U S C E N S U S B U R E A U

Profile of the Foreign-Born Population in the United States: 1997 P23-195 Current Population Reports Special Studies
1

Acknowledgments

This report was prepared by A. Dianne Schmidley and Campbell Gibson in

Population Division (POP). Joseph Costanzo (POP), Robert Callis, Housing and

Household Economic Statistics Division (HHES), and Herman Alvarado (POP)

made significant contributions to the development of the report. J. Gregory

Robinson (POP) contributed to earlier drafts of the report. General direction was

provided by Jorge del Pinal (POP), Assistant Division Chief for Special Populations. Statistical support was provided by Emily Lennon and Linda Chase (POP),

and Bonnie Damon (HHES), and clerical support was provided by Tiffanie

Newman (POP).

Tabulations were provided by A. Dianne Schmidley and Marie Pees (POP)

and Stacey Masano (HHES). Laura Yax, Mary Pontorno, and Janet Wysocki

(POP) prepared the report and the supporting statistical table package for presentation on the Census Bureau Internet site.

The report was reviewed by Kenneth Bryson (POP) and Larry Long (HHES).

One or more sections were reviewed by other staff members in Population Division

and in Housing and Household Economic Statistics Division: Robert Bennefield

(HHES), Claudette Bennett (POP), Jennifer Day (POP), Manuel de la Puente

(POP), Carmen DeNavas (HHES), Kristin Hansen (POP), Frederick Hollmann

(POP), Mary Kirk (HHES), Gordon Lester (HHES), Martin O’Connell (POP),

Thomas Palumbo (HHES), Randolph Sherrod (HHES), Linda Showalter

(POP), and Sharon Stern (HHES). Consultation was provided by Prithwis Das

Gupta (POP), Charles Nelson (HHES), Leonard Norry (HHES), Kathleen

Short (HHES), Victor Valdisera (HHES), and Edward Welniak (HHES).

The section on labor force was reviewed by Jay Meisenheimer, U.S. Bureau of

Labor Statistics. Linda Gordon, Office of Policy and Planning of the U.S. Immigration and Naturalization Service, also reviewed the report.

Survey coordination was provided by Gregory Weyland, Demographic Surveys

Division. Sampling review was provided by Thomas Moore III, Marti Jones,

Marie Stetser, and Geneva Burns, Demographic Statistical Methods Division.

The staff of Administrative and Customer Services Division, Walter C. Odom,

Chief, performed planning, design, composition, editorial review, and printing planning and procurement for publications, Internet products, and report forms. Penny

Heiston provided publication coordination and editing. Design and graphics were

performed by Janet Sweeney.

Partial funding for the report was provided by the Immigration and Naturalization Service of the U.S. Department of Justice.
Profile of the

Foreign-Born

Population

in the United

States: 1997

Current Population Reports

Special Studies P23-195

Issued August 1999

U.S. Department of Commerce

William M. Daley, Secretary

Robert L. Mallett, Deputy Secretary

Economics and Statistics Administration

Robert J. Shapiro, Under Secretary for

Economic Affairs

U.S. CENSUS BUREAU

Kenneth Prewitt, Director
Suggested Citation

Schmidley, A. Dianne and

Campbell Gibson, U.S. Census

Bureau, Current Population

Reports, Series P23-195,

Profile of the Foreign-Born

Population in the United States:

1997. U.S. Government Printing

Office, Washington, DC, 1999.

ECONOMICS

AND STATISTICS

ADMINISTRATION

Robert J. Shapiro,

Under Secretary

for Economic Affairs

ECONOMICS

AND STATISTICS

ADMINISTRATION

U.S. CENSUS BUREAU

Kenneth Prewitt,

Director

William G. Barron,

Deputy Director

Paula J. Schneider,

Principal Associate Director

for Programs

Nancy M. Gordon,

Associate Director for

Demographic Programs

John F. Long,

Chief, Population Division

Daniel H. Weinberg,

Chief, Housing and Household

Economic Statistics Division

For sale by Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, DC 20402.
iii

U.S. Census Bureau

Contents

Notes About This Report ................................................................................................................................................ 1

Highlights ........................................................................................................................................................................ 2

Sections

1. Trends in Immigration and the Foreign-Born Population ................................................................................ 8

2. Region of Birth ................................................................................................................................................ 10

3. Country of Birth .............................................................................................................................................. 12

4. Geographic Distribution.................................................................................................................................. 14

5. Metropolitan Areas ......................................................................................................................................... 16

6. Length of Residence ........................................................................................................................................ 18

7. Citizenship Status ............................................................................................................................................ 20

8. Nativity, Parentage, and Foreign Stock ........................................................................................................... 22

9. Race and Hispanic Origin ............................................................................................................................... 24

10. Age and Gender ............................................................................................................................................... 26

11. Household Size and Type ................................................................................................................................ 28

12. Families and Own Children ............................................................................................................................ 30

13. Educational Attainment .................................................................................................................................. 32

14. Labor Force Participation ................................................................................................................................ 34

15. Occupation ...................................................................................................................................................... 36

16. Money Income of Households and Families ................................................................................................... 38

17. Earnings of Full-Time, Year-Round Workers ................................................................................................. 40

18. Poverty Status .................................................................................................................................................. 42

19. Means-Tested Program Participation .............................................................................................................. 44

20. Health Insurance and Pension Plans .............................................................................................................. 46

21. Homeownership .............................................................................................................................................. 48

References ..................................................................................................................................................................... 51

Figures

1-1. Foreign-Born Population and Percent of Total Population for the United States: 1850 to 1997 .................... 9

1-2. Immigrants to the United States, by Decade: Fiscal Years, 1821 to 1997 ........................................................ 9

2-1. Foreign-Born Population by Region of Birth: 1960 to 1997 ............................................................................11

2-2. Foreign-Born Population by Region of Birth: Selected Years, 1850 to 1997 ...................................................11

3-1. Countries of Birth of the Foreign-Born Population, With

500,000 or More in 1997: 1990 and 1997 ..................................................................................................... 12

4-1. States With a Foreign-Born Population of 1 Million or More in 1997: 1990 and 1997 ................................. 15

4-2. Foreign Born Population for States: 1997 ....................................................................................................... 15

5-1. Metropolitan Areas With Foreign-Born Populations of 1 Million or

More in 1997: 1990 and 1997 ........................................................................................................................ 16

5-2. Population by Nativity and Metropolitan-Nonmetropolitan Residence: 1997 .............................................. 17
iv

U.S. Census Bureau

6-1. Length of Residence in the United States for the Foreign-Born Population: 1970 to 1997 ........................... 18

6-2. Length of Residence in the United States for the Foreign-Born

Population by Region of Birth: 1997 ............................................................................................................... 19

7-1. Foreign-Born Population by Citizenship Status: 1970 to 1997 ....................................................................... 20

7-2. Naturalized Citizens by Length of Residence in the United States: 1970 to 1997......................................... 21

7-3. Naturalized Citizens by Region of Birth: 1997 ............................................................................................... 21

8-1. Foreign-Stock Population by Nativity and Parentage: Selected Years, 1890 to 1997 ..................................... 23

9-1. Nativity and Parentage for Selected Race and Hispanic Origin Groups: 1997 .............................................. 25

9-2. Length of Residence in the United States and Citizenship Status for Selected

Race and Hispanic Origin Groups of the Foreign-Born Population: 1997 ..................................................... 25

10-1. Age and Gender of the Population by Nativity, Length of Residence in the

United States, and Citizenship Status: 1997 ................................................................................................... 26

10-2. Age and Gender of the Foreign-Born Population by Region of Birth: 1997 ................................................... 27

10-3. Age and Gender of the Foreign-Born Population: 1960 to 1997 .................................................................... 27

11-1. Households by Nativity, Length of Residence in the United States,

and Citizenship Status of the Householder: 1997 .......................................................................................... 28

11-2. Foreign-Born Households by Region of Birth of the Householder: 1997 ....................................................... 29

12-1. Families by Type, Nativity of Householder, and Number of Own Children: 1997 ....................................... 30

12-2. Married-Couple Families by Nativity of Spouses and

Age of Household Members: 1997 .................................................................................................................. 31

13-1. Educational Attainment of the Population 25 Years Old and Over by Nativity,

Length of Residence in the United States, and Citizenship Status: 1997....................................................... 33

13-2. Educational Attainment of the Foreign-Born Population

25 Years Old and Over by Region of Birth: 1997 ............................................................................................ 33

14-1. Labor Force Participation Rates of the Population 16 Years Old and Over

by Nativity and Gender for Selected Age Groups: 1997 ................................................................................ 35

14-2. Labor Force Participation Rates of the Population 25 to 54 Years Old by Nativity,

Length of Residence in the United States, Citizenship Status, and Gender: 1997 ........................................ 35

14-3. Labor Force Participation Rates of the Foreign-Born Population 25 to 54 Years

Old by Region of Birth and Gender: 1997 ...................................................................................................... 35

15-1. Major Occupation Group of Workers 16 Years Old and Over by Nativity,

Length of Residence in the United States, and Citizenship Status: 1997....................................................... 36

15-2. Major Occupation Group of Foreign-Born Workers 16 Years Old

and Over by Region of Birth: 1997 ................................................................................................................. 37

16-1. Median Household Income by Nativity, Length of Residence in the United States,

and Citizenship Status of the Householder: 1996 .......................................................................................... 39

16-2. Income of Foreign-Born Households by Region of Birth of the Householder: 1996 ..................................... 39

16-3. Median Family Income by Nativity of Householder, Type of Family, and

Presence of Related Children Under 18 Years: 1996 ...................................................................................... 39

17-1. Earnings of Full-Time, Year-Round Workers by Gender, Nativity, Length of

Residence in the United States, and Citizenship Status: 1996 ....................................................................... 41

17-2. Median Earnings of Foreign-Born Full-Time, Year-Round Workers by

Gender and Region of Birth: 1996 .................................................................................................................. 41
v

U.S. Census Bureau

18-1. Poverty Rates for the Population by Nativity, Length of Residence in the

United States, and Citizenship Status: 1996 ................................................................................................... 43

18-2. Poverty Rates for the Foreign-Born Population by Region of Birth: 1996...................................................... 43

18-3. Selected Poverty Rates for the Population by Nativity, for Families by Nativity of

the Householder, and for Related Children Under 18 Years by Nativity: 1996 ............................................. 43

19-1. Households Receiving Selected Means-Tested Noncash or Cash Benefits, by

Specified Benefit and Nativity of the Householder: 1996 .............................................................................. 45

19-2. Households Receiving Selected Means-Tested Noncash or Cash Benefits, by Nativity, Length

of Residence in the United States, and Citizenship Status of the Householder: 1996 .................................. 45

19-3. Foreign-Born Households Receiving Selected Means-Tested Noncash or

Cash Benefits by Region of Birth of the Householder: 1996 .......................................................................... 45

20-1. Health Insurance Coverage of the Population by Nativity, Length of Residence

in the United States, and Citizenship Status: 1996 ........................................................................................ 47

20-2. Health Insurance Coverage of the Foreign-Born Population by Region of Birth: 1996 ................................. 47

20-3. Employment-Based Health Insurance and Employer-Offered Pension Plans for Workers

by Nativity, Length of Residence in the United States, and Citizenship Status: 1996................................... 47

20-4. Employment-Based Health Insurance and Employer-Offered Pension Plans

for Foreign-Born Workers by Region of Birth: 1996 ....................................................................................... 47

21-1. Homeownership Rates and Median Age of Householder by Nativity, Citizenship

Status, and Length of Residence in the United States: 1997 .......................................................................... 49

21-2. Homeownership Rates by Nativity of Householder and Type of Household: 1997...................................... 49

21-3. Homeownership Rates and Median Age of Householder for Foreign-Born

Householders by Region of Birth: 1997 .......................................................................................................... 49

Text Tables

3-1. Leading Countries of Birth of the Foreign-Born Population: Selected Years, 1850 to 1990 .......................... 13

4-1. Foreign-Born Population by Region of Residence and for Leading States:

Selected Years, 1900 to 1997 ........................................................................................................................... 14

5-1. Foreign-Born Population in the 10 Largest Metropolitan Areas: 1997 .......................................................... 17

8-1. Population by Nativity and Parentage: 1997................................................................................................... 22

9-1. Population by Nativity, Parentage, and Selected Race and Hispanic Origin Groups: 1997 ........................... 24

Appendixes

A. The Foreign-Born Population and Immigration: Definitions and Concepts .................................................. 52

B. Source and Accuracy of Estimates .................................................................................................................. 54

C. Comparison of Population Universes.............................................................................................................. 62

D. Nativity Questions on the Current Population Survey................................................................................... 63

E. Related Reports and Information .................................................................................................................... 64

Appendix Figures

A-1. Classification of the Population of the United States by Nativity and Place of Birth: 1997 .......................... 53
1

U.S. Census Bureau

Notes About This Report

Profile of the Foreign-Born Population in the United States: 1997, Current

Population Reports, P23-195, presents data on a wide range of geographic, demographic, social, economic, and housing characteristics for the foreign-born population

of the United States. Data for the native population are included for comparison.

The data in this report for 1997 are from the March 1997 Current Population Survey

(CPS). Data for 1990 and earlier years, which are included for historical comparison, are from the decennial censuses of population. Detailed tables showing data for

1997 are presented in Profile of the Foreign-Born Population of the United

States: 1997, PPL-115, issued in 1999. Detailed tables showing data on the foreignborn population from decennial censuses are presented in Historical Census Statistics on the Foreign-Born Population of the United States: 1850 to 1990,

Population Division Working Paper, No. 29, issued in 1999.

The reference date for data from the 1990 census is April 1. For data from the

CPS, the reference dates vary depending on when the housing unit first came into

the survey and on the topic. Housing units (and their occupants) in the CPS are in

for 4 months, out for 8 months, and then in again for 4 months. Thus housing units

in the March 1997 CPS are about equally distributed among those that first came

into the survey from December 1995 to March 1996 and from December 1996 to

March 1997. While data on some characteristics, including age, are updated, data on

other characteristics, including length of residence in the United States and citizenship status of the foreign-born population, are not.

The core of this report is 21 two-page sections presenting information on various

topics for the foreign-born population. These sections are preceded by Highlights

and are followed by References and five appendixes: (A) The Foreign-Born Population and Immigration: Definitions and Concepts; (B) Source and Accuracy of Estimates; (C) Comparison of Population Universes; (D) Nativity Questions on the Current Population Survey; and (E) Related Reports and Information.

Numbers or percentages in the text, figures, and text tables may not sum to

totals due to rounding. In general, percentages in the text are rounded to whole

numbers for percentages of 10 and above and are shown to 1 decimal place for

percentages below 10 (i.e., to show 2 significant digits); however, percentages

above 10 are shown to 1 decimal place in cases where rounding to whole numbers would distort a comparison.

The Census Bureau uses 90-percent confidence intervals and 0.10 levels of significance to determine statistical validity (see Appendix B). Comparisons in the text

of this report that do not meet this standard are described as being not significant.

Copies of this report are available from the Superintendent of Documents, U.S.

Government Printing Office, Washington, DC 20402. General questions about the

report may be addressed to A. Dianne Schmidley, Population Division, U.S. Census

Bureau, Washington DC 20233, or to the E-mail address <pop@census.gov>.
2

U.S. Census Bureau

Highlights

Trends in Immigration and the

Foreign-Born Population

• The estimated foreign-born population of the United States in

March 1997 was 25.8 million,

based on data collected in the

Current Population Survey. This

was the largest foreign-born

population in U.S. history and

represented an increase of 6.0

million, or 30 percent, over the

1990 census figure of 19.8 million.

• In 1997, an estimated 9.7 percent

of the U.S. population was foreign born, up from 7.9 percent in

1990. The 1997 proportion is

midway between the highest and

lowest proportions in this century: 14.7 percent in 1910 and

4.7 percent in 1970.

• The rapid increase in the foreignborn population from 9.6 million

in 1970 to 25.8 million in 1997

reflects the high level of immigration during the past generation,

primarily from Latin America 30 percent of the foreign-born

and Asia. population was from Germany.

• While Latin America and Asia

Region of Birth accounted for only 2 of the 10

leading countries of birth • In 1997, 13.1 million, or 51 per- (Mexico and Cuba) of the for- cent, of the foreign-born popula- eign-born population in 1970, by tion was from Latin America, 1997 these two regions may have compared with 8.4 million, or 44 accounted for 8 of the 10 top percent in 1990. In 1970, 1.8 countries (Mexico, the Philip- million, or 19 percent, of the for- pines, China, Cuba, Vietnam, In- eign-born population was from dia, the Dominican Republic, and Latin America. El Salvador). The exact number

• The foreign-born population and the exact order after Mexico

from Asia was 6.8 million or 27 are uncertain due to sampling

percent of the total foreign-born variability in the Current Populapopulation in 1997. In 1970, 0.8 tion Survey.

million, or 9 percent, of the foreign-born population was from Geographic Distribution Asia.

• Six states had estimated foreign- • The foreign-born population born populations of 1 million or from Europe dropped from 5.7

million in 1970 to 4.3 million in more in 1997: California (8.1 million), New York (3.6 million), 1997 or from 62 percent to 17 Florida (2.4 million), Texas (2.2 percent of the total foreign-born million), New Jersey (1.2 mil- population. Previously, the pro- lion), and Illinois (1.1 million). portion of the foreign-born popu- Together, these states accounted lation from Europe had dropped for 18.5 million or 72 percent of from 86 percent in 1900 to 83 the total foreign-born population. percent in 1930 and to 75 percent The estimates do not differ sig- in 1960.

nificantly between Florida and

Texas and between New Jersey Country of Birth and Illinois.

• Mexico accounted for 7.0 million • In seven states, the foreign-born

or 28 percent of the total foreign- proportion in the population in

born population in 1997. The 1997 was estimated to be above

foreign-born population from the national average of 9.7 perMexico increased from 0.8 mil- cent: California (25 percent),

lion in 1970 to 2.2 million in New York (20 percent), Hawaii

1980 and to 4.3 million in 1990. (18 percent), Florida (16 percent), New Jersey (15 percent), • The foreign-born population Arizona (14 percent), and Texas from Mexico in 1997 was about 6

(11 percent). The estimates do times as large as the foreign-born not differ significantly between population from the next highest Florida and New Jersey. ranked country. Mexico’s proportion of the foreign-born • The foreign-born population in

population was last exceeded in a California increased from 1.8

decennial census in 1890 when

The native population, as

defined by the Census Bureau,

includes U.S. residents who

were born in the United States

or an outlying area of the

United States (e.g., Puerto

Rico), and U.S. residents who

were born in a foreign country

but who had at least one parent who was a U.S. citizen.

All other residents of the

United States are classified as

foreign born.

Definitions of terms other

than native population and

foreign-born population are included in the main text of the

report.
3

U.S. Census Bureau

million in 1970 to 8.1 million in Length of Residence accounted for primarily by a de1997 or from 18 percent to 31 cline in each length-of-residence • The foreign-born population was percent of the total foreign-born category. For example, the pro- distributed by length of residence population. The foreign-born portion naturalized among the in the United States in 1997 as population in New York in- foreign-born population with 10 follows: 21 percent under 5 years, creased from 2.1 million to 3.6 to 14 years of residence in the 20 percent 5 to 9 years, 14 per- million but dropped from 22 per- United States dropped from 58 cent 10 to 14 years, 15 percent 15 cent to 14 percent of the national percent in 1970 to 30 percent in to 19 years, and 30 percent 20 total. 1997. years and over. • In 1997, the proportion of natuMetropolitan Areas • The median length of residence ralized citizens in the foreign- in the United States of the for- born population varied greatly by • Five metropolitan areas (each eign-born population was 13 region of birth: 53 percent from identified here by the name of the years in 1997 and 12 years in Europe, 44 percent from Asia, first city in its official metropoli- 1990. The median dropped from and 24 percent from Latin tan area title) had estimated for- 20 years in 1970 to 14 years in America. The low proportion eign-born populations of 1 mil- 1980 with the attrition through from Latin America is attribut- lion or more in 1997: Los Ange- death of most of the immigrants able primarily to the low figure les (4.8 million), New York (4.6 who came to the United States for the population from Mexico million), Miami (1.4 million), during the period of large-scale (15 percent). San Francisco (1.4 million), and immigration that ended in the

Chicago (1.1 million). The esti- 1920s.

mates do not differ significantly Nativity, Parentage, and • Length of residence in the United between Los Angeles and New Foreign Stock States of the foreign-born popula- York or between Miami and San tion varies greatly by region of • In 1997, 54.7 million or 21 per- Francisco. birth, reflecting large-scale immi- cent of the population was of for-

• Among the 10 largest metropoli- gration from Latin America and eign stock. This number intan areas in 1997 (those with to- Asia since 1970. In 1997, the cluded 25.8 million foreign born,

tal populations of 4 million or median length of residence was 15.0 million of foreign parentage

more), the proportion foreign 25 years for the foreign-born (native with both parents foreign

born was highest in Los Angeles population from Europe and 12 born), and 13.9 million of mixed

(31 percent). Among metropoli- years for the foreign-born popula- parentage (native with one partan areas with 1 million to 4 mil- tion from Latin America and ent foreign born). The remainlion population, the proportion Asia. der of the population (212 milforeign born was highest in Mi- lion) was native of native parentami (39 percent). Citizenship Status age (both parents native).

