# Presentation: 926209

## Dealing With A Future Which Is in Perpetual Construction---Washington State Provisional Projection by Age, Sex And Race/Ethnicity: 2000-2030

- Office of Financial Management
- Washington State
- March 30, 2005

**Notes:**
This projection feeds into our long term employment forecast, used by DOH, DSHS for program planning and policy analysis. We used to update it every 5 years.  And now we look into revising it every other year.

We realize that there are number of states that also do ASR projections, such as Taxes, Minnesota, Wyoming, Mississippi, etc. So, there are a lot of talents and experiences in the audience.  Our projection is still in testing and evaluation mode.  So, I welcome comments, suggestions or even questions.  

## Introduction

- Philosophy: Maximize knowledge and minimize subjective bias
- Projection categories: OMB new race/ethnicity categories, gender, five year age groups, and single year between 15-19.
- Method: cohort component method with all the components being projected separately
- Base year data:  NCHS 2000 estimates
- Control totals: each component is controlled to the state total

**Notes:**
We know the challenge is huge.  Data incomparability can through things off.  We know judgments are inevitable.  So, we ask how we can maximize our knowledge and minimize subjective bias.
This is related to our choice of methods and development of assumptions.
Between forward and backward bridging: choose backwards because MR and NCHS data at the state level are more stable for bridging than input data.
Data selection:  we researched on a lot of projections and evaluated any data that we think may be relevant.  But, not all of them can be used together, so our rules are: the most recent, how much historical trend to use, and information produced by experts such and the Bureau and UN.
Keep the model simple: 15-19 uses simple share method.  Two+ is done with simple survival method.

## Main Steps for Projection Procedure for State Population by Age, Gender and Race/Ethnicity

- Major Data Input:
- Births 95-2000
- Deaths 95-2000
- Migration 95-2000

- Fertility  assumptions
- Mortality assumptions
- Migration assumptions

- Calculate ASFR, TFR
- Calculate Mortality rates
- Calculate migration rates

- Projecting  births,
- deaths and migration:
- 2000-2030

- Control projected births, deaths and
- migration to state totals, then add all the
- components into the master file

- Produce pyramid for
- Evaluation; make
- adjustment if necessary

- Project multiracial
- category

- Project Non Hispanic
- And Hispanic population

- Project 15-19 single year
- Gender, Non Hispanic/
- Hispanic

- Final report

**Notes:**
This flow chart shows the basic steps of our ASR projection.  
The input data are data that used to calculate rates.  Information used to make judgments are not included.
It is done with pretty much the standard cohort model
Except how the multiracial is pulled out and how the Hispanics are separated, which I will talk about later

## Adjust Black Population in NCHS 2000 Estimates

**Notes:**
Data source: C:\Bridging\NCHS bridging\compare.xls
When we decide to project the population in OMB old race categories, we evaluated NCHS estimate to make sure that the allocation of multiracial is reasonable.  We placed NCHS numbers in the brackets between black alone and black in combination.  We found that for majority of the age groups, NCHS method allocates 98% of black in combination into Black category, whereas some age groups have even exceeded the number of in combination.  We made adjustment based on two WSPS surveys, which indicate about 65% of those who check black and something else would choose black if choices are limited. 
This chart shows numeric numbers of MR, OFM, and NCHS numbers.  The blue line indicates NCHS allocation increase black in MR by about 45% for 0-4, 33% for 5-9, etc.  We adjusted them to about 30% increase for those age groups.

## Fertility Assumptions: Before and Current

- Prior to the current projection:
- Assume 95-2000 ASFR for 2000-05 period
- Use 2000-05 Women 15-49 and 0-4 year old to recalculate ASFR to be used for 2005-10 period, and so on.
- Then control to state projected total births for the period.
- Concerns:
- 	Only the fertility assumptions for the total women at child bearing age are reflected.  We assume that the fertility pattern for each one of the minority groups is likely to change in the future.  Such variance in different race groups are not reflected in the method.

