong.

[Adam Griffin]

Took the data cinyc was kind enough to organize and mapped out the overall change of each county's total unincorporated populations over the past decade.

Obvious caveats apply: some counties/boroughs/parishes have no unincorporated areas (in which case they are simply colored based on total population change), and of course there are likely many places where based on 2010 boundaries alone, the unincorporated segments of a county actually grew in population (but new municipalities were incorporated, existing cities expanded their boundaries, etc, therefore leading to a decrease in population on paper).

Full-sized image

[cinyc]

Interactive for Census Places, this time with a background map. Alaska is up top due to this.

https://cinycmaps.com/index.php/2-uncategorized/96-2020-census-place-population-change-2010-20

With all the data you've collected thus far, is there anyway to "unify" a national map (i.e. include unincorporated areas' population changes along with the above map)?

That would involve math to figure out the "balance of" each geo. I'm not sure whether that's even possible. Census didn't provide that data in the release. I'd have to calculate it on my own.

To be clear, I was referring to the unincorporated remainder at the county/parish/borough level (and not each tract, block, etc). Maybe this is what you inferred and maybe it would still be difficult, but I just wanted to clarify. Minus any cities that may cross county borders, I would think this would be relatively simple to calculate.

There are some incorporated places that cross county lines. I'd have to think about how to calculate that. That should be in the dataset, but I'd have to figure out the summary level.

Doing what I'd like to do - within County Sub - seems to not be available, but I'll have to double check.

155 State-Place-County

It is kind of inverted, but you want intersections of Place and County anyway.

How close are the CDP's between the the two Censuses?

Yup. I found and calculated the data. I'm getting ready to update the map.

How close the CDPs are between the 2 Censuses I don't know. There may be boundary changes, and the raw 2010 Census data won't pick that up. I'd have to use the April 2010 estimates base, which I've been loathe to do, except to fill in blanks due to no 2010 pop. And the 2010 estimates base doesn't have CDPs at all, unless you know of a source other than the PEP.

When I re-make the county sub map with the "official" April 1, 2020 estimates, I'm going to have to think about all of this. But I will update the incorporated place map with county remainders soon.

I don't think the Census Bureau makes estimates for CDP's.

I think for comparing Census 2020 with Estimates 2020 you will have to filter incorporated cities on the PLACECC field. All "Cn" are incorporated places. All "Un" and "Mn" are CDP's.

I'd then include all the unincorporated areas in balance of county.

You can compare CDP between 2010 and 2020, though I think there may be a major mismatch between the two. CDP's may become incorporated or decimated by annexation.

I think that the Census Bureau has grown indifferent to CDP's over time. They started in the 1950s when they started defining urban areas, which was when growth began outside cities. Previously, cities tended to expand to include all developed territory. You might have the central cities and a few suburban cities, and then some areas that looked like cities as far as land use.

But now that they have census tracts and census blocks and urban areas being defined automatically, the Census Bureau could care less about defining statistical cities. If the States want to do so they are free to do so. Now a county might want CDP's for all the colonias or settlement areas. It is hard enough to keep up with official annexations. It is hard to define boundaries of CDP's from the Census Bureau perspective. It requires too much context.

So I was thinking it might be fairly hard to match 2010 CDP's to 2020 CDP's..

I would be kind of curious to compare the 2020 Estimates to 2020 Census for counties where cities are substantial (say 20% to 80%) and the counties had substantial growth 10%+. I think the way they estimate city populations is wrong.

There is a way to compute it, but it would be very time consuming and somewhat inexact. Census has block assignment files for incorporated places and CDPs, and a relationship file for the 2010-2020 blocks. One could sum up the 50 files for each state and compute what's in and outside of those places for both years. But it's probably not worth the time and effort.

There are no PEP estimates for CDPs, but there is block group data in the ACS. So we could compare that - but again, very time consuming and inexact.

[cinyc]

At Jim's suggestion, I updated the Place with Remainder map to show Counties minus incorporated places as the balance of counties for the estimates comparison map (now using the official April estimates, I think). I haven't fixed the shapefile to take out the CDPs yet. Pretend they don't exist for now. Maybe later.