• The proportion foreign born was • The proportion of the population • In 1997, 9.0 million, or 35 per- much higher in the metropolitan of foreign stock has increased cent, of the foreign-born popula- population (11 percent) than in since 1970 but is below historical tion were naturalized citizens of the nonmetropolitan population levels. The proportion increased the United States. This repre- (3 percent) in 1997. Within the from 33 percent in 1890 to 35 sents a continued decline in the metropolitan population, the pro- percent in 1910 and then dropped proportion naturalized among the portion ranged from 18 percent to 17 percent in 1970, the last foreign-born population from 64 in metropolitan areas of 5 million year for which data on foreign percent in 1970 to 51 percent in or more population down to 6 stock are available from the de- 1980 and to 40 percent in 1990. percent in metropolitan areas cennial census.

with less than 1 million popula- • The decline in the proportion of

tion. naturalized citizens in the total

foreign-born population is
4

U.S. Census Bureau

• With the large-scale immigration foreign-born Asians and Pacific Household Size and Type

of the past generation, the pro- Islanders, the median length of • In 1997, the average size of portion of the population that is residence was 12 years (44 per- households with a foreign-born native of foreign or mixed parent- cent were citizens). For foreign- householder (foreign-born house- age is likely to increase, and thus born Hispanics, the median holds) was 3.32, considerably the proportion of foreign stock is length of residence was 12 years larger than the average size of likely to increase. One indication (22 percent were citizens.) 2.56 for households with a native of this trend is the increase in the householder (native households). proportion of births in the United Age and Gender Foreign-born households had States occurring to foreign-born larger average numbers of both women residing in the United • In 1997, the median ages of the adults (2.29 versus 1.89) and States: from 6 percent in 1970 to foreign-born population (37) and children (1.03 versus 0.67). 18 percent in 1995. the native population (34) did

not differ greatly; however, their • Whereas native households inRace and Hispanic Origin age distributions differed consid- cluded an average of only 0.03

erably. In the foreign-born popu- foreign-born members in 1997,

• In 1997, Hispanics (of any race) lation, 10 percent were under 18 foreign-born households included

accounted for 11.4 million or 44 years old and 44 percent were 25 an average of 1.13 native mempercent of the foreign-born popu- to 44 years old, whereas the cor- bers. Native members reprelation. Asians and Pacific Island- responding proportions in the na- sented 34 percent of all members

ers accounted for 6.1 million or tive population were 28 percent of foreign-born households.

24 percent. Together, these and 30 percent. The sex ratio • In 1997, average household size groups accounted for 68 percent (males per 100 females) of the among foreign-born households of the foreign-born population foreign-born population was 101 ranged from 3.84 with house- but for only 9 percent of the na- compared with 95 for the native holders from Latin America to tive population. (About 2 per- population. 2.41 with householders from Eucent of Asians and Pacific Island- • The age structure of the foreign- rope. ers were of Hispanic origin.) born population varies greatly by

• The proportion foreign born var- region of birth, reflecting recent Families and Own Children ies greatly by race and Hispanic trends in immigration. In 1997,

origin. In 1997, 3.4 percent of the median age of the foreign- • The average size of families with

White non-Hispanics were for- born population was 51 from Eu- a foreign-born householder (foreign born compared with 5.9 per- rope, 38 from Asia, and 34 from eign-born families) in 1997 was

cent of Blacks, 61 percent of Latin America. 3.84 compared with 3.11 for

Asians and Pacific Islanders, and families with a native house- • During the past generation, the 38 percent of Hispanics. holder (native families). Foreign- age structure of the foreign-born born families had larger average • Length of residence and citizen- population has changed dramati- numbers of both adults (2.51 ver- ship status vary greatly by race cally due to the attrition through sus 2.16) and children (1.33 ver- and Hispanic origin of the death of immigrants who entered sus 0.95). foreign-born population. In prior to 1930 and to large-scale

1997, the median length of resi- immigration since 1970. The • Among married-couple families

dence in the United States was median age of the foreign-born with a foreign-born householder

20 years for foreign-born White population dropped from 57 in in 1997, the proportion with one

non-Hispanics (50 percent of 1960 to 37 in 1990 and has not or more own children under 18

whom were citizens). For for- changed significantly since. The years old ranged from 69 percent

eign-born Blacks, the median proportion 65 years old and over of those with householders from

length of residence was 13 years dropped from 33 percent in 1960 Latin America to 38 percent of

(35 percent were citizens). For to 11 percent in 1997. those with householders from
5

U.S. Census Bureau

Europe. Among foreign-born America. Within Latin America, Occupation

households with householders the proportion ranged greatly: 78 • In March 1997, managerial and from Mexico, the proportion was percent of those from South professional specialty occupa- 79 percent. America to 31 percent of those tions accounted for 24 percent of from Mexico. • Of the 53.6 million married- foreign-born workers compared couple families in 1997, 7.7 mil- with 30 percent of native work- lion or 14 percent included at Labor Force Participation ers. Technical, sales, and admin- least one foreign-born spouse. Of istrative support occupations ac- • In March 1997, the foreign-born these, 4.8 million had both counted for 22 percent of foreign- population accounted for 15.6 spouses foreign born, 1.7 million million or 12 percent of the total born workers compared with 31 had a foreign-born wife and a na- percent of native workers. civilian labor force of 135 mil- tive husband, and 1.3 million had lion. The labor force participa- • The occupational distributions of a foreign-born husband and a na- tion rate of the foreign-born naturalized-citizen workers and tive wife. population was 66 percent, not of native workers are similar.

significantly different from 67 For example, managerial and pro- Educational Attainment percent for the native population. fessional specialty occupations

accounted for 33 percent of natu- • In 1997, the proportion of the • Foreign-born men ages 25 to 54 ralized-citizen workers and 30 population 25 years old and over in March 1997 had a labor force

who had completed high school percent of native workers in participation rate (92 percent) March 1997. The corresponding or more education was lower that did not differ significantly proportions were 28 percent and among the foreign-born popula- from the rate for native men (91 31 percent in technical, sales, and tion (65 percent) than among the percent) and that did not vary administrative support occupa- native population (84 percent). greatly by citizenship status or reHowever, the proportion with a tions and 15 percent and 13 per- gion of birth. In contrast, for- cent in service occupations. bachelor’s degree or more educa- eign-born women ages 25 to 54

tion was 24 percent for both the had a lower labor force participa- • The proportions of foreign-born

foreign-born and native popula- tion rate (66 percent) than did workers in managerial and protions. native women (78 percent). fessional specialty occupations

Among foreign-born women, the vary by region of birth. In March • Among the foreign-born popula- rate for noncitizens (60 percent) 1997, these occupations ac- tion 25 years old and over in was lower than for naturalized counted for 38 percent of work- 1997, the proportion who had

completed high school or more citizens (77 percent), and the rate ers from Europe, 36 percent from

for women from Mexico (52 per- Asia (not significantly different education was the same for men cent) was lower than for other from each other), and 11 percent and women: 65 percent. The foreign-born women (66 per- from Latin America. Among for- proportion who had a bachelor’s cent). eign-born workers from Latin degree or more education was 27 America, these occupations ac- percent for men and 21 percent • In March 1997, the unemploy- counted for 23 percent of work- for women. ment rate was higher for the for- ers from South America and 6 eign-born labor force as a whole • The proportion of the foreign- percent of workers from Mexico. (6.9 percent) than for the native born population 25 years old and labor force (5.4 percent). Among over who had completed high women, the unemployment rate school or more education varies Money Income of

was higher for the foreign-born by region of birth. In 1997, the Households and Families

labor force (7.4 percent versus proportion was 84 percent of the • In 1996, median income for 4.9 percent); however, among foreign-born population from men, the unemployment rates households with a foreign-born Asia, 79 percent from Europe, householder was $30,000, were not significantly different and 47 percent from Latin compared with $36,100 for (6.5 percent versus 5.9 percent).
6

U.S. Census Bureau

households with a native house- Earnings of Full-Time, • Among the foreign-born populaholder. Among foreign-born Year-Round Workers tion, the poverty rates in 1996

households, 43 percent had in- were relatively low (and not sig- • Among full-time, year-round comes below $25,000, and 29 nificantly different from each workers in 1996, median earn- percent had incomes of $50,000 other) for the populations from ings were $25,000 for foreign- and over. Among native house- Europe (13 percent) and from born males and $20,800 for for- holds, 35 percent were in each of Asia (15 percent). For the popu- eign-born females. Median these two income categories. lation from Latin America, the earnings were higher for their poverty rate was 29 percent. • Income by type of family is lower native counterparts: $33,200 for for foreign-born families than for • Using an alternative definition of native males and $24,100 for na- native families. In 1996, median poverty that includes the value of tive females.

income for married-couple fami- means-tested noncash transfers

• Among foreign-born workers, lies was $38,800 for those with a (e.g., food stamps, housing assis- median earnings in 1996 were foreign-born householder and tance, and medicaid), the poverty much higher for naturalized citi- $50,800 for those with a native rates in 1996 of the foreign-born zens than for noncitizens: householder. For families with a population and of the native $35,600 compared with $20,500 female householder, no husband population were 16.1 percent and for males and $25,500 compared present, and one or more related 9.6 percent, respectively. with $17,200 for females. children under 18 years old, median income was $13,400 for • Median earnings among foreign- Means-Tested Program foreign-born families and born workers vary by region and Participation $16,800 for native families. country of birth as well as by

gender. For example, in 1996, • In 1996, 24 percent of house- • The income of foreign-born median earnings of foreign-born holds with foreign-born house- households varies by region of workers from Asia were $35,300 holders and 17 percent of house- birth of the householder. In

for males and $24,600 for fe- holds with native householders 1996, median household income

was $42,900 for those with males, and median earnings of participated in one or more of the

foreign-born workers from following means-tested programs householders from Asia, $31,300

with householders from Europe, Mexico were $16,800 for males providing noncash benefits: foods

and $13,700 for females. stamps, housing assistance, or and $24,100 with householders medicaid. The highest participa- from Latin America.

Poverty Status tion rates were for medicaid: 21

percent for foreign-born house-

• In 1996, the official poverty rate holds and 14 percent for native

was 21.0 percent for the foreign- households.

born population compared with

12.9 percent for the native population. Of the 36.5 million individuals below the poverty level,

5.4 million or 15 percent were

foreign born.
7

U.S. Census Bureau

• In 1996, 10.6 percent of house- • Among workers in 1996, 44 per- householder. For families with a

holds with a foreign-born house- cent of those who were foreign female householder, no husband

holder and 7.5 percent of house- born and 54 percent of those who present, the homeownership

holds with a native householder were native had employment- rates were 32 percent for foreignparticipated in one or more of the based health insurance. Among born households and 47 percent

following means-tested programs foreign-born workers, the propor- for native households.

providing cash benefits: aid to tions were 57 percent for natural- • The homeownership rate among families with dependent children ized citizens and 36 percent for foreign-born households varies by (AFDC), general assistance, or noncitizens. region of birth of the house- supplemental security income • In 1996, 41 percent of foreign- holder. In 1997, the (SSI). Nearly all (98 percent) of born workers and 56 percent of homeownership rates were 63 the households receiving cash native workers had employers percent of those with household- benefits also received noncash who offered pension plans (other ers from Europe, 50 percent with benefits. than social security). Among for- householders from Asia, and 38

• Among foreign-born households, eign-born workers, the propor- percent with householders from

participation rates in means- tions were 53 percent for natural- Latin America. Within Latin

tested programs are higher for ized citizens and 33 percent for America, the homeownership

households with noncitizen noncitizens. rate of those with householders

householders than for households from Mexico was the same as for

with naturalized-citizen house- Homeownership the region as a whole: 38 percent.

holders. In 1996, the rates were

29 percent compared with 18 • In 1997, the homeownership rate

percent for noncash benefits and was higher for households with a

12 percent compared with 8 per- native householder than for

cent for cash benefits. households with a foreign-born

householder: 68 percent comHealth Insurance and pared with 47 percent. However,

the homeownership rate for for- Pension Plans eign-born households with a

• In 1996, 66 percent of the householder who was a naturalforeign-born population com- ized citizen was 66 percent, not

pared with 86 percent of the na- significantly different from the

tive population had health insur- rate for native households.

ance for all or part of the year. • By type of family, the highest (Health insurance includes gov- homeownership rates in 1997 ernment insurance plans such as were for married-couple families: medicare, medicaid, or military 59 percent for families with a for- health care and private insurance eign-born householder and 83 plans.) percent for families with a native
8

U.S. Census Bureau

Section 1.

Trends in Immigration and the

Foreign-Born Population

Foreign-born population 9.6 million in 1970, the lowest total

surpasses 25 million. in this century, to 14.1 million in

1980, and to 19.8 million in 1990. The estimated foreign-born popu- In 1997, an estimated 9.7 per- lation of the United States in March cent of the U.S. population was for- 1997 was 25.8 million, based on eign born, the highest proportion data collected in the Current Popula- since 1930. The 1997 figure is tion Survey. This is the largest midway between the highest fig- foreign-born population in U.S. his- ures reached during the period of tory and represents an increase of large-scale immigration from Eu- 6.0 million, or 30 percent, over the rope (14.4 percent in 1870, 14.8 1990 census total (Figure 1-1).1

percent in 1890, and 14.7 percent The rapid growth in the foreign- in 1910) and the lowest figure of born population in the past genera- 4.7 percent in 1970. The propor- tion has been due primarily to large- tion foreign born increased to 6.2 scale immigration from Latin percent in 1980 and to 7.9 percent America and Asia.2

 The foreign- in 1990.

born population increased from

Historically, the foreign-born

population increased during

each decade until 1930 and

then declined until 1970.

With the exception of the 1860s

(which included the Civil War) and

the 1890s (which included the “closing” of the agricultural frontier and

economic depression), the number of

immigrants increased in each decade

from the 1820s to the 1901-1910 decade (Figure 1-2).3

 The number increased from 0.1 million in the

1820s, the first full decade for

which data on immigrants were collected, to 8.8 million in the 1901-

1910 decade, the highest total on

record for a single decade.4 The

foreign-born population increased

rapidly from 2.2 million in 1850, the

first census year in which data on

place of birth were collected, to 13.5

million in 1910.5

The number of immigrants declined during the 1911-1920 decade

and the 1920s, due first to World

War I and then to restrictive immigration legislation enacted in 1921

and 1924. This legislation established national origin quota systems

that severely limited immigration,

but were most favorable to immigration from countries in the Western

Hemisphere and countries in Northern or Western Europe.6

 As a result

of decreased immigration, the

foreign-born population increased

slowly to 14.2 million in 1930.

However, the proportion foreign

born in the total population, which

had fluctuated in the 13 percent to

15 percent range from 1860 to 1920,

dropped from 14.7 percent in 1910 to

11.6 percent in 1930.

With the low level of immigration in the 1930s and 1940s (due

partly to economic depression and

then to World War II), the foreignborn population dropped to 10.3

Immigrants and immigration.

Immigrants, as defined by the Immigration and Naturalization

Service (INS), are aliens admitted to the United States for lawful

permanent residence. They may be issued immigrant visas overseas

by the Department of state or adjusted to permanent resident status

in the United States by INS.

Immigration is defined here as the number of immigrants during

a specified period of time, such as a year or a decade.

Native and foreign-born population.

The native population, as defined by the Census Bureau, includes

U.S. residents who were born in the United States or an outlying area

of the United States and U.S. residents who were born in a foreign

country but who had at least one parent who was a U.S. citizen. All

other residents of the United States are classified as foreign born.

(Residence in the United States is based on usual place of residence, not

legal residence; see Appendix A.)

The foreign-born population includes immigrants, as defined above,

legal nonimmigrants (e.g., refugees and persons on student or work visas), and persons residing in the United States illegally (undocumented

aliens).

The foreign-born population can be classified by citizenship status:

those who have become naturalized citizens and those who are not

U.S. citizens.

Further information.

For a detailed discussion, see Appendix A, “The Foreign-Born

Population and Immigration: Definitions and Concepts.”
9

U.S. Census Bureau

million in 1950 and to 6.9 percent of million in 1970 and to a record low Immigration Reform and Control Act

the total population. The number of 4.7 percent of the total population. of 1986 (IRCA), which permitted

immigrants increased in the 1950s The national origins quota sys- some undocumented aliens to obtain

and 1960s, but was still low by his- tem, which was enacted in the 1920s lawful permanent residence, and the

torical standards. As a result, and and reaffirmed in the Immigration Immigration Act of 1990, which inbecause of the relatively old age and Nationality Act of 1952, was creased the annual cap on immigrastructure of the foreign-born popula- eliminated by the Immigration Act of tion, have contributed to increased

tion (reflecting four decades of low 1965. This legislation and subse- immigration in the past generation,

immigration), it dropped to 9.6 quent legislation, including the as described in the beginning of this

section.

1

Data from the 1990 census, which are for

the total resident population, and from the

March 1997 Current Population Survey (CPS),

which are limited to the civilian noninstitutional population plus Armed Forces living off

post or with their families on post, are not totally comparable due to differences in the

population universes. The data in this report

thus understate slightly the growth in the

foreign-born population in the 1990-97 period.

See Appendix C, “Comparison of Population

Universes.” 2

While immigration has been the primary

source of the growth in the foreign-born population since 1970, the growth in the number of

undocumented aliens, which is estimated at 5

million in 1996, has also contributed (Immigration and Naturalization Service, 1997, pp.

197-201). 3

For a detailed discussion of trends in immigration to the United States, see U.S. Immigration and Naturalization Service, 1991, special section on “Trends in Immigration,” pp.

13-34. See also U.S. Immigration and Naturalization Service, 1997, Appendix I, “Immigration and Naturalization Legislation.” 4

The highest number of immigrants recorded for a 10-year period was 10.1 million

for the years 1905-14 (ibid., p. 25). It should

be noted, however, that emigration was extremely high during this era. Warren and

Kraly’s estimates of emigration and net immigration for the 1905-14 period are 3.2 million

and 6.9 million, respectively (Warren and

Kraly, 1985, p. 5). For the 1901-10 decade,

when the number of immigrants was 8.8 million, their estimates of emigration and net immigration are 3.0 million and 5.8 million, respectively (U.S. Immigration and Naturalization Service, 1997, p. 196). 5

During this period, immigration greatly

exceeded the combination of emigration of

foreign-born population from the United States

and deaths to the foreign-born population. See

Appendix A, “The Foreign-Born Population

and Immigration: Definitions and Concepts.” 6

Ibid., Appendix I, “Immigration and

Naturalization Legislation.”

Foreign-born population (in millions)

Percent of total population

Figure 1-1.

Foreign-Born Population and Percent of Total Population 

for the United States: 1850 to 1997

1997199019801970196019501940193019201910190018901880187018601850

Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census, 1999a, Table 1, and 1999b, Table 1-1.

9.7

13.2

14.4

13.3

14.8

13.6

14.7

13.2

11.6

8.8

6.9

5.4

4.7

6.2

7.9

9.7

2.2 4.1 5.6 6.7 9.2 10.3 13.5 13.9 14.2 11.6 10.3 9.7 9.6 14.1 19.8 25.8

(For 1850-1990, resident population. For 1997, civilian noninstitutional population plus 

Armed Forces living off post or with their families on post)

Figure 1-2.

Immigrants to the United States, by Decade: 

Fiscal Years, 1821 to 1997

(Numbers in millions)

1991-

1997

1981-

1990

1971-

1980

1961-

1970

1951-

1960

1941-

1950

1931-

1940

1921-

1930

1911-

1920

1901-

1910

1891-

1900

1881-

1890

1871-

1880

1861-

1870

1851-

1860

1841-

1850

1831-

1840

1821-

1830

Source: U.S. Immigration and Naturalization Service, 1997, Table 1, and 1999, Table 2.

0.1

0.6

1.7

2.6 2.3

2.8

5.2

3.7

8.8

5.7

4.1

0.5

1.0

2.5

3.3

4.5

7.3

6.9
10

U.S. Census Bureau

Section 2.

Region of Birth

One-half of the foreign-born More than one-quarter of the

population is from Latin foreign-born population is

America. from Asia.

In 1997, 13.1 million of the In 1997, 6.8 million of the foreignforeign-born population living in the born population was born in Asia comUnited States was born in Latin pared with 5.0 million in 1990. This

America, up from 8.4 million in increase represented a continuation of 1990 (Figure 2-1). This increase rep- the rapid growth since 1960 when the resented a continuation of the rapid figure was 0.5 million. The foreign- growth in the foreign-born popula- born population from Asia had tripled tion from Latin America since 1960 in the 1970s and then had doubled in when the figure was 0.9 million. the 1980s. From 1970, when the total foreign- The foreign-born population born population started to increase from Asia constituted 27 percent of dramatically, to 1997, the increase in the foreign-born population in 1997, the foreign-born population from not significantly different from 26 Latin America accounted for 11.3 percent in 1990. Their share of the million, or 70 percent, of the total in- foreign-born population increased crease of 16.2 million.

from 5 percent in 1960 to 9 percent The foreign-born population from in 1970 and to 19 percent in 1980. Latin America accounted for 51 percent of the foreign-born population in

1997 (Figure 2-2).1

 This is the first About 3 percent of the

time that any region of the world other foreign-born population is

than Europe has accounted for as from Africa or Oceania.

much as one-half of the foreign-born 2 In 1997, the foreign-born popula- population. The proportion of the

foreign-born population from Latin tion from Africa was 0.6 million, up

America increased rapidly from 9 per- from 0.4 million in 1990. The

cent in 1960 to 19 percent in 1970, to foreign-born population from

33 percent in 1980, and to 44 percent Oceania in 1997 was 0.2 million, up

in 1990. from 0.1 million in 1990. In 1960,

Among the 13.1 million foreign- the foreign-born population from Afborn population from Latin America rica and Oceania each was only

in 1997, 8.8 million were from Cen- 35,000.4

tral America (including Mexico), 2.8

million were from the Caribbean, Historically, Europe was the and 1.5 million were from South ce o

America.3 primary sour f the foreign- In 1970, when the born population. foreign-born population from Latin

America was 1.8 million, 0.9 million As suggested by the discussion of

were from Central America, 0.7 mil- historical trends in immigration in Seclion were from the Caribbean, and tion 1, Europe was the primary source

0.3 million were from South Amer- of the foreign-born population in the ica. From 1970 to 1997, the foreign- United States until the past generation. born population from Central The proportion from Europe declined America increased more rapidly than relatively slowly from 92 percent in from the Caribbean or South Amer- 1850 to 75 percent in 1960 and then ica and rose from 48 percent to 67 dropped more rapidly to 17 percent in percent of the foreign-born popula- 1997 (Figure 2-2). tion from Latin America.