**Notes:**
The previous version of the fertility projection was based simply on the 95-2000 ASFR.  For each projection period we recalculated the ASFR based on previous period women between 15-49 and population 0-4, then control the births to state total projected births.  This procedure has weaknesses.  The change of ASFR is actually driven by the projected child bearing age women and the state total birth.  

## Current Fertility Assumptions

- The ASFR for 2000 is calculated with the existing method;
- Child-women ratio is the second method;
- Census Bureau's national fertility projection has been incorporated to develop adjustment factors.
- United Nations fertility data for Southeast Asian and Mexico are used to assess the fertility rates for Hispanics and API.
- Assimilation theory is adopted to bring down the high fertility rate of Hispanic origin population.

**Notes:**
So, this time we use 95-2000 births to calculate ASFT TRF for 2000-05.  Then we did some research on how others project ASFRs for beyond 2010 periods. Black and American Indians seem to have pretty stable fertility rates and we don’t feel those are going to change much.  But, we do feel the ASFR for Asian and Hispanics will change in the future.  The main reason for these two groups to grow is immigration.  And the immigrants could have different fertility patterns than those who have lived in America for a while.  

We looked at different models, and made some decisions based on assimilation model, which examines immigrants’ variation and adaptation of beliefs and behaviors after migration. Immigrants want to change their lives for the better and control of fertility may be an important component in reaching their goal. 

The fertility rates at their home countries are declining and are expected to continue.  According to the U.N, between 2010-2030, TFR for Asia is 2.02 and 1.9 by 2050.  Latin America is 1.99 by 2030 and 1.85 by 2050 and afterwards.  

Bean at al have examined the fertility levels of Mexican-origin women stratified by generational cohorts and compared to non Hispanic White U.S. women.  They found Adult Mexican immigrant women are likely to have 0.557 children than Non Hispanic white women in America, child immigrants who live in the U.S. till they reach child bearing age may have 0.366 fewer children.  The second generation could have 0.171 fewer children.  There is about 30% decrease between each category.  

## TFR by Race/Ethnicity

**Notes:**
However, since the next 30 years will still see relatively large # of immigrants, we do not expect for the total converge yet.
The change of TFR over 30 year period is from 2.32 to 2.10.

## Migration: Assumptions and Methods

- Total migration by race:
- Migration is controlled to the state total projected migration, so the crucial issue is to get the racial distribution right
- 1990-2000 residual migration is calculated with standard survival rate method.
- Age and gender distribution:
- The 1995-2000 in and out migration are used to get base for international migration as well as the age and gender distribution among each race.
- School enrolment  (grade 2-7t vs. 3-8t+1) between 1981-2003 by race is used as an indicator for future migration change.

**Notes:**

The state total migration is projected with several methods, and we are pretty confident about the fitness of the numbers.  For this ASR projection the crucial thing is to get the race and age distributions right.  We project the migration in short term (2000-10) and long  term (2010-30). 

The standard survival method is used to calculate 2000 migration rate. 
The adjusted NCHS 2000 estimate is used so that the two points of time are comparable. 
Though 1990-2000 migration may not be indicative for the future, the racial proportion seems to be reasonable and assumed to maintain in the near future.  Meaning that we may not see close to 645,000 net migration for a decade, Asian and Hispanics will continue to be the largest contributors over the prjection horizen.
School enrolment trends are also used to evaluate the near term migration assumption.  Asian and Hispanic population had tremendously large increase of migration during the 1980s.  The volumes maintained to be large over the 90’s, but the momentum of increase has remarkably slowed.   There has been a lot of studies, research and speculation on how the immigration trends are going to be.  We feel that the pull and push factors are going to work the same way as the 90’s for the next decade.  This trend may not maintain its momentum in the future. 

The 95-2000 migration is used to get the age and gender distribution 

## Change of School Enrolment Grade 2-7t vs. 3-8t+1

**Notes:**
Asian migration increased tremendously over 1980’s and reached peak at early 90’s and stay there till mid decade and started to go lower.