In 1850, nearly all the foreignborn population from Europe was

from Northern and Western Europe.5

The proportion from Southern and

Eastern Europe was still less than

one-twentieth in 1880, but then increased steadily to one-half by 1930.

Since then, Southern and Eastern

Europe have accounted for more

than one-half of the foreign-born

population from Europe.

Through 1960, Northern America (essentially Canada) was the second largest source of the foreignborn population after Europe.6

 From

1960 to 1997, the proportion of the

foreign-born population from Northern America dropped from 10 percent to 2 percent.

1

Percentages of the “total” foreign-born population in this section exclude the foreign-born

population for whom region of birth was not reported. 2

The six regions of the world used in this report are those defined by the United Nations and

used in its annual Demographic Yearbook. These

regions are Europe, Asia, Africa, Oceania, Latin

America, and Northern America (United Nations, 1996, pp. 30-31). 3

These three subregions of Latin America are

those defined by the United Nations. See footnote 2. 4

The decline in the foreign-born population

in the “Other” category from 1.3 million in 1990

to 1.0 million in 1997, as shown in Figure 2-1, is

due to a decline in the foreign-born population for

whom region of birth was not reported from 0.8

million in the 1990 census to 0.3 million in the

March 1997 Current Population Survey. See U.S.

Bureau of the Census, 1998b. The foreign-born

population for whom region of birth was not reported increased from 0.1 million in 1960 to 0.3

million in 1970 and to 0.9 million in 1980. The

large increase in the foreign-born population in

the “Other” category from 1970 to 1980, as

shown in Figure 2-1, thus is due primarily to the

increase in the foreign-born population for whom

region of birth was not reported. 5

As defined here, Northern and Western

Europe includes the British Isles, Scandinavia, the

Low Countries, France, Germany, Switzerland,

and Austria. Southern Europe and Eastern Europe comprise the remainder of Europe. These

subregions of Europe defined for use in this report reflect historical patterns of immigration to

the United States and differ slightly from the subregions defined by the United Nations. See footnote 2. 6

In addition to Canada, foreign countries in

Northern America include Bermuda, Greenland,

and St. Pierre and Miquelon. See footnote 2.
11

U.S. Census Bureau

Figure 2-1.

Foreign-Born Population by 

Region of Birth: 1960 to 1997

Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census, 1999a, Table 2,

and 1999b, Table 1-1.

19971990198019701960

Other

(Africa, Oceania,

and not reported)

Asia

Northern America

Europe

Latin America

7.3 5.7 5.1 4.4 4.3

0.5 0.8

0.9

0.8

1.0

0.9

0.5 0.1

9.7 9.6

14.1

19.8

25.8

1.0

6.8

13.1

1.3

5.0

8.4

1.2

2.5

4.4

0.4

0.8

1.8

(Numbers in millions. For 1960-90, resident 

population. For 1997, civilian noninstitutional 

population plus Armed Forces living off post 

or with their families on post)

Other

(regions not shown 

separately)

Asia

Northern America

Europe

Latin America

Figure 2-2.

Foreign-Born Population by Region of Birth: 

Selected Years, 1850 to 1997

Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census, 1999a, Table 2, and 1999b, Table 1-1.

199719901980197019601930190018801850

92.2

6.7

1.0

86.2

10.7

3.1

86.0

11.4

2.6

83.0

9.2

5.6

2.2

75.0

9.8

9.4

5.1

0.7

61.7

8.7

19.4

8.9

1.3

39.0

6.5

33.1

19.3

2.1

22.9

4.0

44.3

26.3

2.5

16.9

2.2

51.3

26.8

2.9

(Percent distribution excluding region not reported. For 1960-90, resident 

population. For 1997, civilian noninstitutional population plus Armed Forces 

living off post or with their families on post)
12

U.S. Census Bureau

Section 3.

Country of Birth

More than one-quarter of

the foreign-born population

is from Mexico.

In 1997, 7.0 million of the

foreign-born population living in the

United States was born in Mexico

(Figure 3-1). This was the largest

foreign-born population from a

single country in U.S. history and

represents an increase of 2.7 million,

or 63 percent, over the 1990 figure

for Mexico of 4.3 million. Previously, the foreign-born population

from Mexico rose from 0.8 million in

1970 to 2.2 million in 1980.

The foreign-born population

from Mexico accounted for 28 percent of the foreign-born population

in 1997, continuing the increase

from 8 percent in 1970 to 17 percent in 1980 and to 23 percent in

1990. Mexico’s proportion of the

foreign-born population in 1997

was last exceeded in a decennial

census in 1890 when 30 percent of

the foreign-born population was

from Germany.1

The foreign-born population

from Mexico in 1997 was about 6

times as large as the foreign-born

population from the next highest

ranked country. Since data on

country of birth were first collected

in 1850, the leading country of

birth of the foreign-born population had never had twice the total

of the second leading country until

1980 (2.2 million from Mexico and

0.8 million from Germany).

In addition to the large increase

in the foreign-born population from

Mexico in the 1990 to 1997 period,

there were statistically significant increases in the foreign-born population from several other countries

with 0.5 million or more foreign-born

population in 1997: the Philippines,

China,2

 Cuba, Vietnam, India, the

Soviet Union,3 the Dominican Philippines and Korea), and to six in

Republic, and El Salvador. There 1990 (Vietnam and China).

were statistically significant declines The sample size in the Current

for Germany and Canada. Population Survey is not large

enough to rank reliably those counMost of the 10 leading tries for which the estimates are

countries of birth of the similar in 1997, as suggested by the

foreign-born population are 90-percent confidence intervals

in Latin America and Asia. shown in Figure 3-1. Even so, the

number of Latin American and

In 1960, Mexico was the only Asian countries among the 10 leadLatin American or Asian country ing countries of birth of the foreignamong the 10 leading countries of born population may have increased

birth of the foreign-born population to 8 in 1997 (with the addition of In-

(Table 3-1). The number increased dia, the Dominican Republic, and El to two in 1970 (with the addition Salvador, and the subtraction of Koof Cuba), to four in 1980 (the rea).4

1997

1990

Figure 3-1.

Countries of Birth of the Foreign-Born Population,

With 500,000 or More in 1997: 1990 and 1997

(Numbers in thousands. 90-percent confidence intervals 

in parentheses for 1997 estimates. For 1990, resident population.

For 1997, civilian noninstitutional population plus Armed Forces

living off post or with their families on post)

Canada*

Germany*

Korea

United Kingdom

El Salvador*

Dominican

Republic*

Soviet Union*1

India*

Vietnam*

Cuba*

China*1

Philippines*

Mexico* 7,017 (6,565-7,469)

4,298

1,132 (955-1,310)

913

1,107 (931-1,282)

677

913 (748-1,078)

737

770 (623-916)

543

748 (604-893)

450

734 (622-846)

334

632 (495-769)

348

607 (472-742)

465

606 (504-707)

640

591 (463-720)

568

578 (479-678)

712

542 (415-669)

745

*Change from 1990 to 1997 is statistically significant.

1See text footnotes 2 and 3, respectively, regarding China and the Soviet Union.

Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census, 1999a, Table 3, and 1999b, Tables 3-1, 3-2, 3-3, and 3-4.
13

U.S. Census Bureau

Historically, European

countries and Canada were

the leading countries of birth

of the foreign-born

population.

At each census from 1850

through 1960, the 10 leading countries of birth of the foreign-born

population were predominantly European countries and Canada. The

only exceptions were Mexico (1850-

60, 1920-60) and China (1860-80).

Prior to 1980, when Mexico became the leading country of birth

of the foreign-born population, the

leading countries were Ireland

(1850-70), Germany (1880-20),

and Italy (1930-1970). The 10

leading countries of birth of the

foreign-born population in selected

years are shown in Table 3-1.

1

Percentages of the “total” foreign-born

population in this section exclude the foreignborn population for whom country of birth

was not reported.

Table 3-1.

Leading Countries of Birth of the Foreign-Born Population: Selected Years, 1850 to 1990

(Resident population)

Subject 1850 1880 1900 1930 1960 1970 1980 1990

Number of 10 Leading

Countries by Region

 Total ..................... 10

Europe ........................ 8

Northern America .......... 1

Latin America ............... 1

Asia ........................... -

10 Leading Countries by Rank1

(foreign-born population

in thousands)

1 ........................... Ireland

........................... 962

2 ........................... Germany

........................... 584

3 ........................... Great Britain

........................... 379

4 ........................... Canada

........................... 148

5 ........................... France

........................... 54

6 ........................... Switzerland

........................... 13

7 ........................... Mexico

........................... 13

8 ........................... Norway

........................... 13

9 ........................... Holland

........................... 10

10 ........................... Italy

........................... 4

10

8

1

-

1

Germany

1,967

Ireland

1,855

Great Britain

918

Canada

717

Sweden

194

Norway

182

France

107

China

104

Switzerland

89

Bohemia

85

10

9

1

-

-

Germany

2,663

Ireland

1,615

Canada

1,180

Great Britain

1,168

Sweden

582

Italy

484

Russia

424

Poland

383

Norway

336

Austria

276

10

8

1

1

-

Italy

1,790

Germany

1,609

United Kingdom

1,403

Canada

1,310

Poland

1,269

Soviet Union

1,154

Ireland

745

Mexico

641

Sweden

595

Czechoslovakia

492

10

8

1

1

-

Italy

1,257

Germany

990

Canada

953

United Kingdom

833

Poland

748

Soviet Union

691

Mexico

576

Ireland

339

Austria

305

Hungary

245

10

7

1

2

-

Italy

1,009

Germany

833

Canada

812

Mexico

760

United Kingdom

686

Poland

548

Soviet Union

463

Cuba

439

Ireland

251

Austria

214

10

5

1

2

2

Mexico

2,199

Germany

849

Canada

843

Italy

832

United Kingdom

669

Cuba

608

Philippines

501

Poland

418

Soviet Union

406

Korea

290

10

Mexico

4,298

Philippines

913

Canada

745

Cuba

737

Germany

712

United Kingdom

640

Italy

581

Korea

568

Vietnam

543

China

530

- Represents zero.

1

In general, countries as reported at each census. Data are not totally comparable over time 

Northern Ireland. China in 1990 excludes Hong Kong and Taiwan.

Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census, 1999a, Tables 3 and 4.

due to changes in boundaries for some countries. Great Britain excludes Ireland. United Kingdom includes

3

1

2

4

2

Including Hong Kong and excluding Taiwan. Data for Taiwan corresponding to the

format in Figure 3-1 are (in thousands) 244 for

1990 and 360 (260-461) for 1997. 3

The Soviet Union as defined prior to

January 1, 1992, when the United States formally recognized 12 independent republics

within the former Soviet Union. See Immigration and Naturalization Service, 1997, p. 10. 4

Given the uncertainty as to whether or

not the Dominican Republic, El Salvador, and

Korea are in the top 10 in 1997, the number

may be as low as 6 (if none of the 3 is among

the 10 leading countries) or as high as 9 (if all 3

are among the 10 leading countries).
14

U.S. Census Bureau

Section 4.

Geographic Distribution

The foreign-born population

is highly concentrated in a

few states.

In 1997, there were six states

with estimated foreign-born populations of 1 million or more: California (8.1 million), New York (3.6

million), Florida (2.4 million),

Texas (2.2 million), New Jersey

(1.2 million), and Illinois (1.1 million) (Table 4-1 and Figure 4-1).1

In five of these states, the proportion foreign born exceeded the national average of 9.7 percent: California (24.9 percent), New York

(19.6 percent), Florida (16.4 percent), New Jersey (15.4 percent)

and Texas (11.3 percent).2 The

proportion foreign born in Illinois

(9.3 percent) did not differ significantly from the national average.

Together, these 6 states accounted

for 18.5 million, or 72 percent, of

the total foreign-born population,

but only 39 percent of the total

population.

From 1960 to 1990, the concentration of the foreign-born population in these same six states increased. Their proportion of the

foreign-born population increased

from 57 percent in 1960 to 73 percent in 1990 while their proportion

of the total population increased

from 35 percent to 39 percent.

In 1997, the proportion foreign

born was significantly above the

national average in only seven

states: the five states noted earlier,

Hawaii at 18.1 percent, and Arizona at 14.4 percent (Figure 4-2).3

At the other extreme were 31 states

where the estimated proportion

foreign born was less than 5 percent in 1997. These include most

states in the Midwest and South.

The foreign-born The regional distribution of

population has grown the foreign-born population

most rapidly in California, has changed sharply

Florida, and Texas. since 1960.

From 1960 to 1997, the foreign- As suggested by the rapid growth

born population increased from 1.3 of the foreign-born population in

million to 8.1 million in California, California, Florida, and Texas, the

from 0.3 million to 2.4 million in foreign-born population increased

Florida, and from 0.3 million to 2.2 much more rapidly in the West and

million in Texas.4 The foreign-born South than in the Northeast and

population in these 3 states com- Midwest from 1960 to 1997 (Table

bined rose from 1.9 million to 12.6 4-1). For the West and South commillion, and the increase of 10.7 mil- bined, the foreign-born population

lion represented 67 percent of the grew from 2.9 million to 17.0 milgrowth in the foreign-born popula- lion and rose from 30 percent to 66

tion in the United States. During percent of the foreign-born populathis period, these three states ac- tion of the United States. During

counted for 41 percent of the growth the same period, the proportion of

in total population. the total population in the West

Table 4-1.

Foreign-Born Population by Region of Residence

and for Leading States: Selected Years, 1900 to 1997

(For 1900-90 resident population. For 1997, civilian noninstitutional population plus

Armed Forces living off post or with their families on post)

Subject 1900 1930 1960 1970 1980 1990 1997

Foreign-Born Population by Region of Residence (in thousands)

United States ......... 10,341 14,204 9,738 9,619

Northeast .................... 4,763 7,202 4,575 4,120

Midwest ...................... 4,158 4,360 2,277 1,874

South ......................... 574 819 963 1,316

West ........................... 846 1,824 1,924 2,310

Percent Foreign Born in Total Population for Regions

United States ......... 13.6 11.6 5.4 4.7

Northeast .................... 22.6 20.9 10.2 8.4

Midwest ...................... 15.8 11.3 4.4 3.3

South ......................... 2.3 2.2 1.8 2.1

West ........................... 20.7 15.3 6.9 6.6

Six Leading States by Rank (foreign-born population in thousands)

1 ......................... NY NY NY NY

........................... 1,900 3,262 2,289 2,110

2 ......................... PA IL CA CA

........................... 985 1,242 1,344 1,758

3 ......................... IL PA IL NJ

........................... 967 1,240 686 635

4 ......................... MA CA NJ IL

........................... 846 1,074 615 629

5 ......................... MI MA PA FL

........................... 542 1,066 603 540

6 ......................... WI MI MA MA

........................... 516 853 576 495

14,080

4,506

2,114

2,895

4,565

6.2

9.2

3.6

3.8

10.6

CA

3,580

NY

2,389

FL

1,059

TX

856

IL

824

NJ

758

19,767

5,231

2,131

4,582

7,823

7.9

10.3

3.6

5.4

14.8

CA

6,459

NY

2,852

FL

1,663

TX

1,524

NJ

967

IL

952

25,779

6,129

2,673

6,468

10,509

9.7

11.9

4.3

6.9

17.6

CA

8,074

NY

3,602

FL

2,351

TX

2,169

NJ

1,208

IL

1,100

Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census, 1999a, Table 13, and 1999b, Table 4-1A.
15

U.S. Census Bureau

and South combined rose from 46

percent to 57 percent.

The changes between 1960 and

1997 in the six states with the largest foreign-born populations reflect

these regional changes (Table 4-1).

Pennsylvania and Massachusetts

were replaced by Florida and

Texas.

Historically, the foreign-born

population was highly

concentrated in the Northeast

and Midwest.

In 1900 and 1930, over 80 percent of the foreign-born population

of the United States lived in the

Northeast and Midwest, and in

1930, 51 percent lived in the

Northeast alone. New York had a

foreign-born population of 3.3 million in 1930, more than twice the

foreign-born population of any

other state and the highest census

figure for any state until 1980,

when the foreign-born population

of California was 3.6 million.

1

The estimates do not differ significantly

between Florida and Texas and between New

Jersey and Illinois. For Illinois, the lower

bound on the 90-percent confidence interval is

less than 1 million (Figure 4-1). 2

The estimates do not differ significantly

between Florida and New Jersey. 3

The proportion foreign born appears to

be above the national figure in two additional

states (Nevada and Rhode Island); however,

the apparent differences are not statistically

significant. It should be noted that the sample

size is not large enough to identify many substantively important differences involving

states with relatively small populations. See

Appendix B. 4

The increase does not differ significantly

between Florida and Texas.

1997

1990

Figure 4-1.

States With a Foreign-Born Population of 1 Million 

or More in 1997: 1990 and 1997

(Numbers in thousands. 90-percent confidence intervals in parentheses for 

1997 estimates. For 1990, resident population. For 1997, civilian 

noninstitutional population plus Armed Forces living off post or 

with their families on post)

*Change from 1990 to 1997 is statistically significant.

Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census, 1990 census of population, and 1999b, Table 4-1A.

Illinois*

New Jersey*

Texas*

Florida*

New York*

California* 8,074 (7,646-8,502)

6,459

3,602 (3,362-3,842)

2,852

2,351 (2,146-2,556)

1,663

2,169 (1,951-2,387)

1,524

1,208 (1,074-1,341)

967

1,100 (959-1,242)

952

Figure 4-2.

Foreign-Born Population for States: 1997

(Civilian noninstitutional population plus Armed Forces 

living off post or with their families on post)

Percent foreign born

(number of states in parentheses)

Under 5.0 (31)

5.0 to 9.9 (10 plus DC)

10.0 to 14.9 (4)

15.0 to 19.9 (4)

20.0 or more (1)

Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census, 1999b, Table 4-1A.

CA

24.9

AZ

14.4 NM

6.9

TX

11.3

OK

2.0 AR

1.6

LA

2.5

MS

2.0

AL

1.3

GA

3.0

FL

16.4

KS

4.1

NE

3.5

SD

1.0

ND

0.8 MT

1.0

WY

1.6

CO

8.6

UT

5.9

NV

11.1

OR

9.2

WA

6.6 MN

4.6

IA

2.7

MO

2.2

IL

9.3

IN

2.3

OH

2.3

MI

4.5

WI

3.0

PA

3.2

WV

1.1

KY 1.2

TN 1.2

NC

3.6 SC

1.2

VA

6.6

NY

19.6

ME

2.3

NH

3.4 VT

3.0

MA

8.0

NJ

15.4

MD

8.6

CT

7.5

RI

11.1

HI

18.1

AK

3.8

ID

4.7

DE

4.9

DC

9.5

Northeast

11.9%

South

6.9%

United States

9.7%

West

17.6%

Midwest

4.3%
16

U.S. Census Bureau

Section 5.

Metropolitan Areas

The foreign-born population Los Angeles had the highest proporis highly concentrated in a tion foreign born at 31 percent

few large metropolitan areas. (Table 5-1). For metropolitan areas

with 1 million to 4 million popula- In 1997, the metropolitan areas tion in 1997, Miami had the highest with the largest foreign-born popula- proportion foreign born at 39 per- tions were Los Angeles (4.8 million) cent.

and New York (4.6 million), although these estimates are not sig- The foreign-born population nificantly different from each other is mor (Figure 5-1).1 e concentrated than the Together, these two native population in metropolitan areas included 9.4 mil- metropolitan areas and in lion, or 36 percent, of the foreign- their central cities. born population of 25.8 million. In

contrast, they included only 13 per- The concentration of the foreigncent of the total population. born population in metropolitan

In three additional metropolitan areas and in their central cities is

areas, the foreign-born population shown from two perspectives in Figwas 1 million or more in 1997: Mi- ure 5-2. The numbers on the left

ami, San Francisco, and Chicago. 2 side show the proportionate distribuTogether with Los Angeles and New tions of the total population, the naYork, these five metropolitan areas tive population, and the foreign-born

included 13.2 million, or 51 percent population by type of residence. The

of the foreign-born population, but bar chart on the right side shows the

only 20 percent of the total popula- proportion foreign born in each cattion. egory of the population by type of

Among the 10 largest metropoli- residence.

tan areas in 1997 (those with total As shown in the left side of

populations of 4 million or more), Figure 5-2, 94 percent of the

foreign-born population lived in

metropolitan areas in 1997 compared with 79 percent of the native

population. The difference was accounted for entirely by the differences in the proportions in central

cities: 47 percent of the foreignborn population versus 28 percent

of the native population. The proportion living outside central cities

in metropolitan areas was slightly

lower among the foreign-born

population than among the native

population: 48 percent versus 51

percent.

The foreign-born population was

especially concentrated in the largest

metropolitan areas and in their central cities: 53 percent lived in the 8

metropolitan areas of 5 million or

more population in 1997 compared

with 25 percent of the native population. The central cities of these eight

largest metropolitan areas included

28 percent of the foreign-born population compared with only 8 percent

of the native population.

While a much higher proportion

of the foreign-born population than

of the native population lived in metropolitan areas of 5 million or more

population in 1997, the proportions

were not significantly different in

metropolitan areas of 1 million up to

5 million population (25 percent and

26 percent, respectively). The proportions were lower for the foreignborn population than for the native

population in metropolitan areas

with less than 1 million population

(16 percent versus 28 percent) and

in nonmetropolitan areas (6 percent

versus 21 percent).

Over one-quarter of the

central-city population of the

largest metropolitan areas is

foreign born.

As shown on the right side of

Figure 5-2, the proportion of the

1997

1990

4,778 (4,513-5,044)

1,073

Chicago-Gary-Kenosha,

IL-IN-WI CMSA*

San Francisco-OaklandSan Jose, CA CMSA

Miami-Ft. Lauderdale, FL CMSA*

New York-Northern New JerseyLong Island, NY-NJ-CT-PA CMSA*

Los Angeles-RiversideOrange County, CA CMSA* 3,945

4,582 (4,321-4,842)

3,657

1,356 (1,181-1,531)

*Change from 1990 to 1997 is statistically significant.

Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census, 1999a, Table 16, and 1999b, Table 5-2A.

915

1,251

1,440 (1,282-1,599)

1,062 (925-1,199)

Figure 5-1.

Metropolitan Areas With Foreign-Born Populations of 

1 Million or More in 1997: 1990 and 1997

(Numbers in thousands. 90-percent confidence intervals in parentheses for 1997 estimates. 

For 1990, resident population. For 1997, civilian noninstitutional population plus Armed Forces 

living off post or with their families on post. Metropolitan areas as defined 

June 30, 1993; see text, footnote 1)
17

U.S. Census Bureau

population foreign born was much The proportion of the population

higher in metropolitan areas (11 per- foreign born was higher in central

cent) than in nonmetropolitan areas cities (15 percent) than outside cen-

(3 percent) in 1997. The proportion tral cities in metropolitan areas (9

foreign born ranged from 18 percent percent). The foreign-born proporin metropolitan areas with 5 million tion of the population was highest in

or more population to 6 percent in central cities of metropolitan areas

metropolitan areas with less than 1 with 5 million or more population

million population. (26 percent).

1

Official names of metropolitan areas are

provided in Figure 5-1 and Table 5-1, but are

shortened in the text for readability.

The general concept of a metropolitan area

(MA) is one of a large population nucleus, together with adjacent communities that have a

high degree or economic and social integration

with that nucleus. Some MAs are defined

around two or more nuclei. The Office of

Management and Budget, with technical assistance from the Census Bureau, uses published

standards to define MAs for use by federal

agencies. The standards provide for the classification of an MA as a metropolitan statistical

area (MSA) or as a consolidated metropolitan

statistical area (CSMA) with component primary metropolitan statistical areas (PMSAs).

See Office of Management and Budget, 1990

and 1993. 2

For the Chicago metropolitan area, the

lower bound on the 90-percent confidence interval is less than 1 million.

Table 5-1.

Foreign-Born Population in the 10 Largest Metropolitan Areas: 1997

(Civilian noninstitutional population plus Armed Forces living off post or with their families on post.

Metropolitan areas as defined June 30, 1993; see text, footnote 1)

Rank in total Percent

population Metropolitan area foreign born

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

New York-Northern New Jersey-Long Island, NY-NJ-CT-PA CMSA ...............

Los Angeles-Riverside-Orange County, CA CMSA .....................................

Chicago-Gary-Kenosha, IL-IN-WI CMSA................................................

Washington-Baltimore, DC-MD-VA-WV-CMSA .........................................

San Francisco-Oakland-San Jose, CA CMSA ...........................................

Philadelphia-Wilmington-Atlantic City, PA-NJ-DE-MD CMSA ......................

Boston-Worcester-Lawrence, MA-NH-ME-CT CMSA ..................................

Detroit-Ann Arbor-Flint, MI CMSA ......................................................

Dallas-Ft. Worth, TX CMSA ................................................................

Houston-Galveston-Brazoria, TX CMSA.................................................

22.8

30.5

13.0

11.0

20.8

6.2

8.1

6.7

9.6

15.0

Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census, 1999b, Table 5-2A.

Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census, 1999b, Table 5-1A.

Figure 5-2.

Population by Nativity and MetropolitanNonmetropolitan Residence: 1997

(Civilian noninstitutional population plus Armed Forces living off post or with their 

families on post. Metropolitan areas as defined June 30, 1993; see text, footnote 1)

9.7

11.4

15.1

9.1

14.1

19.4

11.1

18.4

26.5

13.8

9.3

11.4

8.2

5.9

7.3

4.9

2.7

Total population

Metropolitan areas

In central cities

Outside central cities

1 million or more population

In central cities

Outside central cities

5 million or more population

In central cities

Outside central cities

1 million up to 5 million population

In central cities

Outside central cities

Less than 1 million population

In central cities

Outside central cities

Nonmetropolitan areas

Total Native Foreign born

100.0 100.0 100.0

80.4 78.9 94.4

30.0 28.2 46.7

50.4 50.7 47.7

53.9 51.2 78.3

19.3 17.2 38.6

34.6 34.1 39.7

28.1 25.4 53.5

10.2 8.3 27.9

17.9 17.1 25.6

25.8 25.9 24.9

9.1 8.9 10.8

16.7 17.0 14.1

26.5 27.6 16.1

10.7 11.0 8.1

15.8 16.6 8.0

19.6 21.1 5.6

Percent distribution by type of residence Percent foreign born by type of residence

Total

Metro areas

In central cities

Outside central cities

Nonmetro areas
18

U.S. Census Bureau

Section 6.

Length of Residence

The median length of 10 to 14 years, and 15 to 19 years In 1970, when pre-1930 immiresidence of the foreign-born were all higher in 1997 than in grants still constituted a sizable

population is about 13 years. 1970. proportion of the foreign-born

In 1997, the category of length population, the top one quarter of In 1997, the median length of of residence in the United States of the foreign-born population had re- residence in the United States of 20 years and over included the fol- sided in the United States for 50.8

the foreign-born population was lowing subcategories up to 40 years years or more. The corresponding 13.3 years (Figure 6-1).1

 This is and over: 3rd quartiles were 29.8 years in slightly higher than in 1990 (12.2 20 years and over 30.3% 1980, 24.1 years in 1990, and 23.1 years) and slightly lower than in 20 to 24 years 8.6% years in 1997.5

1980 (14.1 years), but much lower 25 to 29 years 6.9% than in 1970 when the median was 30 to 34 years 4.5% 2 Length of residence by region 20.3 years. 35 to 39 years 3.2% of birth reflects historical In general, changes between 40 years and over 7.2% patterns of immigration. 1970 and 1997 in the percent dis- While data dividing the tribution of the foreign-born popu- In 1997, the median length of category 20 years and over are lation by length of residence reflect residence in the United States of available from censuses of 1970, the relatively high level of immigra- the foreign-born population was 1980, and 1990, the subcategories tion during this period and the at- are not directly comparable.3 11.7 years for the population from How- trition (through death) of nearly all Asia and 12.4 years for the popula- ever, the available data on these immigrants who came to the tion from Latin America (Figure subcategories permit the computa- United States before 1930 when 6-2). These two medians are not tion of quartiles of length of resi- immigration previously had been at significantly different from each dence in the United States, which relatively high levels, as discussed 4 nd other, nor is the median for the for- are shown in Figure 6-1. The 2 in Section 1. The proportion of the eign-born population from Latin quartile (the median) was dis- foreign-born population residing in rd America significantly different cussed earlier. The 3 quartile the United States for 20 years or from the median length of resi- shows the minimum length of resi- more dropped from 50 percent in dence of 13.3 years for the total dence of the one-quarter of the for- 1970 to 30 percent in 1997. The foreign-born population. The me- eign-born population with the long- proportions residing in the United dian length of residence of the est length of residence in the States under 5 years, 5 to 9 years, population from Africa, 9.8 years, United States.

Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census, 1999a, Table 10, and 1999b, Table 6-1.

Figure 6-1.

Length of Residence in the United States for the Foreign-Born Population: 1970 to 1997

(Excludes population for whom length of residence was not reported. For 1970-90, resident population.

For 1997, civilian noninstitutional population plus Armed Forces living off post or with their families on post)

Year

1970

1980

1990

1997

Percent distribution by length of residence (in years)

Under 5 5 to 9 10 to 14 15 to 19 20 and over 1st

quartile

6.0

5.1

5.4

7.7

13.3

12.2

14.1

20.3

23.1

24.1

29.8

50.8

2nd

quartile

(median)

21.0

24.7

23.7

18.5

19.6 14.1 15.0 30.3

19.2 13.9 10.7 31.5

15.8 12.8 9.4 38.2

12.2 10.5 8.5 50.4

3rd

quartile

Length of residence (in years)
19

U.S. Census Bureau

does not differ significantly from 13.3 years. While 30 percent of the percent; 45 to 54 years, 12.7 percent; 55

the medians for the populations foreign-born population had resided years and over, 19.7 percent. For 1980, the

subcategories of 38.2 percent are: 20 to 29 from Asia and Latin America. in the United States for 20 years or years, 13.6 percent; 30 years and over, 24.7

Among the foreign-born popula- more, 56 percent of the foreign born percent. For 1990, the subcategories of 31.5

tion from Latin America, the median from Europe and 57 percent of the percent are: 20 to 24 years, 8.0 percent; 25

was highest for those from the Carib- foreign born from Northern America to 29 years, 6.1 percent; 30 to 39 years, 8.1

percent; 40 years and over, 9.3 percent (U.S. bean, 16.3 years, reflecting the rela- were in this category (although the Bureau of the Census, 1999a, Table 10).

tively large number of immigrants last two proportions are not signifi- 4

Quartiles are the values in a ranked disfrom Cuba in the 1960s and 1970s. cantly different from each other). tribution of a population that divide it into

four groups of equal size. In Figure 6-1, the The median lengths of residence of 1st quartile divides the foreign-born popula- the population from Central America 1

The median is the value which divides tion into 25 percent (one-quarter) with a

(about four-fifths of whom are from the ranked population into two groups of shorter length of residence and 75 percent equal size. Mexico) and South America, 11.3 2 (three-quarters) with a longer length of resi- Because reporting on year of entry dence. The 2nd quartile is the median. The years and 12.1 years, respectively, (which is used to obtain data on length of 3rd quartile divides the foreign-born populawere not significantly different from residence) is subject to misstatement, small tion into 75 percent (three-quarters) with a differences in length of residence do not war- each other. shorter length of residence and 25 percent rant emphasis. For example, the specific The median lengths of residence (one-quarter) with a longer length of resi- question, “When did you come to live in the dence. in 1997 of the foreign-born popula- United States?,” may be interpreted by some The 1st quartile can be viewed as the metion from Northern America (essen- respondents to mean the year in which they dian of the lower half of a distribution, and obtained permanent legal residence in the tially Canada) and Europe were 28.4 the 3rd quartile can be viewed as the median United States.

years and 24.6 years, respectively, do 3 of the upper half of a distribution. For 1970, the subcategories of 50.4 per- 5

The quartiles for 1990 and 1997 do not not differ significantly, but were both cent are: 20 to 24 years, 6.3 percent; 25 to differ significantly.

about double the national median of 34 years, 3.5 percent; 35 to 44 years, 8.2

Figure 6-2.

Length of Residence in the United States for the Foreign-Born 

Population by Region of Birth: 1997

(Civilian noninstitutional population plus Armed Forces living off post or with their families on post)

Population

(in millions)

0.5

1.5

1.8

7.0

8.8

2.8

13.1

0.6

6.8

4.3

Total 25.8 1

Europe

Asia

Africa

Latin America

Caribbean

Central America

Mexico

Other

South America

Northern America

Median

(in years)

13.3

24.6

11.7

9.8

12.4

16.3

11.3

11.1

11.7

12.1

28.4

1Total includes Oceania and region not reported, not shown separately.

Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census, 1999b, Table 6-1.

Under 5 5 to 9 10 to 14 15 to 19

Percent distribution by length of residence (in years)

20 or more

21.0 19.6 14.1 15.0 30.3

17.9 11.5 6.8 7.8 56.0

24.5 20.3 15.7 18.0 21.6

33.1 17.6 20.7 13.3 15.2

20.0 22.4 15.5 16.2 25.8

16.9 13.4 14.9 17.6 37.1

20.4 25.6 15.8 15.9 22.3

21.8 25.0 14.7 15.0 23.6

15.0 28.0 20.2 19.5 17.3

23.0 20.6 15.1 15.5 25.7

15.7 11.7 9.6 6.4 56.5
20

U.S. Census Bureau

Section 7.

Citizenship Status

The proportion of naturalized (58 percent to 30 percent), for 15 to

citizens in the foreign-born 19 years (72 percent to 42 percent),

population has declined and for 20 years and over (90 persince 1970. cent to 67 percent).3

Most of the decline in the proporWhile the total foreign-born tion of naturalized citizens in the

population increased by 165 percent foreign-born population is attribut- (from 9.7 million to 25.8 million) be- able to the declines within each

tween 1970 and 1997, the numbers length-of-residence category.

of naturalized citizens and nonciti- Changes in the distribution of the

zens in the foreign-born population foreign-born population by length of increased at very different rates (Fig- residence in the United States are a

ure 7-1).1 Naturalized citizens in- secondary factor. (The median creased by 46 percent (from 6.2 mil- length of residence of the foreign- lion to 9.0 million), and noncitizens born population dropped from 20.3 rose by 373 percent (from 3.5 million years in 1970 to 13.3 years in 1997, to 16.7 million). as discussed in Section 6.)

 As a result of the more rapid As noted above, the proportion of

growth of noncitizens, the propor- naturalized citizens dropped from 64

tion of naturalized citizens in the percent in 1970 to 35 percent in

foreign-born population dropped 1997, or by 29 percentage points.

steadily from 64 percent in 1970 to The declines in proportions of natu51 percent in 1980, to 40 percent in ralized citizens in the length-of1990, and to 35 percent in 1997. residence categories account for 20

The proportion for 1997 is the low- percentage points of the drop, and

est for at least the past century.2 the changes in the distribution by

length of residence account for 9 perThe proportion of naturalized centage points of the drop.4

citizens has declined in each

length-of-residence category. The proportion of naturalized

citizens varies greatly by The proportion of naturalized region of birth. citizens in the foreign-born population declined from 1970 to 1997, not The proportion of naturalized

only for the total foreign-born popu- citizens among the foreign-born

lation, but for every category of population in 1997 was 53 percent

length of residence in the United for the population from Europe, 44 States (Figure 7-2). As measured by percent for the population from

percentage-point change, the declines Asia, and 24 percent for the populawere most pronounced for the tion from Latin America (Figure 7-

foreign-born population residing in 3). The low proportion for the poputhe United States for 10 to 14 years lation from Latin America is attributable primarily to the low figure for

the population from Mexico (15 percent).

Part of the differences in the proportions of naturalized citizens by

region of birth is attributable to differences in length of residence in the

United States. Most notably, the proportions of citizens in 1997 among

the population from Mexico whose

length of residence in the United

States was 10 to 14 years, 15 to 19

years, or 20 years or more were

much lower than for the total

foreign-born population: 11 percent

versus 30 percent, 14 percent versus

42 percent, and 34 percent versus 67

percent, respectively.5

Figure 7-1.

Foreign-Born Population by 

Citizenship Status: 1970 to 1997

Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census, 1999a, Table 11, and 

1999b, Table 7-1.

1970 1980 1990 1997

25.8

19.8

14.1

9.7

16.7

11.8

7.0

3.5

9.08.07.16.2

Total

Noncitizens

Naturalized 

citizens

(In millions. For 1970-90, resident 

population. For 1997, civilian noninstitutional 

population plus Armed Forces living off post or 

with their families on post.)
21

U.S. Census Bureau

1

Some individuals who are foreign born

may report themselves erroneously as U.S. citizens. The naturalization process usually requires 5 years of residence in the United

States. See also Section 6, footnote 1, concerning limitations of data on length of residence in

the United States. 2

For censuses prior to 1970, data on citizenship of the foreign-born population are

available for 1890-1950. The proportion

naturalized (excluding the foreign born for

whom citizenship was not reported) was 49

percent in 1920, 58 percent in 1930, 68 percent in 1940, and 79 percent in 1950. The

proportion naturalized among foreign-born

males 21 years and over was 64 percent in

1890, 67 percent in 1900, 51 percent in

1910, and 50 percent in 1920 (U.S. Bureau of

the Census, 1999a, Table 11). 3

The percentage-point declines for the

categories of 10 to 14 years and 15 to 19

years do not differ significantly. 4

The 1970 distribution by length of residence combined with the 1997 proportions

of naturalized citizens would have produced

a decline in the proportion of naturalized

citizens from 63.6 percent to 43.4 percent.

The reverse combination (the 1997 distribution by length of residence combined with

the 1970 proportions of naturalized citizens)

would have produced a decline from 63.6

percent to 54.9 percent. 5

If the distribution of persons from

Mexico by length of residence in the United

States is adjusted (standardized) to the distribution of the total foreign-born population by

length of residence in the United States, the

proportion of citizens among the foreign-born

population from Mexico rises only slightly:

from 15 percent to 17 percent.

Figure 7-2.

Naturalized Citizens by Length of Residence

in the United States: 1970 to 1997

Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census, 1973, Table 17; 1985, Table 2; 1993a, Table 1; 1998 special tabulations,

and 1999b, Table 7-1.

(For 1970-90, resident population. For 1997, civilian noninstitutional 

population plus Armed Forces living off post or with their families on post)

Total Under 5 years 5 to9 years 10 to 14 years 15 to 19 years 20 years and over

Percent of

foreign-born

population

1970

1980

1990

1997

63.6

50.5

40.5

35.1

12.210.5

7.6 4.9

31.4

28.2

23.3

16.0

57.5

44.1

40.7

30.2

72.5

57.6

49.4

42.3

89.6

84.9

73.5

67.0

Figure 7-3.

Naturalized Citizens by Region of Birth: 1997

Foreign-born population

(in millions)

0.5

1.5

1.8

7.0

8.8

2.8

13.1

0.6

6.8

4.3

Total 25.8 1

Europe

Asia

Africa

Latin America

Caribbean

Central America

Mexico

Other

South America

Northern America

1

Total includes Oceania and region not reported, not shown separately.

Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census, 1999b, Table 7-1.

35.1

53.3

44.3

34.8

23.6

41.3

16.6

14.9

23.7

31.5

43.8

(Percent of foreign-born population. Civilian noninstitutional population plus 

Armed Forces living off post or with their families on post)
22

U.S. Census Bureau

Section 8.

Nativity, Parentage, and Foreign Stock

One-fifth of the population

is of foreign stock.

In 1997, 54.7 million, or 21 percent, of the population was of foreign

stock (Table 8-1). In addition to a

foreign-born population of 25.8 million, the population of foreign or

mixed parentage (which is defined as

native) was 28.9 million. The population of foreign or mixed parentage

included 15.0 million of foreign parentage and 13.9 million of mixed

parentage. Among the population of

mixed parentage, 7.5 million had a

foreign-born father, and 6.4 million

had a foreign-born mother.1

The proportion of the

population of foreign stock

has increased since 1970.

In 1960, 34.1 million, or 19 percent of the population was of foreign

stock (Figure 8-1). The population

of foreign stock dropped to 33.6 million, or 17 percent of the population

in 1970, the last year in which data

on parentage were collected in the

decennial census.2 By 1997, the

population of foreign stock had risen

to 54.7 million, or 21 percent of the

population, reflecting the high level

of immigration since 1970.

The growth in the population of

foreign stock since 1970 is due

mostly to the growth in the foreignborn population. From

1970 to 1997, the foreignborn population increased by 16.2 million

(from 9.6 million to 25.8

million) while the population of foreign or mixed

parentage rose by only

5.0 million (from 24.0

million to 28.9 million).

The slower growth in the

population of foreign or

mixed parentage reflects

the relatively old age

structure of this population in 1970, which in

turn reflects the preceding decades of relatively

low immigration.3

 With

the attrition (through

mortality) of descendants of immigrants who came to the United

States early in the twentieth century

and with the high level of immigration during the past generation, the

population of foreign or mixed parentage will undoubtedly grow more

rapidly in the future.4

From 1960 to 1997, the population of mixed parentage increased by

3.7 million (from 10.2 million to

13.9 million).5 The portion with

foreign-born fathers increased by 1.0

million (from 6.5 million to 7.5 million) while the portion with foreignborn mothers increased by 2.7 million (from 3.8 million to 6.4 million).

The proportion of the

population of foreign stock is

below historical levels.

While the proportion of the

population of foreign stock rose

from 17 percent in 1970 to 21 percent in 1997, it is well below the

level of the 1890 to 1930 period

(Figure 8-1). The proportion increased from 33 percent in 1890 to

35 percent in 1910 and then

The terms native population and foreign-born population, which

were defined in Section 1, concern the nativity of the population.