## Change of School Enrolment Grade 2-7t vs. 3-8t+1

**Notes:**
Hispanics shows similar pattern as Asian for 1980 and early 1990’s. But their momentum does not seem to lose speed.  It looks like they will stay where they are for a while.

## Migration: Assumptions and Methods

- For the long term: domestic and international migrations are projected separately; immigration assumptions are built based on Bureau’s 1999 immigration framework.  Washington State foreign born, and 1980-2000 immigration information from INS are also used as indicators.
- Domestic migration is derived as residual of total and international migration.  Age, sex and race distribution shall be based on 95-2000 migration from census 2000.
- Total migration is controlled to the state total migration projection.

**Notes:**
For the long term, we made assumptions  on immigration as well as domestic migration. Foreign born seem to play a larger role in the migration change.  The international migration assumptions were developed within the framework of Census Bureau's 1999 national ASR projection.  Aging of the U.S. population will increase immigration “pull” beginning in the 2010’s.  
However the composition of sending counties may change.  While between 2000-2010, Asian and Mexico are predominantly the sending countries, in the 2020’s and later, we are likely to see relatively more immigrants from African, and Middle East countries rather than Asian countries. 
The sending and receiving relationship between U.S. and Mexico are not going to change.  However, we feel the emigration will increase.  So, over the 2020-2030 period, Hispanic immigration is reduced by 25%. 

Domestic migration = total state migration – international migration.
State total migration is based on several methods such as econometric model, ratio correlation and cohort component II methods.

## Mortality Assumption

- Washington mortality by race follows the national trend.  NCHS 2000 life tables for white, black and other race are used for 2000-2010.
- After 2010, the gain in life expectancy will gradually slow down.  No sufficient information to distinguish the change by racial groups, the trend for total population by gender is adopted.
- Robert Schoen Basic Life Table method is used to calculate life expectancy of Hispanic origin population.

**Notes:**
Our state forecast made the assumption that mortality rate for WA follows the same trend as the nation.  
So will the projections of mortality by race.
 After 2010 the gain in life expectancy will gradually slow down.  No sufficient information to distinguish the change by racial groups, therefore, the one year gain per each projection period for state total population is used.    
Robert Schoen basic life table method is used to calculate life expectancy of Washington Hispanic origin population.
Once we have all the ingredients projected, we add them together for review.  We produce pyramids to see if the age distributions look right.

## Extract the Multiracial Population

- Difference between 2000 MR and adjusted NCHS 2000 estimate is controlled to the Multiracial population in 2000 MR file.
- Project 0-4 year old multiracial based on 1990 and 2000 under one year old in multiracial families.
- Add the projected 0-4 to each projection period and forward surviving the rest of the age groups.
- Raking to the state level total multiracial population which is projected separately.

**Notes:**
The next task is to get the multiracial population.
We look at some historical information that could indicate the direction of change for multiracial population.
Interracial marriages increased from 0.4% of total marriages in 1960 to 1.3% in 1980, 1.8% in 1990 and 2.6% in 2000. 
Children born to interracial marriage families compose 4.1% of all births in 1990.   Census 2000 PUMA indicates 5.8% in 2000.
2000 MR and NCHS data give us the difference which are considered multiracial from each race group.
Then 2000 multiracial by race are survived to each projection period.
1990 and 2000 proportion of children born into multiracial families are used to project 0-4 year old for each projection period.

## Separate the Hispanic and Non Hispanic

- Use projected Hispanic births as base
- Use CWR to estimate 0-4 year old migrants by race/ethnicity, and percent of total migration is calculated to project future migration of the age cohort .
- Applied survival rate to (1+2) =projected
- 0-4 Hispanic
- Survive Hispanic by age and gender to the next projection period and add (3) for 0-4 year old.
- Subtract Hispanic from total to get Non Hispanic

## Slide 15

- Data and documentation can be found at the following URL:
- http://www.ofm.wa.gov/pop/race/provisional_projections.htm