Information on the birthplace of parents may be used to classify the

native population by parentage: native of native parentage (both

parents native), native of foreign parentage (both parents foreign

born), and native of mixed parentage (one parent native and one

parent foreign born).

The term foreign stock includes the foreign-born population and

the native population of foreign or mixed parentage. The foreign stock

may thus be thought of as first and second generation U.S. residents

combined. Just as the native population and foreign-born population

comprise the total population, the native population of native parentage

and the foreign-stock population also comprise the total population.

Table 8-1.

Population by Nativity and Parentage: 1997

(Civilian noninstitutional population plus Armed Forces

living off post or with their families on post)

Nativity and parentage

Number

(in millions) Percent

Total population .......................

Native ........................................

Native parentage ......................

Foreign or mixed parentage ........

Foreign parentage ................

Mixed parentage ..................

... Father foreign born ..........

... Mother foreign born .........

Foreign born ...............................

Native of native parentage .............

Foreign stock ..............................

Foreign or mixed parentage ........

Foreign born ...........................

266.8

241.0

212.1

28.9

15.0

13.9

7.5

6.4

25.8

212.1

54.7

28.9

25.8

100.0

90.3

79.5

10.8

5.6

5.2

2.8

2.4

9.7

79.5

20.5

10.8

9.7

Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census, 1999b, Table 4-1A.
23

U.S. Census Bureau

dropped back to 33 percent in have fluctuated, reflecting the tim1930. ing of periods of large-scale immiThe relative sizes of the popula- gration and subsequent childbeartion of foreign or mixed parentage ing of the foreign-born population,

and the foreign-born population as shown below. In 1890, when

1890 1960 1970 1997

Foreign or mixed

 parentage 18.4% 13.6% 11.8% 10.8%

Foreign born 14.8% 5.4% 4.7% 9.7%

Ratio 1.2 2.5 2.5 1.1

to 1 to 1 to 1 to 1

18.4 percent of the population was

native of foreign or mixed parentage

and 14.8 percent of the population

was foreign born, the ratio was 1.2 to

1. By 1960, the ratio had increased

to 2.5 to 1. From 2.5 to 1 again in

1970, the ratio fell sharply to 1.1 to 1

in 1997, slightly lower than the ratio

in 1890.

1

Among the foreign-born population, 24.2

million had parents born in the same country,

and only 1.6 million had parents born in different countries. Among the population of foreign parentage, 12.8 million had parents born

in the same country, and only 2.2 million had

parents born in different countries. 2

The question on nativity or birthplace of

parents, which was included in censuses from

1870 to 1970, was replaced in 1980 with a

question on ancestry that was based on selfidentification, with no restrictions on how

many generations removed from their ancestors’ country or countries of origin. 3

In 1970, the native population of foreign

or mixed parentage had a median age of 47.3,

and 16.3 percent was 65 years old and over

(U.S. Bureau of the Census, 1973, Table 1). 4

One indication of future growth is the

rapid increase in the number of births in the

United States to foreign-born women residing

in the United States, from 223,000 (6.0 percent

of total births) in 1970 to 696,000 (17.8 percent of total births) in 1995 (U.S. National

Center for Health Statistics, 1975, Table 1-61,

and unpublished data, 1998). These children

have U.S. citizenship at birth and are part of

the native population. 5

Data published from the 1970 census did

not distinguish between the native populations

of foreign parentage and mixed parentage.

Figure 8-1.

Foreign-Stock Population by Nativity and Parentage: 

Selected Years, 1890 to 1997

1890 1900 1910 1920 1930 1960 19701 1997

1Data not available separately for foreign parentage and mixed parentage.

Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census, 1999a, Table 12, and 1999b, Table 4-1A.

(For 1890-1970, resident population. For 1997, civilian noninstitutional population plus 

Armed Forces living off post or with their families on post)

9.2 10.3 13.5 13.9 14.2 9.7 9.6 25.8

8.1 10.7

12.9 15.8 17.5

14.1

24.0

15.0

3.4

5.0

6.0

7.0 8.5

10.2

13.9

20.8

26.0

32.5

36.7

40.3

34.1 33.6

54.7 Number (in millions)

1890 1900 1910 1920 1930 1960 19701 1997

14.8 13.6 14.7 13.2 11.6 5.4 4.7 9.7

13.0 14.0 14.1 14.9 14.3

7.9 11.8

5.6

5.5 6.6 6.5 6.7 7.0

5.7 5.2

33.2 34.3 35.3 34.7 32.8

19.0

16.5

20.5

Percent of total population

Mixed parentage

Foreign parentage

Foreign born

Foreign stock

Mixed parentage

Foreign parentage

Foreign born

Foreign stock
24

U.S. Census Bureau

Section 9.

Race and Hispanic Origin

Two-thirds of the foreignborn population is Hispanic

or Asian and Pacific Islander.

In 1997, Hispanics accounted for

29.7 million, or 11 percent, of the total population, and Asians and Pacific Islanders accounted for 10.1

million, or 4 percent of the total

population (Table 9-1). Among the

foreign-born population, 11.4 million, or 44 percent, were Hispanic,

and 6.1 million, or 24 percent, were

Asian and Pacific Islander. Among

the native population, 18.3 million,

or 8 percent, were Hispanic, and 4.0

million, or 2 percent, were Asian

and Pacific Islander. Hispanics and

Asians and Pacific Islanders, who together accounted for 15 percent of

the total population, thus accounted

for 68 percent of the foreign-born

population, but for only 9 percent of

the native population.

In contrast, the proportions of

White non-Hispanics and of Blacks

were lower in the foreign-born population than in the native population.

White non-Hispanics, who represented 72 percent of the total population, accounted for 26 percent of the

foreign-born population and for 77

percent of the native population.

Blacks, who represented 12.8 percent of the total population, accounted for 8 percent of the 

foreign-born population and for 13.4

percent of the native population.

Race and Hispanic groups

differ sharply in their

distributions by nativity

and parentage.

In 1997, 9.7 percent of the population was foreign born (Figure 9-1).

The proportion was much higher

among Asians and Pacific Islanders

(61 percent) and Hispanics (38 percent) and was below the national figure for Blacks (5.9 percent) and for

White non-Hispanics (3.4).

The opposite situation exists

with regard to the native population

of native parentage. While this category included 79 percent of the total

population in 1997, it included 90

percent of Blacks and 88 percent of

White non-Hispanics. In contrast,

32 percent of Hispanics and only 11

percent of Asians and Pacific Islanders were native of native parentage.

The foreign-born population

by region of birth is not

always homogeneous by race

or Hispanic origin.

The foreign-born populations

from Europe and Northern

America are the most homogeneous by race and Hispanic origin.

In 1997, 97 percent and 92 percent,

respectively, were White nonHispanic. (These percentages do

not differ significantly.) Of the

foreign-born population from Asia,

83 percent were Asian and Pacific

Islander and 15 percent were

White non-Hispanic. Of the

foreign-born population from Africa, 60 percent were Black, and 30

percent were White non-Hispanic.

Of the foreign-born population

from Latin America in 1997, 86

percent were Hispanic, and 12 percent were Black. About 3 percent

were both Black and Hispanic. The

The racial categories used for

data from the March 1997 Current Population Survey include

the following: White; Black;

American Indian, Eskimo, and

Aleut; and Asian and Pacific Islander. The ethnic categories include Hispanic origin and not of

Hispanic origin. The population

in a race category may be Hispanic or not Hispanic, and the

population of Hispanic origin

may be of any race. There are

four race or Hispanic groups that

are identified for discussion in

this section: Blacks, Asians and

Pacific Islanders, Hispanics, and

White non-Hispanics.1

Table 9-1.

Population by Nativity, Parentage, and Selected Race and Hispanic Origin Groups: 1997

(Civilian noninstitutional population plus Armed Forces living off post or with their families on post)

Native

Total Foreign or

population Total Native parentage mixed parentage Foreign born Foreign stock

Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent

Total1 ............................. 266.8 100.0 241.0 100.0 212.1 100.0 28.9 100.0 25.8 100.0 54.7 100.0

Black .................................. 34.2 12.8 32.2 13.4 30.8 14.5 1.4 4.7 2.0 7.9 3.4 6.2

Asian and Pacific Islander ....... 10.1 3.8 4.0 1.6 1.1 0.5 2.8 9.8 6.1 23.7 8.9 16.3

Hispanic origin (of any race) ... 29.7 11.1 18.3 7.6 9.6 4.5 8.7 30.2 11.4 44.2 20.1 36.8

White, not of Hispanic origin ... 191.8 71.9 185.2 76.8 169.0 79.7 16.2 55.8 6.6 25.6 22.8 41.6

1

The four race and Hispanic groups shown are not a mutually exclusive and exhaustive set of categories adding to the total. See footnote 1 in text.

Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census, 1999b, Table 9-1A.
25

U.S. Census Bureau

Black population from Latin 13.3 years, and 35 percent were 1

The four race and Hispanic groups disAmerica was primarily from the naturalized citizens (Figure 9-2). cussed in this section do not represent a mutuCaribbean. Of the foreign-born As would be expected given ally exclusive and exhaustive set of categories

population from the Caribbean, 54 patterns of immigration by region adding to the total population. The populations in these four categories add to 99.6 per- percent were Hispanic, and 46 per- of birth (discussed in Section 2), cent of the total population. The non-Hispanic

cent were Black. About 5 percent the figures were highest for American Indian and Alaska Native populawere both Hispanic and Black. foreign-born White non-Hispanics: tion (0.8 percent of the total population) is not

a median of 19.6 years and 50 per- included, and individuals who are both Black

The foreign-born Asian and and Hispanic, or both Asian and Pacific Is- cent naturalized citizens. lander and Hispanic (0.4 percent of the total

Pacific Islander population Foreign-born Asians and Pacific population) are each included in two of the

has a low median length of Islanders had a median length of four categories shown. (In brief, 99.6 percent

residence in the United States residence of 11.6 years, and 44 per- plus 0.8 percent minus 0.4 percent equals 100.0

percent.)

and a high proportion of cent were naturalized citizens.

naturalized citizens. Foreign-born Hispanics had a median length of residence of 12.2 years

In 1997, the median length of (not significantly different from the

residence in the United States of median for Asians and Pacific Isthe foreign-born population was landers), and only 22 percent were

naturalized citizens.

1The four race and Hispanic groups shown are not a mutually exclusive and exhaustive set of categories adding to the total. See footnote 1 in text.

2Includes the foreign-born population and the native population of foreign or mixed parentage. See Section 8.

Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census, 1999b, Table 9-1A.

Figure 9-1.

Nativity and Parentage for Selected Race and Hispanic Origin Groups: 1997

(Civilian noninstitutional population plus Armed Forces living off post or with their families on post)

191.8

29.7

10.1

34.2

266.8

Percent distribution by nativity and parentage

Native parentage Foreign or mixed parentage Foreign born

20.5

9.9

88.8

67.7

11.9

Percent 

of foreign 

stock2

Total1

Black

Asian and Pacific Islander

Hispanic origin (of any race)

White, not of Hispanic origin

79.5

90.1

11.2

32.3

88.1

10.8

4.0

28.2

29.4

8.4

9.7

5.9

60.6

38.4

3.4

Native

Population

(in millions)

1The four race and Hispanic groups shown are not a mutually exclusive and exhaustive set of categories adding to the total. See footnote 1 in text.

Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census, 1999b, Table 9-1B.

Figure 9-2.

Length of Residence in the United States and Citizenship Status for Selected 

Race and Hispanic Origin Groups of the Foreign-Born Population: 1997

(Civilian noninstitutional population plus Armed Forces living off post or with their families on post)

6.6

11.4

6.1

2.0

25.8

Percent distribution by length of residence

13.3

12.8

11.6

12.2

19.6

Median

length of

residence

(in years)

35.1

35.3

44.1

21.6

49.8

Percent

naturalized

citizens

Total1

Black

Asian and Pacific Islander

Hispanic origin (of any race)

White, not of Hispanic origin

Population

(in millions) Under 5 5-9 10-14 15-19 20+

21.0

20.5

24.1

19.9

20.4

19.6

17.3

20.6

23.5

12.3

14.1

22.0

16.7

14.9

8.1 9.8

16.0

18.1 20.6

15.0

16.4

30.3

23.9

25.7

49.2
26

U.S. Census Bureau

Section 10.

Age and Gender

Two-thirds of the foreign- old and over among naturalized generally higher for males than for

born population is in the citizens (20 percent) was much females, especially in the older

25 to 64 age span. higher than among the noncitizen ages.

population (6 percent). In 1997, the median ages of the As would be expected, the age The age structure of foreign-born population (37 years) structure of the foreign-born popula- the foreign-born population and the native population (34 years) tion differed greatly by length of resi- varies greatly by region did not differ greatly; however, there dence in the United States. The me- of birth. were major differences in age distri- dian age ranged from 28 years old for butions between the two groups (Fig- those resident in the United States In 1997, the median age of the

ure 10-1). Only 10 percent of the less than 10 years to 54 years old for foreign-born population ranged from

foreign-born population was under those resident in the United States 51 for those from Europe to 34 for

age 18 compared with 28 percent of 20 years and over. The proportions those from Latin America (Figure

the native population. In contrast, 65 years old and over for these two 10-2). Among those from Latin

the proportions in the foreign-born groups were 3 percent and 27 per- America, the median age was 31 for

population were higher than in the cent, respectively. the population born in Mexico. The

native population in the 25 to 44 age The sex ratio (males per 100 fe- proportion in the 25 to 44 age group

group (44 percent versus 30 percent) males) in 1997 was higher in the was 47 percent for the population

and in the 45 to 64 age group (24 foreign-born population (101) than born in Asia or Latin America compercent versus 20 percent). As a re- in the native population (95). pared with 27 percent for the populasult, the 25 to 64 age span includes Among the foreign-born popula- tion born in Europe. In contrast, the

about two-thirds of the foreign-born tion, the sex ratio was higher proportion 65 years old and over was

population compared with about among those whose length of resi- 7 or 8 percent for the foreign-born

one-half of the native population. dence in the United States was less population from Latin America or

Among the foreign-born popula- than 10 years (109) than among Asia compared with 26 percent for

tion in 1997, naturalized citizens those whose length of residence the foreign-born population from Euwere older (median age 47) than was 20 years and over (87).1

 This rope.2

 The differences in age structhe noncitizen population (median difference is due in part to the fact ture by region of birth reflect

age 33). The proportion 65 years that age-specific mortality rates are differences in patterns of immigraFigure 10-1.

Age and Gender of the Population by Nativity, Length of Residence in 

the United States, and Citizenship Status: 1997

(Civilian noninstitutional population plus Armed Forces living off post or with their families on post)

Population

(in millions)

Percent distribution by age

16.7

9.0

7.8

7.5

10.5

25.8

241.0

Total 266.8

Native

Foreign born

Length of residence in U.S.

Less than 10 years

10 to 19 years

20 years and over

Citizenship status

Naturalized citizen

Not a citizen

Under 18 18-24 25-44 45-64 65+

Median

age

(years)

34.3

33.7

37.4

28.2

37.2

53.8

47.1

33.1

95.9

95.4

100.9

108.8

105.7

87.2

94.4

104.6

Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census, 1999b, Tables 10-1A, 10-1B, and 10-1C.

Sex ratio

(males 

per 100

females)

26.7 9.4 31.6 20.4 11.9

28.5 9.1 30.3 20.0 12.1

10.2 11.4 43.5 24.1 10.8

21.4 18.3 47.0 10.2 3.1

5.1 11.8 55.7 22.3 5.2

1.8

27.2 44.4 26.6

3.7 5.4 36.7 34.6 19.6

13.6 14.7 47.2 18.4 6.1
27

U.S. Census Bureau

tion and in length of residence in the the foreign-born population 25 to 44 1

The apparent difference in sex ratios beUnited States, as discussed in Sec- years old rose from 19 percent in tween noncitizens (105) and naturalized citition 1 and Section 6, respectively. 1960 to 44 percent in 1997, and the zens (94) was not statistically significant.

proportion 65 years old and over Data from the 1990 census show a higher sex

The age structure of the ratio for noncitizens (102) than for naturalized dropped from 33 percent in 1960 to citizens (87) (U.S. Bureau of the Census, 1993,

foreign-born population 11 percent in 1997. The sex ratio of Table 1).

has changed dramatically the foreign-born population dropped 2

The proportions of 7.0 percent for Latin

since 1960. from 96 in 1960 to 84 in 1970 and America and 7.8 percent for Asia do not differ

significantly. then rose to 101 in 1997. These 3

The age groups in Figure 10-3 include un- The median age of the foreign- changes reflect the long-term trends der age 15 and 15 to 24 years old rather than

born population dropped from 57 to in immigration, as discussed in under age 18 and 18 to 24 years old because

37 between 1960 and 1990 and has Section 1, and the higher age-specific data on the latter two groups are not available

for all censuses back to 1960. not changed significantly since 1990 mortality rates for males than for fe- (Figure 10-3).3

 The proportion of males in the older ages.

Figure 10-2.

Age and Gender of the Foreign-Born Population by Region of Birth: 1997

(Civilian noninstitutional population plus Armed Forces living off post or with their families on post)

Population

(in millions)

0.5

1.5

1.8

7.0

8.8

2.8

13.1

0.6

6.8

4.3

Total 25.8 1

Europe

Asia

Africa

Latin America

Caribbean

Central America

Mexico

Other

South America

Northern America

1Total includes Oceania and region not reported, not shown separately.

Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census, 1999b, Table 10-1D.

Percent distribution by age

Under 18 18-24 25-44 45-64 65+

Median

age

(years)

37.4

50.8

37.7

35.6

34.2

41.7

31.9

31.5

33.6

37.4

47.0

100.9

78.9

99.1

162.0

110.7

92.8

120.1

126.9

96.7

95.7

65.2

Sex ratio

(males 

per 100

females)

10.2 11.4 43.5 24.1 10.8

6.3 6.4 27.0 33.8 26.5

9.6 10.4 46.5 25.8 7.8

8.1 12.0 53.4 22.9 3.5

11.9 14.0 47.3 19.8 7.0

8.9 9.4 39.8 27.1 14.8

13.0 16.3 49.8 16.4 4.6

13.8 16.5 49.1 16.3 4.3

9.7 15.2 52.7 16.7 5.7

10.7 9.2 46.9 26.2 7.0

5.6 4.0 37.3 29.5 23.8

Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census, 1999a, Table 7, and 1999b, Tables 10-1A and 10-2A.

Figure 10-3.

Age and Gender of the Foreign-Born Population: 1960 to 1997

(For 1960-90, resident population. For 1997, civilian noninstitutional population plus 

Armed Forces living off post or with their families on post)

Population

(in millions)

9.7

9.6

14.1

19.8

1997 25.8

1990

1980

1970

1960

Percent distribution by age

Under 15 15-24 25-44 45-64 65+

Median

age

(years)

37.4

37.3

39.9

52.0

57.2

100.9

95.8

87.8

84.4

95.6

Sex ratio

(males 

per 100

females)

7.5

7.5

14.1 43.5 24.1 10.8

15.0 41.9 22.0 13.6

8.8 14.7 33.6 21.6 21.2

6.3 8.8 25.9 27.0 32.0

5.2 5.2 19.5 37.5 32.6
28

U.S. Census Bureau

Section 11.

Household Size and Type

On average, foreign-born

households are larger than

native households.

In 1997, 10.4 million, or 10.3 percent, of the 101 million households

in the United States had a foreignborn householder (Figure 11-1). The

average household size of foreignborn households (3.32) was considerably larger than of native households (2.56). Foreign-born households had larger average numbers

both of adults (18 years old and

over), 2.29 versus 1.89, and of children (under age 18 years), 1.03 versus 0.67.

Among households with a

foreign-born householder, average

household size was smallest where

length of residence in the United

States was 20 years and over

(2.94).1

Average household size was

larger where the householder was

not a citizen than where the

householder was a citizen. This

was the case overall (3.57 versus

3.01) and for each of several

categories of length of residence:

5 to 9 years, 10 to 19 years, and

20 years and over.2

The foreign-born proportion of

households (10.3 percent) exceeds

the foreign-born proportion of the

population (9.7 percent), even

though average household size is

substantially larger among foreignborn households than among native

households. This anomaly reflects

the definition of household nativity

based on the nativity of the householder and the fact that a substantial proportion of members of

foreign-born households, especially

children, are native (with U.S. citizenship at birth) rather than

foreign born.

One-third of the

members of foreign-born

households are native.

The average size of native

households (2.56) in 1997 included

2.53 native members and only 0.03

foreign-born members. The average size of foreign-born households

(3.32) included 2.19 foreign-born

members and 1.13 native members.

Native members thus represented 34

A household is a person or

group of people who occupy a

housing unit. The householder

is usually the household member, or one of the household

members, in whose name the

housing unit is owned or rented.

A family is made up of two or

more people living together who

are related by blood, marriage, or

adoption, one of whom is the

householder.

Households are classified as

foreign born or native based on

the nativity of the householder,

regardless of the nativity of other

household members. For simplicity, a household with a native

householder is referred to also as

a native household, and a household with a foreign-born householder is referred to also as a

foreign-born household.

Figure 11-1.

Households by Nativity, Length of Residence in the United States, and 

Citizenship Status of the Householder: 1997

(Civilian noninstitutional population plus Armed Forces living off post 

or with their families on post)

Households

(in millions)

Percent distribution of households by type

5.8

4.6

4.3

3.1

3.0

10.4

90.6

Total 101.0

Native

Foreign born

Length of residence in U.S.

Less than 10 years

10 to 19 years

20 years and over

Citizenship status

Naturalized citizen

Not a citizen

Married couple Male 

householder

Male 

householder1

Female 

householder

Female 

householder2

Family households Nonfamily households Average

household 

size

2.64

2.56

3.32

3.43

3.73

2.94

3.01

3.57

1

Male householder, no wife present. 2Female householder, no husband present.

Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census, 1999b, Tables 11-1A, 11-1B, and 11-1C.

53.1

52.6

57.4

56.2

59.6

56.6

58.4

56.6

3.8 12.7 13.6 16.9

3.6 12.6 13.8 17.5

5.7 13.1 11.8 12.0

7.6 12.9 15.6 7.7

6.8 15.0 11.3 7.3

3.6 11.7 9.6 18.5

4.8 11.4 10.2 15.2

6.4 14.4 13.1 9.4
29

U.S. Census Bureau

percent of all members of foreign- have the highest average number of foreign-born households. The

born households. In absolute num- members among the different house- higher figure for households with a

bers, there were 11.8 million native hold types, represented 57 percent of householder from Mexico reflects a

members of the 10.4 million foreign- foreign-born households versus 53 higher proportion of marriedborn households in 1997 compared percent of native households. couple families (65 percent versus

with only 2.9 million foreign-born 57 percent) and a lower proportion

members of the 90.6 million native Household size varies of householders 65 years and over

households. by region of birth of (6 percent versus 15 percent).3

The distribution of households by the householder.

size differs sharply between foreign- 1

The apparent differences in average

Of the 10.4 million households born and native households. Among household size when length of residence was

in 1997 with a foreign-born house- less than 10 years (3.43) compared to 10 to foreign-born households, about the 19 years (3.73) are not statistically signifi- holder, 4.9 million, or 47 percent, same proportion had 1 member (19 cant.

percent) as had 5 or more members of the householders were from 2

Under 5 years is excluded because very

Latin America (Figure 11-2). An few individuals in this category have become (21 percent). Among native house- additional 2.7 million householders naturalized citizens.

holds, 26 percent had 1 member and 3

Elderly householders are less likely to were from Asia, and 2.2 million only 9 percent had 5 or more mem- have children still living at home. Data on

were from Europe. Average house- bers. fertility from the 1990 census show that

hold size among these foreign-born among women 35 to 44 years old, the aver- Family households, which in- age numbers of children ever born were 2.3 households ranged from 3.84 with clude married-couple families, male- for all foreign-born women and 3.3 for householders from Latin America householder families (no wife foreign-born women from Mexico (U.S.

present), and female-householder to 2.41 with householders from Bureau of the Census, 1993a, Table 1).

Europe. families (no husband present), repre- Average household size among sented 76 percent of foreign-born foreign-born households with households versus 69 percent of na- householders from Mexico was tive households in 1997. Married4.38 compared with 3.32 for all couple families, which generally

Figure 11-2.

Foreign-Born Households by Region of Birth of the Householder: 1997

(Civilian noninstitutional population plus Armed Forces living off post 

or with their families on post)

Households

(in millions)

Percent distribution of households by type

0.3

0.6

0.6

2.4

3.0

1.2

4.9

0.3

2.7

2.2

Total 10.4 3

Europe

Asia

Africa

Latin America

Caribbean

Central America

Mexico

Other

South America

Northern America

Married couple Male 

householder

Male 

householder1

Female 

householder

Female 

householder2

Family households Nonfamily households Average

household 

size

3.32

2.41

3.26

2.91

3.84

3.16

4.26

4.38

3.81

3.17

2.26

1

Male householder, no wife present. 2Female householder, no husband present. 3Total includes Oceania and region not reported, not shown separately.

Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census, 1999b, Table 11-1D.

57.4 5.7 13.1 11.8 12.0

52.1 3.1 8.5 12.4 23.9

62.4 6.2 8.1 14.1 9.2

49.6 6.8 10.3 23.9 9.4

57.8 6.9 18.3 9.1 8.0

47.9 4.7 25.2 10.0 12.2

62.7 8.1 15.1 8.4 5.7

65.4 8.0 13.0 8.5 5.1

52.1 8.5 22.9 8.3 8.2

53.6 5.6 20.2 10.3 10.4

46.5

1.5

10.0 22.5 19.5
30

U.S. Census Bureau

Section 12.

Families and Own Children

Family size and type differ

between foreign-born and

native families.

In 1997, 7.9 million, or 11 percent, of the 70.2 million families in

the United States had a foreign-born

householder (Figure 12-1). The average size of foreign-born families

was 3.84 compared with 3.11 for native families. Foreign-born families

had larger average numbers both of

adults (18 years old and over), 2.51

versus 2.16, and of children (under

age 18 years), 1.33 versus 0.95.

Of the 7.9 million families in

1997 with a foreign-born householder, 6.0 million were marriedcouple families, 1.4 million were

families with a female householder

(no husband present), and 0.6 million were families with a male

householder (no wife present). Of

the 62.3 million families with native

householders, 47.6 million were

married-couple families, 11.4 million

were female-householder families,

and 3.3 million were male-householder families. Married-couple

families thus represented 75 percent

of all foreign-born families and 76

percent of all native families, not significantly different from each other.

Average family size was 3.99 for

married-couple families with a

foreign-born householder and 3.16

for their native counterparts.

Three-fifths of marriedcouple families with a

foreign-born householder

have one or more

own children.

Among married-couple families

in 1997, 60 percent of those with a

foreign-born householder had one

or more own children under 18

years old compared with 45 percent

of those with a native householder

(Figure 12-1). The proportions

among foreign-born families were

higher than among native families

for one or two children (44 percent

versus 36 percent), and for three or

more children (16 percent versus 9

percent).

A family is made up of two

or more people living together

who are related by birth, marriage, or adoption, one of whom

is the householder.

Own children under age 18

are never-married sons and

daughters of the householder, including step- and adopted children.

Families are classified as foreign born or native based on the

nativity of the householder, regardless of the nativity of other

family members. For simplicity,

a family with a native householder is referred to also as a native family, and a family with a

foreign-born householder is referred to also as a foreign-born

family.

Figure 12-1.

Families by Type, Nativity of Householder, and Number of Own Children: 1997

(Civilian noninstitutional population plus Armed Forces living off post 

or with their families on post)

Households

(in millions)

Percent distribution of families by number of own children under 18 years old

1.4

11.4

12.8

0.6

3.3

3.8

6.0

47.6

53.6

7.9

62.3

Total families 70.2

Native householder

Foreign-born householder

Married-couple families

Native householder

Foreign-born householder

Male householder, no wife present

Native householder

Foreign-born householder

Female householder, no husband present

Native householder

Foreign-born householder

None 1 2 3 or more

Average

family

size

3.19

3.11

3.84

3.25

3.16

3.99

3.02

2.98

3.36

2.85

2.74

3.42

Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census, 1999b, Table 12-1A.

50.6

51.8

42.0

53.2

54.9

39.5

55.6

52.8

70.9

38.4

38.3

39.9

20.4

20.1

22.5

17.7 18.9 10.1

18.9 10.0

18.7 9.4

20.9 14.7

17.3 18.5 9.3

21.5 22.6 16.4

26.1

27.5

18.3

13.3

14.3

8.2

5.0

5.4

2.6

29.9

30.0

28.6

20.6

20.8

18.8

11.1

11.0

12.6
31

U.S. Census Bureau

Among the 1.4 million foreign- families with both husband and wife householder had one or more own

born families with a female house- native had an average size of 3.16. children under 18 years old. The

holder (no husband present), 13 The average size of married- proportion ranged from 38 percent

percent had three or more own couple families with both spouses with householders from Europe to

children, not significantly different foreign born (4.12) included 2.85 69 percent with householders from

from 11 percent among the 11.4 foreign-born members and 1.27 na- Latin America. Among marriedmillion native families with a fe- tive members. Native members thus couple families with householders

male householder. represented 31 percent of all mem- from Mexico, the proportion was

bers of these families. For married- 79 percent.

One-seventh of married- couple families with husband foreign In comparison to the 16 percent

couples families include at born and wife native, 67 percent of of married-couple families with a

least one foreign-born spouse. family members were native, not sig- foreign-born householder who had

nificantly different from the 66 per- three or more own children, the Of the 53.6 million married- cent of family members who were proportion ranged from 6 percent couple families in 1997, 7.7 million, native in married-couple families with householders from Europe to or 14 percent, included at least one with spouses’ nativities reversed 24 percent with householders from foreign-born spouse (Figure 12-2). (husband native and wife foreign Latin America. Among married- Average size of these families varied born). In married-couple families couple families with householders by nativity of the husband.1

 The 4.8 with both spouses native, virtually from Mexico, 32 percent had three million families with both husband all members were native: only 0.1 or more own children.

and wife foreign born had an average percent were foreign born. family size of 4.12. In contrast the 1

The apparent differences in average fam1.7 million families with husband One quarter of married-couple ily size when the nativity of the wife varies are

native and wife foreign born had an not statistically significant. families with a householder average size of 3.07. The 1.3 million from Latin America had three families with husband foreign born or more own children. and wife native had an average size

of 3.66. In contrast, the 45.9 million In 1997, 60 percent of marriedcouple families with a foreign-born

Figure 12-2.

Married-Couple Families by Nativity of Spouses and Age of Household Members: 1997

(Civilian noninstitutional population plus Armed Forces living off post 

or with their families on post)

Families

(in millions)

Average number of family members

45.9

1.7

1.3

4.8

Total married-couple families 53.6

Foreign born Foreign born

Foreign born Native

Native Foreign born

Native Native

Under age 18 Age 18 and over Under age 18 Age 18 and over

1

Includes an average of 0.04 foreign-born family members. 

Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census, 1999b, Table 12-4.

Native Foreign born

4.12

3.66

3.07

3.161

3.25

0.87

0.74

1.19

1.08

0.89 2.04

0.04

0.28

0.19

2.28

1.27

0.02

1.04

0.38 2.47

1.26

0.07

1.14

Husband Wife
32

U.S. Census Bureau

Section 13.

Educational Attainment

Educational levels among 5 percent, and 10 percent. Among structures of the foreign-born and

the foreign-born and native individuals with less than a high native populations differ (as dispopulations differ only school education, those with less cussed in Section 10), it is of interest

below the college level. than 5 years of school represented to compare educational levels among

about 1 in 4 of the foreign-born the population 25 to 34 years old, the

In 1997, the proportion of the population, but only about 1 in 20 youngest age span in which the large

population 25 years old and over of the native population. majority of individuals have comwho had completed high school or pleted their formal education.2

more education was lower among Differences in graduate level In 1997, the proportion of the the foreign-born population (65 per- education between males and population 25 to 34 years old who cent) than among the native popula- females are greater for the had completed high school or more tion (84 percent) (Figure 13-1). The foreign-born population than education was lower among the

difference was confined to the pro- for the native population. foreign-born population (67 percent)

portions who were high school than among the native population

graduates only or who had some col- Educational distributions by gen- (91 percent). The proportion who

lege but less than a bachelor’s degree. der differ somewhat among the had a bachelor’s degree or more eduThe proportion who had a bachelor’s foreign-born population. In 1997, cation was 25 percent for the

degree or more education was 24 the proportion of the foreign-born foreign-born population 25 to 34

percent for both the foreign-born and population 25 years old and over years old, not significantly different

native populations. The similarity who had completed high school or from 27 percent for the native popubetween college educational levels more education was 65 percent for lation. At the lower end of the eduextended to the graduate level as males and for females; however, the cational spectrum, the proportions of

well. The proportion with a gradu- proportion with a bachelor’s degree the population 25 to 34 years old

ate degree was 9 percent for the for- or more education was higher for with less than 5 years of school were

eign-born population and 8 percent males (27 percent) than for females 5 percent for the foreign-born popufor the native population. (22 percent). This difference was lation and only 0.2 percent for the

For the foreign-born population entirely among the proportions with native population.

25 years old and over, the propor- a graduate degree or higher: 12 pertion who had completed high cent for males and 6 percent for fe- Educational levels of the

school or more education was 78 males. foreign-born population percent for naturalized citizens For the native population 25 differ by region of birth. compared with 56 percent for those years old and over in 1997, 84 perwho were not citizens. The differ- cent of males and of females had Among the foreign-born populaence by citizenship status was completed high school or more edu- tion 25 years old and over in 1997,

greater than by length of residence cation. The proportion with a the proportion who had completed

in the United States. bachelor’s degree or more education high school or more education was

Among individuals with less was higher for males (26 percent) 65 percent. The proportion was

than a high school education (35 per- than for females (22 percent).1

 The well above 65 percent for the

cent for the foreign-born population proportion with a graduate degree foreign-born population from Euand 16 percent for the native popula- was also higher for males (9 percent) rope, Asia, Africa, and Northern

tion), the distributions by educa- than for females (6 percent). America (Figure 13-2). The protional attainment differed sharply. portion was only 47 percent for the

Among the foreign-born population, Educational differences exist foreign-born population from Latin

the proportions of the population 25 also among the population America; however, there was conyears old and over with less than 5 ages 25 to 34 years. siderable variation among the subyears of school, with 5 to 8 years, regions of Latin America, ranging

and with 9 to 12 years (but not high Because educational levels among from 78 percent for the foreignschool graduates), were 8 percent, 16 adults differ by age (with lower edu- born population from South

percent, and 11 percent, respectively. cational levels among the population America to 31 percent for the

The corresponding figures for the na- 65 years old and over than among foreign-born population from

tive population were 1 percent, younger adults) and because the age Mexico.
33

U.S. Census Bureau

Of the foreign-born population (not significantly different from 18 proportions with bachelor’s degrees is not sta25 years old and over from Mexico, percent). The median educational tistically significant. 2

The discussion of educational levels for the 69 percent who had less than a level of the foreign-born population the population 25 to 34 years old is limited to a

high school education included 18 from Mexico was thus about 8 years. comparison of foreign-born and native populapercent with less than 5 years of tions. The sample is not large enough to idenschool, 34 percent with 5 to 8 years, 1

The apparent gender differential between tify small, but substantively important, differences between foreign-born males and females and 17 percent with 9 to 12 years the foreign-born and native populations in the in the 25 to 34 years age group.

Figure 13-1.

Educational Attainment of the Population 25 Years Old and Over by Nativity,

Length of Residence in the United States, and Citizenship Status: 1997

(Civilian noninstitutional population plus Armed Forces living off post 

or with their families on post)

Population

(in millions)

12.0

8.2

7.7

6.2

6.3

20.2

150.4

Total 170.6

Native

Foreign born

Length of residence in U.S.

Less than 10 years

10 to 19 years

20 years and over

Citizenship status

Naturalized citizen

Not a citizen

Less than high 

school graduate

Bachelor's degree

or more

High school

graduate

Some college, less 

than bachelor's degree

Percent 

high school

graduate

or more

82.1

84.4

65.3

63.8

63.6

68.0

78.2

56.5

Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census, 1999b, Tables 13-1A, 13-1B, and 13-1C.

17.9

15.6

34.7

33.8 24.5 23.9

35.1 25.5 23.8

23.6 17.2 24.5

36.2 22.1 14.0 27.7

36.4 22.4 16.8 24.5

32.0 25.8 20.3 21.8

21.8 31.3 21.7 25.2

43.5 22.5 14.2 19.8

Percent of total

Figure 13-2.

Educational Attainment of the Foreign-Born Population 

25 Years Old and Over by Region of Birth: 1997

(Civilian noninstitutional population plus Armed Forces living off post 

or with their families on post)

Population

(in millions)

0.5

1.2

1.3

4.9

6.2

2.3

9.7

0.4

5.5

3.7

Total 20.2 1

Europe

Asia

Africa

Latin America

Caribbean

Central America

Mexico

Other

South America

Northern America

Percent

high school

graduate

or more

65.3

79.0

83.9

88.1

47.0

62.4

35.4

31.3

50.7

77.6

84.3

1Total includes Oceania and region not reported, not shown separately.

Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census, 1999b, Table 13-1D.

Less than high 

school graduate

Bachelor's degree

or more

High school

graduate

Some college, less 

than bachelor's degree

Percent of total

34.7

21.0

16.1

11.9

53.0

37.6

64.6

68.7

49.3

22.4

15.7

23.6 17.2 24.5

30.6 19.7 28.7

21.1 18.3 44.6

17.4 21.8 48.9

22.3 14.7 10.1

27.4 19.9 15.1

19.1 10.7 5.6

17.2 9.5 4.6

26.4 15.1 9.3

28.9 25.2 23.5

28.7 28.3 27.3
34

U.S. Census Bureau

Section 14.

Labor Force Participation

The foreign-born population

accounts for 12 percent of

the civilian labor force.

In March 1997, the foreign-born

population accounted for 15.6 million, or 12 percent, of the total civilian labor force of 135 million.1

 The

labor force participation rate of the

foreign-born population was 66 percent, not significantly different from

67 percent for the native population.

The patterns of labor force

participation rates by gender

differ between the foreignborn and native populations.

The labor force participation

rate in 1997 was higher for foreignborn males (79 percent) than for

native males (74 percent), as

shown in Figure 14-1. The difference is due primarily to differences

in age structure and not to differences in age-specific labor force

participation rates. Males 25 to 54

years old, who had the highest participation rates, represented 65 percent of foreign-born males 16 years

old and over, compared with 58

percent of native males 16 years

old and over. Males 65 years old

and over, who had the lowest par- born in Mexico, the labor force participation rates, represented 10 per- ticipation rate was 52 percent comcent of foreign-born males 16 years pared with 66 percent for all foreignold and over, compared with 14 born females.

percent of native males 16 years

old and over. In each case — for The unemployment rate is males 25 to 54 years old and for higher for the foreign-born males 65 years old and over — the labor force than for the native labor force participation rates by

nativity were about the same. labor force.

For females, the labor force par- In March 1997, the overall un- ticipation rate was lower among employment rate was 5.6 percent.2

the foreign-born population (53 The unemployment rate was higher percent) than among the native among the foreign-born labor force population (61 percent). In con- (6.9 percent) than among the na- trast to the situation for males, the tive labor force (5.4 percent).3

difference for females is due to dif- Among males, the apparent differ- ferences in age-specific labor force ence in unemployment rates (6.5 participation rates and not to dif- percent for the foreign-born labor ferences in age structure. In the 25 force and 5.9 percent for the native to 54 age span, which accounts for labor force) is not statistically sig- most of the labor force, the partici- nificant. Among females, the un- pation rates were 66 percent for employment rate was higher for the foreign-born females and 78 per- foreign-born labor force (7.4 per- cent for native females. cent) than for the native labor

force (4.9 percent).

Labor force participation The unemployment rate for the

rates for foreign-born foreign-born labor force in March

females differ sharply by 1997 varied by region of birth. It

citizenship status. was 8.8 percent for the foreign-born

labor force from Latin America and Among foreign-born males, labor 4.4 percent for the foreign-born labor force participation rates in the 25 to force from Asia. 54 age span did not differ greatly by

length of residence in the United 1

Labor force data for March 1997 in this States or by citizenship status (Fig- section differ slightly from data for March

ure 14-2). Among foreign-born fe- 1997 published by the U.S. Bureau of Labor

males, the labor force participation Statistics (BLS) due to the use by BLS of a

rate was lowest for those with length composite estimation procedure that reduces

sampling error, especially in estimates of of residence less than 10 years (57 month-to-month change. In addition, the data percent), and it was lower among in this section differ from annual-average data

those who were not citizens (60 per- and from seasonally adjusted data published by

cent) than among those who were BLS (U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, 1997, esnaturalized citizens (77 percent). pecially pp. 164-165 and 188-189). 2

Unemployment rates may fluctuate sig- For foreign-born males in 1997, nificantly from month to month, due partly to

labor force participation rates for the seasonal patterns. See U.S. Bureau of Labor

25 to 54 age span did not vary Statistics, 1997, pp. 188-189.

greatly by region of birth (Figure 14- 3

There is no statistical difference between

unemployment rates for the total labor force 3); however, there was more varia- and the native labor force.

tion among females. For females

The civilian labor force is the

civilian noninstitutional population 16 years old and over

who are employed (have a job),

or who are unemployed (without a job, available for work,

and actively seeking work).

The labor force participation

rate is the proportion of the civilian population 16 years old

and over in the labor force. The

unemployment rate is the proportion of the civilian labor

force that is unemployed.
35

U.S. Census Bureau

0.2

2.1

0.9

6.1

7.0

45.3

1.0

6.0

0.3

3.6

9.3

63.1

0.1

1.5

0.7

5.1

4.8

40.7

0.5

5.8

0.2

3.5

6.3

56.6

Figure 14-1.

Labor Force Participation Rates of the Population 16 Years Old 

and Over by Nativity and Gender for Selected Age Groups: 1997

(Percent of the civilian noninstitutional population)

16 years old and over

16 to 19 years

20 to 24 years

25 to 54 years

55 to 64 years

65 years and over

Males Females

Labor force

(in millions)

Labor force

(in millions)

78.8

73.6

42.4

49.6

78.7

80.9

91.5

91.3

75.6

66.8

17.2

17.1

Foreign born

Native

Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census, 1999b, Table 14-1A.

53.4

60.6

39.7

49.9

52.5

75.3

66.0

78.3

47.7

52.3

7.9

8.9

Figure 14-2.

Labor Force Participation Rates of the Population 25 to 54 Years Old by Nativity,

Length of Residence in the United States, Citizenship Status, and Gender: 1997

(Percent of civilian noninstitutional population)

Males Females

Labor force

(in millions)

Labor force

(in millions)

7.0

45.3

52.3

1.8

2.5

2.6

4.6

2.4

4.8

40.7

45.5

1.4

1.8

1.6

2.8

1.9

Total

Native 

Foreign born

Length of residence in 

the United States

Less than 10 years

10 to 19 years

20 years and over

Citizenship status

Naturalized citizen

Not a citizen

Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census, 1999b, Tables 14-3A, 14-3B, and 14-3C.

76.7

78.3

66.0

57.3

69.9

72.9

76.7

60.2

91.3

91.3

91.5

89.5

93.2

92.3

93.9

90.4

0.4

0.5

2.2

2.7

0.6

3.8

0.3

1.9

0.8

7.0

0.3

0.4

0.9

1.3

0.6

2.3

1.5

0.7

4.8

Figure 14-3.

Labor Force Participation Rates of the Foreign-Born Population 

25 to 54 Years Old by Region of Birth and Gender: 1997

(Percent of the civilian noninstitutional population)

Total1

Europe

Asia

Africa

Latin America

 Caribbean

 Central America

 Mexico

 Other

 South America

Males Females

Labor force

(in millions)

Labor force

(in millions)

1Total includes Africa (females), Oceania, Northern America, and region not reported, not shown separately.

Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census, 1999b, Table 14-3D.

91.5

92.8

89.0

85.2

92.6

85.9

94.1

95.8

93.7

93.4

(See footnote 1)

66.0

71.9

69.4

61.6

73.8

55.6

51.5

68.9

70.3
36

U.S. Census Bureau

Section 15.

Occupation

Occupational distribution

of foreign-born workers

differs sharply from that

of native workers.

In March 1997, managerial and

professional specialty occupations

accounted for 24 percent of

foreign-born workers compared

with 30 percent of native workers

(Figure 15-1).1 Technical, sales,

and administrative support occupations accounted for an additional

22 percent of foreign-born workers

compared with an additional 31

percent of native workers.2 As a

result, these two occupational

groups together accounted for 46

percent of foreign-born workers

compared with 61 percent of native

workers.

Higher proportions of foreignborn workers than of native

workers were in the following

three occupational groups: service

occupations (19 percent versus 13

percent);3 operators, fabricators,

and laborers (also 19 percent

versus 13 percent); and farming,

forestry, and fishing occupations

(4.7 percent versus 2.2 percent).

Precision production, craft, and

repair occupations accounted for

11 percent of both foreign-born

and native workers.

Naturalized citizen workers

and native workers have

similar occupational

distributions.

The differences in occupational

distributions between foreign-born

and native workers described above

are reflected in differences among

foreign-born workers by length of

residence in the United States and by

citizenship status (Figure 15-1). In

1997, managerial and professional

specialty occupations accounted for

31 percent of foreign-born workers

who had lived in the United States

for 20 years and over compared with

19 percent for those who had lived in

the United States less than 10 years.

In contrast, operators, fabricators,

and laborers accounted for 13 percent of foreign-born workers who

had lived in the United States 20

years and over compared with 23

percent for those who had lived in

the United States less than 10 years.

The occupational classification system used here and

by the Bureau of Labor Statistics is the one used in the

1990 census and is based

largely on the 1980 Standard

Occupational Classification

(SOC). This system includes

501 detailed occupational categories which can be combined into the 6 summary occupational groups discussed

in this section. The data on

occupation are for the employed civilian population 16

years old and over (as discussed in Section 14 on labor

force) who are referred to in

this section as workers.

Figure 15-1.

Major Occupation Group of Workers 16 Years Old and Over by 

Nativity, Length of Residence in the United States, 

and Citizenship Status: 1997

(Civilian noninstitutional population)

Workers

(in millions)

9.0

5.5

4.3

5.0

5.1

14.5

113.2

Total 127.7

Native

Foreign born

Length of residence in U.S.

Less than 10 years

10 to 19 years

20 years and over

Citizenship status

Naturalized citizen

Not a citizen

Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census, 1999b, Tables 15-1A, 15-1B, and 15-1C.

Managerial and professional specialty

Technical, sales, and administrative support

Service occupations

Precision production, craft, and repair

Operators, fabricators, and laborers

Farming, forestry, and fishing

29.4 29.8 13.6 10.8 14.0 2.5

30.1 30.8 12.9 10.7 13.4 2.2

23.7 22.3 19.1 11.3 18.9 4.7

18.9 18.1 22.4 11.4 22.9 6.4

22.5 24.4 17.7 11.2 19.6 4.5

30.8 24.9 16.7 11.2 13.5 2.9

33.0 28.4 14.7 9.7 12.6

1.6

18.0 18.6 21.8 12.2 22.8 6.5

Percent distribution by major occupation group
37

U.S. Census Bureau

Among foreign-born workers in citizenship status, and educational accounted for 26 percent of workers

1997, managerial and professional attainment by region of birth of the from Latin America and for 11 perspecialty occupations accounted for foreign-born population, there are cent of all other foreign-born work33 percent of workers who were major differences in occupational ers. Farming, forestry, and fishing

naturalized citizens versus 18 per- distributions (Figure 15-2). In occupations, which accounted for 4.7

cent of workers who were not citi- 1997, professional and managerial percent of foreign-born workers, aczens. In contrast, operators, fabrica- specialty occupations accounted for counted for 8.1 percent of workers

tors, and laborers accounted for 13 38 percent of workers from Europe from Latin America and for 1.1 perpercent of naturalized-citizen work- and 36 percent of workers from cent of all other foreign-born workers versus 23 percent of workers Asia compared with 11 percent of ers. Among foreign-born workers

who were not citizens. workers from Latin America.4 from Mexico, 31 percent were in the

While the occupational distribu- (The proportions of the foreign- operators, fabricators, and laborers

tion of naturalized-citizen workers born population 25 years old and occupational group, and 13 percent

differs greatly from that of workers over with a bachelor’s degree or were in the farming, forestry, and

who are not citizens, it is closer to more education were 29 percent fishing occupational group.

the occupational distribution of na- from Europe, 45 percent from Asia,

tive workers. In 1997, the propor- and 10 percent from Latin 1

See Section 14, footnote 1, concerning

tions in each of the six summary oc- America.) Among foreign-born labor force data for March 1997. 2

There was no significant difference in the cupational groups for naturalized- workers from Latin America, the percentages between the two occupational

citizen workers and native workers proportions in professional and groups for foreign-born workers or for native

were significantly different from managerial specialty occupations workers.

Service occupations exclude professional each other but were relatively small. ranged from 23 percent for workers 3

specialty occupations (e.g., engineers, scien- from South America and 19 per- tists, physicians, nurses, teachers, lawyers, and

Occupational distributions of cent for workers from the Carib- judges).

foreign-born workers differ bean to 6 percent of workers from 4

The proportions for Europe and Asia are

5 not significantly different from each other. greatly by region of birth. Mexico. 5

The proportions for South America and

In 1997, operators, fabricators, the Caribbean are not significantly different As would be expected given dif- and laborers , who accounted for 19 from each other.

ferences in length of residence, percent of foreign-born workers,

Figure 15-2.

Major Occupation Group of Foreign-Born Workers

16 Years Old and Over by Region of Birth: 1997

(Civilian noninstitutional population)

Workers

(in millions)

0.3

0.9

1.1

3.8

5.0

1.5

7.4

0.4

4.1

2.1

Total 14.5 1

Europe

Asia

Africa

Latin America

Caribbean

Central America

Mexico

Other

South America

Northern America

1Total includes Oceania and region not reported, not shown separately.

Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census, 1999b, Table 15-1D.

Managerial and professional specialty

Technical, sales, and administrative support

Service occupations

Precision production, craft, and repair

Operators, fabricators, and laborers

Farming, forestry, and fishing

23.7 22.3 19.1 11.3 18.9 4.7

37.8 25.7 16.4 10.4 8.7 0.9

35.8 29.5 13.0 7.0 13.4 1.3

26.1 32.3 25.1 5.4 10.5 0.7

11.4 16.5 23.6 14.2 26.2 8.1

19.0 25.4 24.5 9.5 19.3 2.4

7.0 12.2 23.4 16.6 29.8 11.1

5.8 10.9 21.9 17.5 30.7 13.2

11.0 16.7 28.3 13.3 26.7 3.9

23.3 25.8 23.4 8.8 17.4 1.3

46.5 28.5 10.5 10.4 3.8 0.3

Percent distribution by major occupation group
38

U.S. Census Bureau

Section 16.

Money Income of Households and Families

Income is lower among

foreign-born households than

among native households.

In 1996, median income for all

households was $35,500. (Income

estimates in this report are rounded

to hundreds of dollars.) Median income for households with a foreignborn householder was $30,000 compared with $36,100 for households

with a native householder (Figure

16-1). Among foreign-born households, 43 percent had incomes below

$25,000, and 29 percent had incomes

of $50,000 and over. Among native

households, the proportion was 35

percent for each category.

The lower income of foreignborn households is not accounted for

by differences in age of householder

or household size. For example, for

households with householder 45 to

54 years—when household income

peaks—median income in 1996 was

$41,900 for foreign-born households

and $51,400 for native households.

For households with householders

65 years old and over, the corresponding medians were $16,100 and

$19,700, respectively. For two-person households, median income was

$28,500 for foreign-born households

and $38,000 for native households.

For four-person households, the corresponding medians were $38,100

and $52,800, respectively.

As discussed in Section 11, the

average size of foreign-born households in 1997 was considerably

larger than that of native households: 3.32 versus 2.56. The average number of earners in 1996 per

foreign-born household was 1.60

versus 1.39 for native households.1

The lower proportion of earners

among members of foreign-born

households (48 percent) than

among native households (54 percent) reflects the higher proportion

of household members under age

18 in foreign-born households.

Among foreign-born households,

median income in 1996 ranged from

$33,100 when the householder’s

length of residence in the United

States was 20 years or more to

$25,900 when the householder’s

length of residence was less than 10

years (Figure 16-1). Median income

was considerably higher when the

householder was a naturalized citizen than when the householder was

not a citizen: $37,400 versus

$25,700.

Asian households have the

highest income among

foreign-born households.

In 1996, households with a

householder born in Asia had a median income of $42,900 (Figure 16-

2). This was well above the median

income of households with foreignborn householders from Europe, and

was also well above the median income of native households.2

The high income of households

with a foreign-born householder

from Asia appears to reflect two factors. The first factor is the relatively

high proportion of foreign-born

workers in managerial and professional specialty occupations among

foreign-born workers from Asia, a

characteristic which is shared with

foreign-born workers from Europe,

as shown in Section 15.3 The second

factor is the relatively low proportion

of householders from Asia who are

65 years old and over, a characteristic not shared with householders

from Europe.4

The average numbers of earners

and of full-time, year-round earners

in households with householders

from Asia (1.64 and 1.10, respectively) were not significantly different from the corresponding averages

for all households with a foreignborn householder (1.60 and 1.02, respectively). (Earnings of full-time,

year-round workers are discussed in

Section 17.)

The median income in 1996 of

households with a householder born

in Latin America was $24,100. The

median income of households with a

householder born in South America

($31,800) was higher than for households with the householder born

elsewhere in Latin America.

Married-couple families have

the highest income among

foreign-born families.

In 1996, the median income of

the 6.0 million married-couple families with a foreign-born householder

was $38,800 (Figure 16-3). This is

over twice the median income of the

1.4 million families maintained by a

foreign-born female with no husband

present ($16,800). Among these female-householder families, median

income was lower for families with

one or more related children under

18 years old ($13,400) than for families with no related children

($28,900).5

Data on income are based

on money income received

(excluding capital gains) before deductions for income

taxes, social security, union

dues, medicare deductions,

etc. Money income does not

include the value of noncash

benefits such as food stamps,

medicare, medicaid, public

housing, and employerprovided fringe benefits.

Noncash benefits are discussed in Sections 19 and 20.

For definitions of households

and families, see Sections 11

and 12. Data on income are

for the 1996 calendar year

and are based on the composition of households and families as of March 1997.
39

U.S. Census Bureau

In general, the income of native children: $13,400 and $16,800, re- 4

Median household income in 1996 for

families by type and presence or ab- spectively. both native households and foreign-born

households was much lower when household- sence of related children was higher ers were 65 years old and over (and thus more

than for foreign-born families. The 1

Earners include wage and salary workers likely to be retired) than when householders

median income of married-couple and nonfarm and farm self-employed workers. were in the 25 to 64 age span (U.S. Bureau of 2

The sample size of households with the Census, 1999b). families with a native householder householders from Africa or Northern 5

In contrast to own children, as defined in was $50,800 compared with $38,800 America is too small to identify substantively Section 12, related children include grandchilfor those with a foreign-born house- important differences in income involving dren and other relatives of the householder as

holder. For both foreign-born and these regions. well as children of the householder. In March 3

Among full-time, year-round workers, 1997, there were 69.4 million related children native families, the lowest median median earnings for both males and females under 18 years old in the United States, includincome was for female-householder were higher in 1996 for workers in managerial ing 63.9 million own children under age 18

families with one or more related and professional specialty occupations than for (U.S. Bureau of the Census, 1998a, Table 16).

workers in other occupations (U.S. Bureau of

the Census, 1997a, Table 7).

Figure 16-1.

Median Household Income by Nativity, Length of 

Residence in the United States, and Citizenship 

Status of the Householder: 1996

(Households as of March 1997. Civilian noninstitutional population plus 

Armed Forces living off post or with their families on post)

Households

(in millions)

5.8

4.6

4.3

3.1

3.0

10.4

90.6

Total 101.0

Native

Foreign born

Length of residence in U.S.

Less than 10 years

10 to 19 years

20 years and over

Citizenship status

Naturalized citizen

Not a citizen

$30,000

$33,100

$37,400

Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census, 1999b, Tables 16-1A, 16-1B, and 16-1C.

$25,700

$30,200

$25,900

$35,500

$36,100

$24,100

Figure 16-2.

Income of Foreign-Born Households by Region 

of Birth of the Householder: 1996

(Households as of March 1997. Civilian noninstitutional population 

plus Armed Forces living off post or with their families on post)

Households

(in millions)

0.3

0.6

0.6

2.4

3.0

1.2

4.9

0.3

2.7

2.2

Total 10.4 1

Europe

Asia

Africa

Latin America

Caribbean

Central America

Mexico

Other

South America

Northern America

1

Total includes Oceania and region not reported, not shown separately.

Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census, 1999b, Table 16-1D.

$30,000

$31,300

$42,900

$31,300

$23,900

$23,000

$22,400

$25,400

$31,800

$35,000

Figure 16-3.

Median Family Income by Nativity of Householder, Type of Family, and 

Presence of Related Children Under 18 Years: 1996

(Families as of March 1997. Civilian noninstitutional population plus Armed Forces 

living off post or with their families on post)

Families with foreign-born householder Families with native householder

Families

(in millions)

Families

(in millions)

0.9

0.4

1.4

3.8

2.2

6.0

5.0

3.0

7.9

8.0

3.4

11.4

22.4

25.2

47.6

32.2

30.1

62.3

1

Includes male householder, no wife present.

Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census, 1999b, Table 16-7.

Total families1

No related children1

One or more related children1

Married-couple families

No related children

One or more related children

Female householder, no husband present

No related children

One or more related children

$43,400

$44,700

$42,200

$50,800

$47,400

$53,800

$20,200

$30,700

$16,800

$33,000

$36,400

$31,300

$38,800

$40,300

$38,000

$16,800

$28,900

$13,400

Foreign-born householder

Native householder
40

U.S. Census Bureau

Section 17.

Earnings of Full-Time, Year-Round Workers

Earnings of full-time, yearround workers are lower for

foreign-born workers than for

their native counterparts.

In 1996, median earnings for all

full-time, year-round workers

(shortened to “workers” in the remainder of the text of this section)

were $32,100 for males and

$23,700 for females. (Earnings estimates in this report are rounded

to hundreds of dollars.) Median

earnings for foreign-born male and

female workers were $25,000 and

$20,800, respectively, compared

with $33,200 and $24,100, respectively, for native male and female

workers (Figure 17-1). The female-to-male earnings ratio was

higher for foreign-born workers

(.83) than for native workers (.73).

Among foreign-born male workers, 50 percent had earnings less

than $25,000, and 19 percent had

earnings of $50,000 and over.

Among their native counterparts, the Median earnings of workers

corresponding proportions were 31 from Europe and Asia exceed

percent and 26 percent, respectively. the median earnings of all Among foreign-born female foreign-born workers. workers, 62 percent had earnings

less than $25,000, and 10 percent Among workers from the regions

had earnings of $50,000 and over. shown in Figure 17-2, those from

Among their native counterparts, the Europe and Asia generally had the

corresponding proportions were 52 highest earnings. For males, median

percent and 9 percent, respectively. earnings were $40,500 and $35,300,

Thus, even though the median earn- respectively, and for females, median

ings of foreign-born female workers earnings were $23,400 and $24,600,

were lower than those of native fe- respectively.1

male workers, the proportions with The median earnings of workers

earnings of $50,000 or more were from Latin America were below the

not significantly different. median earnings of all foreign-born

workers. The median for male

Earnings of foreign-born workers from Latin America was

workers who are naturalized $18,600 (compared with $25,000),

citizens are slightly higher and the median for female workers

than the earnings of other from Latin America was $16,700

(compared with $20,800). The foreign-born workers. female-to-male earnings ratio was

The median earnings of foreign- higher for foreign-born workers from

born male workers in 1996 ranged Latin America (.90) than for foreignfrom $19,900 for those living in the born workers from Asia (.70) or

United States less than 10 years to from Europe (.58).

$35,200 for those living in the Median earnings for workers

United States 20 years and over. The from the Caribbean ($23,900 for

corresponding figures for foreign- males and $20,200 for females) and

born female workers were $16,800 from South America ($25,200 for

and $24,200. males and $21,100 for females) were

For foreign-born male workers, not significantly different from each

median earnings in 1996 were other or from the medians for all

$35,600 for naturalized citizens foreign-born workers. Among workand $20,500 for workers who were ers from Mexico, the median earnnot citizens. The corresponding ings of both males ($16,800) and fefigures for foreign-born female males ($13,700) were below the reworkers were $25,500 and spective medians for workers from

$17,200, respectively. the Caribbean or South America.

For males, median earnings of

foreign-born workers who had 1

The apparent differences in median earnings between workers from Europe and Asia lived in the United States for 20 were not statistically significant for males or years and over, or who were natu- for females. The median earnings of females

ralized citizens, were slightly from Europe alone were not significantly difhigher than the median earnings of ferent from the median earnings of all foreignborn females. their native counterparts.

Earnings include money

wage or salary income from

work performed as an employee, net income from nonfarm self-employment, and

net income from farm selfemployment before deductions, including taxes. A fulltime, year-round worker is

one who worked 35 or more

hours per week for 50 or

more weeks during the previous calendar year.
41

U.S. Census Bureau

Figure 17-1.

Earnings of Full-Time, Year-Round Workers by Gender, Nativity, Length of 

Residence in the United States, and Citizenship Status: 1996

(Civilian noninstitutional population plus Armed Forces living off post 

or with their families on post)

Workers

(in millions)

4.0

2.6

2.0

2.3

2.3

6.6

47.2

Total 53.8

Native

Foreign born

Length of residence in U.S.

Less than 10 years

10 to 19 years

20 years and over

Citizenship status

Naturalized citizen

Not a citizen

Less than 

$10,000

$50,000-

$74,999

$10,000-

$24,999

$25,000-

$49,999

Median

earnings

$32,100

$33,200

$25,000

$19,900

$23,600

$35,200

$35,600

$20,500

Percent distribution of workers by earnings

$75,000

and over

4.1

3.7

7.2

10.4

7.5

3.3

4.5

8.9

29.1

27.2

42.8

52.3

46.6

28.1

26.0

53.6

42.0 15.5 9.3

43.5 16.1 9.5

31.1 11.1 7.8

24.2 6.9 6.2

30.0 10.4 5.5

39.8 16.5 12.2

39.7 17.7 12.1

25.6 6.8 5.1

Males

2.1

1.7

1.3

1.4

1.1

3.7

32.7

Total 36.4

Native

Foreign born

Length of residence in U.S.

Less than 10 years

10 to 19 years

20 years and over

Citizenship status

Naturalized citizen

Not a citizen

Median

earnings

$23,700

$24,100

$20,800

$16,800

$20,500

$24,200

$25,500

$17,200

Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census, 1999b, Tables 17-1A, 17-1B, and 17-1C.

6.6

6.1

10.4

16.5

10.0

6.0

5.6

14.4

46.6

46.0

51.9

56.6

54.0

45.9

42.7

59.3

37.4 7.0 2.4

38.4 7.0 2.4

28.0 7.2 2.5

19.2 5.3 2.2

26.0 7.3 2.8

37.2 8.7 2.4

38.3 9.5 3.9

19.7 5.4 1.3

Females

0.4

0.5

2.0

2.5

0.6

3.5

1.8

0.9

6.6

0.3

0.3

0.6

0.9

0.5

1.7

1.2

0.6

3.7

Figure 17-2.

Median Earnings of Foreign-Born Full-Time, Year-Round Workers 

by Gender and Region of Birth: 1996

(Civilian noninstitutional population plus Armed Forces living off post 

or with their families on post)

Total1

Europe

Asia

Latin America

Caribbean

Central America

Mexico

Other

South America

Males Females

Workers

(in millions)

Workers

(in millions)

1

Total includes Africa, Oceania, Northern America, and region not reported, not shown separately.

Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census, 1999b, Table 17-1D.

$25,000

$40,500

$35,300

$18,600

$23,900

$16,800

$16,800

$25,200

$16,700

$20,800

$23,400

$24,600

$16,700

$20,200

$14,200

$13,700

$16,400

$21,100

Males

Females

Femaleto-male

earnings

ratio

.83

.58

.70

.90

.85

.85

.81

.98

.84
42

U.S. Census Bureau

Section 18.

Poverty Status

The poverty rate is higher one-half as high as the poverty rate

among the foreign-born for the population born in Latin

population than among the America (28 percent) (Figure 18-2).

native population. Among the foreign-born population

from Latin America, the poverty rate

In 1996, the poverty rate, which ranged from 15 percent for the popuwas 13.7 percent for the total popu- lation from South America to 34 perlation, was 21.0 percent for the cent for the population from Mexico.

foreign-born population and 12.9

percent for the native population While the poverty rate is (Figure 18-1). Of the 36.5 million higher for the foreign-born individuals below the poverty level, population than for the native 5.4 million, or 15 percent, were population, the patterns by foreign born. characteristics such as gender, Among the foreign-born popula- age, and family type are tion, the poverty rate ranged from

11 percent for those who had lived similar.

in the United States for 20 years Among both males and females, and over to 29 percent for those the poverty rate in 1996 was higher who had lived in the United States for the foreign-born population

for less than 10 years. The poverty than for the native population (Figrate was 10 percent for naturalized ure 18-3). For the population uncitizens compared with 27 percent der 18 years old, the poverty rate

for noncitizens. for the foreign born (39 percent)

was twice as high as the poverty

Poverty rates of the foreign- rate for their native counterparts

born population differ by (20 percent). For the 65 years old

region of birth. and over age group, poverty rates

were much lower: 16 percent for In 1996, the poverty rates for the the foreign-born population com- population born in Europe (13 per- pared with 10 percent for the na- cent) and in Asia (15 percent), tive population. which were not significantly differ- In 1996, when the overall pov- ent from each other, were erty rate for families was

11 percent, the poverty

rate was 20 percent for

families with foreign-born

householders, twice the

poverty rate of 10 percent

for families with native

householders. For families with a foreign-born

householder, poverty rates

in 1996 ranged from 10

percent for families with

no related children under

18 years old to 41 percent

for families with three or

more related children under 18 years old. The

corresponding range for families

with native householders was 4 percent to 24 percent.

Poverty rates are high for

children living in families with

foreign-born householders,

regardless of the children’s

nativity.

In 1996, the poverty rate for related children under 18 years old in

families with foreign-born householders was 32 percent (3.4 million

of 10.5 million). For the children

who were foreign born, the poverty

rate was 39 percent (0.9 million of

2.3 million). For the children who

were native, the poverty rate was 30

percent (2.5 million of 8.2 million).1

Native children accounted for about

three-quarters (2.5 million of 3.4

million) of the related children under

18 years old living below the poverty

level in families with foreign-born

householders.

Poverty rates would be lower

under an alternative

definition of income that

includes the value of meanstested noncash benefits.

Using an alternative definition of

income that adds the value of meanstested noncash transfers (e.g., food

stamps, housing assistance, and medicaid) to post-tax cash income from

the private and government sectors

would result in lower poverty rates.2

In 1996, the poverty rate under this

alternative definition would have

been 16.1 percent for the foreignborn population and 9.6 percent for

the native population.

1

The poverty rates of 32 percent and 30

percent are not significantly different from

each other. 2

For a discussion of alternative definitions

of poverty, see U.S. Bureau of the Census,

1997b.

The poverty definition used by the

federal government for statistical purposes is based on a set of money income thresholds that vary by family

size and composition and do not take

into account noncash benefits or taxes.

The average poverty threshold in 1996

for a four-person family was $16,036.

The poverty status (in poverty or not in

poverty) of a family is assigned to each

member of the family. Poverty status is

not defined for individuals under 15

years old who are not related to the

householder (e.g., foster children).
43

U.S. Census Bureau

Figure 18-1.

Poverty Rates for the Population by Nativity, 

Length of Residence in the United States, 

and Citizenship Status: 1996

(Populations as of March 1997. Civilian noninstitutional population 

plus Armed Forces living off post or with their families on post 

and excluding unrelated individuals under 15 years old)

Population

(in millions)

16.7

9.0

7.8

7.5

10.4

25.8

240.5

Total 266.2

Native

Foreign born

Length of residence in U.S.

Less than 10 years

10 to 19 years

20 years and over

Citizenship status

Naturalized citizen

Not a citizen

21.0

11.1

10.3

Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census, 1999b, Tables 18-1A, 18-1B, and 18-1C.

26.8

19.7

29.3

13.7

12.9

28.0

Figure 18-2.

Poverty Rates for the Foreign-Born Population 

by Region of Birth: 1996

(Population as of March 1997. Civilian noninstitutional population 

plus Armed Forces living off post or with their families on post and 

excluding unrelated individuals under 15 years old)

Population

(in millions)

0.6

1.5

1.8

7.0

8.8

2.8

13.1

0.6

6.8

4.3

Total 25.8 1

Europe

Asia

Africa

Latin America

Caribbean

Central America

Mexico

Other

South America

Northern America

1Total includes Oceania and region not reported, not shown separately.

Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census, 1999b, Table 18-1D.

21.0

12.7

14.7

17.1

23.7

31.6

33.9

22.3

15.1

7.9

Figure 18-3.

Selected Poverty Rates for the Population by Nativity, for Families by Nativity of the 

Householder, and for Related Children Under 18 Years Old by Nativity: 1996

(Population as of March 1997. Civilian noninstitutional population plus Armed Forces living off post 

or with their families on post and excluding unrelated individuals under 15 years old)

Foreign born Millions Millions Native

4.0

1.6

1.1

2.8

2.6

12.8

12.9

25.8

36.7

16.8

12.3

29.1

68.1

123.0

117.4

240.5

1Individuals who live alone, or who are unrelated to the householder in households with two or more members.

2Data not shown separately for the small number of foreign-born related children in households with native householders.

Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census, 1999b, Tables 18-1A, 18-2A, 18-3A, and 18-4A.

Population

Total

Males

Females

Under 18 years old

65 years old and over

Males 65 years old and over

Females 65 years old and over

Unrelated individuals1

12.9

11.1

14.7

19.8

10.3

6.3

13.2

19.8

21.0

19.8

22.2

38.9

15.9

12.7

18.2

29.5

1.4

6.0

1.3

1.7

1.9

3.0

7.9

11.4

47.6

6.5

12.2

13.6

30.1

62.3

Families

Total

With no related children under 18 years old

With one related child under 18 years old

With two related children under 18 years old

With three or more related children under 18 years old

Married-couple families

Female-householder families, no husband present

2.3

8.2

10.5

58.7

58.9

Related Children Under 18 Years Old 

by Nativity of Householder

Total

Native related children under 18 years old

Foreign-born related children under 18 years old

9.9

4.2

12.6

13.2

23.9

4.4

31.7

19.8

10.1

17.0

23.0

41.2

15.7

39.7

32.0

30.0

38.8

17.6

17.7

(See footnote 2)
44

U.S. Census Bureau

Section 19.

Means-Tested Program Participation

The participation rate in

means-tested programs is

higher among foreign-born

households than among

native households.

In 1996, 2.5 million, or 24 percent, of households with foreignborn householders participated in

one more of the following meanstested programs providing noncash

benefits: food stamps, housing assistance, or medicaid. The corresponding figures for households with native householders were 15.4 million,

or 17 percent (Figure 19-1). For participation in one or more meanstested programs providing cash benefits - aid to families with dependent

children (AFDC),1

 general assistance, or supplemental security income (SSI) - the corresponding figures were 1.1 million, or 10.6 percent, for foreign-born households,

and 6.8 million, or 7.5 percent, for

native households. The 17.9 million

households receiving noncash benefits in 1996 included nearly all (98

percent) of the 7.9 million households receiving cash benefits. Thus

households receiving cash benefits

are essentially a subset of households

receiving noncash benefits.

Participation rates in 1996 for

food stamps, medicaid, and AFDC

were higher for foreign-born households than for native households.

The highest participation rates were

for medicaid: 21 percent of foreignborn households and 14 percent of

native households.

Among foreign-born

households, participation

rates were higher when the

householder was a noncitizen

than when the householder was

a naturalized citizen.

The participation rate in noncash

programs in 1996 was 29 percent for

noncitizen households compared

with 18 percent for naturalized-citizen households (Figure 19-2). For

cash programs, the rates were 12 percent for noncitizen households compared with 8 percent for naturalizedcitizen households.

Among foreign-born households,

the participation rate in 1996 in noncash programs was lowest when the

householder’s length of residence in

the United States was 20 years and

over (20 percent). There were no

statistically significant differences in

participation rates in cash programs

by length of residence.

Participation rates among

foreign-born households vary

sharply by region of birth of

the householder.

In 1996, the participation rates in

means-tested noncash programs for

households with householders from

Europe (14 percent) and from Asia

(17 percent) were not significantly

different from each other but were

one-half the rate for households with

householders from Latin America

(33 percent) (Figure 19-3). There

was a similar pattern for cash programs. The participation rates in

cash programs for households with

householders from Europe (6.4 percent) and from Asia (7.9 percent),

which were not significantly different from each other, were one-half

the rate for households with householders from Latin America (14 percent).

Among family households,

those with a female

householder, no husband

present, have the highest

participation rates in meanstested programs.2

In 1996, the participation rates in

noncash programs for family households with female householders, no

husband present, were not significantly different for foreign-born

households (48 percent) and native

households (45 percent). Likewise,

the participation rates in cash programs for family households with female householders, no husband

present, were not significantly different for foreign-born households (29

percent) and native households (26

percent).

Participation rates in 1996 were

lowest for married-couple family

households. For noncash programs,

they were 21 percent for foreignborn households versus 10 percent

for native households. For cash programs, the rates were 7.0 percent for

foreign-born households compared to

3.4 percent for native households.

1

Data for the AFDC program for 1996 include the Temporary Assistance for Needy

Families (TANF) program.

 2In contrast to data on poverty for families, which do not include any nonfamily members living with families (i.e., individuals not

related to the householder by birth, marriage,

or adoption), data on means-tested programs

for families include nonfamily members, and

thus the data are for family households. In

March 1997, the 70.2 million family households in the United States included 224.0 million family members and 4.3 million

nonfamily members (U.S. Bureau of the Census, 1998a, Tables 1 and 18).

Means-tested programs are

those that require the income

and/or assets of an individual or

family to be below specified

thresholds in order to qualify for

benefits. These programs provide

cash and noncash assistance to

portions of the low-income population. The noncash programs included here are food stamps,

housing assistance, and medicaid.

The cash programs included here

are aid to families with dependent children, general assistance,

and supplemental security income.
45

U.S. Census Bureau

Figure 19-1.

Households Receiving Selected Means-Tested Noncash or Cash Benefits, 

by Specified Benefit and Nativity of the Householder: 1996

(Households as of March 1997. Civilian noninstitutional population plus Armed Forces 

living off post or with their families on post)

Percent receiving benefits Percent receiving benefits Number

(in millions)

Number

(in millions)

1

Includes households receiving benefits from one or more of the three programs listed.

2

Includes households receiving benefits from AFDC or general assistance and/or from Supplemental Security Income.

3

Aid to families with dependent children.

Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census, 1999b, Tables 19-1A and 19-1B.

2.1

0.6

1.1

2.5

12.3

4.3

7.2

15.4

Selected Noncash Benefits

Total1

Food stamps

Housing assistance

Medicaid

0.6

0.6

1.1

3.9

3.6

6.8

Selected Cash Benefits

Total2

AFDC3 or general assistance

Supplemental security income

17.0

8.0

4.8

13.5

24.1

10.1

6.1

20.5

7.5

3.9

4.3

Foreign-born households (10.4 million) Native households (90.6 million)

Percentage of households receiving 

specified benefits

Foreign-born households

Native households

10.6

5.7

5.6

Figure 19-2.

Households Receiving Selected Means-Tested 

Noncash or Cash Benefits, by Nativity, Length 

of Residence in the United States, and Citizenship 

Status of the Householder: 1996

(Households as of March 1997. Civilian noninstitutional population 

plus Armed Forces living off post or with their families on post)

Households

(in millions)

5.8

4.6

4.3

3.1

3.0

10.4

90.6

101.0

Total

Native

Foreign born

Length of residence in U.S.

Less than 10 years

10 to 19 years

20 years and over

Citizenship status

Naturalized citizen

Not a citizen

17.0

10.6

26.0

Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census, 1999b, Tables 19-1A, 19-1B, 19-1C, 19-2A, 19-2B, and 19-2C.

9.7

24.1

7.5

17.7

7.8

Percentage of households receiving 

Selected noncash benefits

Selected cash benefits

28.2

12.7

19.6

9.6

17.8

8.3

29.1

12.4

Figure 19-3.

Foreign-Born Households Receiving Selected

Means-Tested Noncash or Cash Benefits by Region of 

Birth of the Householder: 1996

(Households as of March 1997. Civilian noninstitutional population 

plus Armed Forces living off post or with their families on post)

Households

(in millions)

0.3

0.6

0.6

2.4

3.0

1.2

4.9

0.3

2.7

2.2

10.4 Total1

Europe

Asia

Africa

Latin America

Caribbean

Central America

Mexico

Other

South America

Northern America

1

Total includes Oceania and region not reported, not shown separately.

Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census, 1999b, Tables 19-1D and 19-2D.

Percentage of households receiving 

Selected noncash benefits

Selected cash benefits

24.1

10.6

13.9

6.4

17.5

7.9

25.5

11.7

32.9

14.1

35.8

20.8

34.1

12.4

35.4

12.6

29.0

11.8

21.4

9.0

15.6

5.3
46

U.S. Census Bureau

Section 20.

Health Insurance and Pension Plans

One-fifth of the population

with no health insurance is

foreign born.

In 1996, 84 percent of the total

population had health insurance

for all or at least part of the year.

The proportion was lower among

the foreign-born population than

among the native population: 66

percent versus 86 percent (Figure

20-1).1 Of the 41.7 million

individuals with no health insur- (not significantly different from each

ance during 1996, 8.6 million, or other), and 36 percent for workers

21 percent, were foreign born. from Latin America (Figure 20-4).

Among the foreign-born popula- For workers from Mexico, the protion, the proportion with health in- portion with employment-based

surance in 1996 ranged from 54 per- health insurance was 31 percent.

cent for those resident in the United

States less than 10 years to 83 per- Employer-offered pension

cent among those resident 20 years plans are available to a lower

and over. The proportion with proportion of foreign-born health insurance was 83 percent for workers than of native

naturalized citizens compared with workers.

58 percent for noncitizens.

The proportion of the foreign- In 1996, 41 percent of foreignborn population with health insur- born workers and 56 percent of naance varied by region of birth (Fig- tive workers had employers who ofure 20-2). For the populations fered pension plans (Figure 20-3).5

from Europe and Asia, the propor- Among foreign-born workers, the

tions in 1996 were 85 percent and proportion ranged from 32 percent

75 percent, respectively. For the for those resident in the United

population from Latin America, the States less than 10 years to 50 perproportion was 54 percent and cent for those resident 20 years and

ranged from 69 percent and 66 per- over. The proportion was 53 percent

cent, respectively, for the popula- for naturalized citizens compared

tions from Caribbean and South with 33 percent for noncitizens. By

America (not significantly differ- region of birth, the proportions were

ent from each other) to 46 percent 51 percent of workers from Europe,

for the population from Mexico. 49 percent for workers from Asia

(not significantly different from each

The proportion of other), and 31 percent for workers

foreign-born workers with from Latin America (Figure 20-4).

employment-based health For workers from Mexico, the proinsurance is lower than for portion with employer-offered pennative workers. sion plans was 26 percent.

In 1996, 44 percent of foreign- 1

The proportions with health insurance

born workers and 54 percent of na- under private insurance plans were 52 percent

for the foreign-born population and 72 percent tive workers had employment-based for the native population.

health insurance (Figure 20-3). 2The major types of military health care

Among foreign-born workers, the are CHAMPUS (Comprehensive Health and

Medical Plan for Uniformed Services) and proportion ranged from 34 percent CHAMPVA (Civilian Health and Medical Pro- for those resident in the United gram of the Department of Veteran’s Affairs).

States less than 10 years to 56 per- 3

U.S. Bureau of the Census, 1998c, pp. 6-7.

cent for those resident 20 years and 4

Information collected in the March 1997

CPS on pension plan coverage was not detailed over. The proportion was 57 percent and coverage may have been underreported. for naturalized citizens compared See U.S. Department of Labor et al., 1994.

with 36 percent for noncitizens. By 5

The proportions of workers participating

region of birth, the proportions were in employer-offered pension plans were 30 percent for foreign-born workers and 43 percent 54 percent of workers from Europe, for native workers.

52 percent for workers from Asia

Health insurance includes

private insurance plans and

government insurance plans.

Private insurance plans include

those offered through employment (either one’s own and or

a relative’s) and those purchased privately. Government

insurance plans include medicare, medicaid, and military

health care.2

 Individuals may

be covered by more than one

insurance plan during a year.

There is some evidence that

health insurance coverage is

underreported.3

Data on employment-based

health insurance and employeroffered pension plans (other

than social security) are shown

for workers. In this section,

workers are defined as individuals who were employed at

any time during the year. Employment-based health insurance includes private insurance

obtained through a current or

former employer or union. If a

worker’s employer offers a pension plan, a worker may not

participate because he or she is

ineligible (e.g., due to length of

service or part-time employment) or chooses not to participate.4
47

U.S. Census Bureau

F

E

O

L

a

(

p

N

F

S

Figure 20-1.

Health Insurance Coverage of the Population by

Nativity, Length of Residence in the United States,

and Citizenship Status: 1996

(Percent of population. Population as of March 1997. Civilian 

noninstitutional population plus Armed Forces living off post or 

with their families on post)

Population

(in millions)

16.7

9.0

7.8

7.5

10.5

25.8

241.0

Total 266.8

Native

Foreign born

Length of residence in U.S.

Less than 10 years

10 to 19 years

20 years and over

Citizenship status

Naturalized citizen

Not a citizen

66.4

82.9

82.8

Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census, 1999b, Tables 20-1A, 20-1B, and 20-1C.

57.6

66.7

54.0

84.4

86.3

54.5

Figure 20-2.

Health Insurance Coverage of the Foreign-Born

Population by Region of Birth: 1996

(Percent of population. Population as of March 1997. Civilian 

noninstitutional population plus Armed Forces living off post or 

with their families on post)

Population

(in millions)

0.6

1.5

1.8

7.0

8.8

2.8

13.1

0.6

6.8

4.3

Total 25.8 1

Europe

Asia

Africa

Latin America

Caribbean

Central America

Mexico

Other

South America

Northern America

1

Total includes Oceania and region not reported, not shown separately.

Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census, 1999b, Table 20-1D.

66.4

84.7

75.4

66.5

68.7

47.9

46.4

53.8

66.1

88.8

igure 20-3.

mployment-Based Health Insurance and Employerffered Pension Plans for Workers by Nativity,

ength of Residence in the United States, 

nd Citizenship Status: 1996

Workers as of March 1997. Civilian noninstitutional population 

lus Armed Forces living off post or with their families on post)

Workers

(in millions)

9.8

6.0

4.8

5.5

5.6

15.8

127.1

Total 142.9

ative

oreign born

Length of residence in U.S.

Less than 10 years

10 to 19 years

20 years and over

Citizenship status

Naturalized citizen

Not a citizen

54.1

40.5

33.8

ource: U.S. Bureau of the Census, 1999b, Tables 20-3A, 20-3B, and 20-3C.

32.2

44.0

56.5

53.0

54.7

Percent of workers with

Employment-based health insurance

Employer-offered pension plans

44.2

40.6

55.8

50.2

56.5

52.9

36.4

33.0

Figure 20-4.

Employment-Based Health Insurance and 

Employer-Offered Pension Plans for Foreign-Born 

Workers by Region of Birth: 1996

(Workers as of March 1997. Civilian noninstitutional population 

plus Armed Forces living off post or with their families on post)

Workers

(in millions)

0.4

1.0

1.2

4.2

5.4

1.7

8.1

0.4

4.4

2.3

15.8 Total1

Europe

Asia

Africa

Latin America

Caribbean

Central America

Mexico

Other

South America

Northern America

1

Total includes Oceania and region not reported, not shown separately.

Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census, 1999b, Table 20-3D.

Percent of workers with

Employment-based health insurance

Employer-offered pension plans

44.0

40.5

53.6

51.4

51.5

49.3

48.8

57.5

35.9

30.6

44.3

36.7

31.9

26.5

30.6

25.8

36.5

29.0

44.0

42.6

63.9

59.2
48

U.S. Census Bureau

Section 21.

Homeownership

Homeownership rates

are similar for naturalizedcitizen households and

native households.

In 1997, the overall homeownership rate was 66 percent (Figure 21-

1). The rate was much higher for

native households (68 percent) than

for households with a foreign-born

householder (47 percent). Among

foreign-born households, the

homeownership rate was much

higher when the householder was a

naturalized citizen (66 percent) than

when the householder was not a citizen (32 percent). The homeownership rate for naturalized-citizen

households (66 percent) was not significantly different from the homeownership rates for native households (68 percent).

The members of a household,

as defined in Section 11, live in

an occupied housing unit (e.g., a

house, condominium, or mobile

home). The homeownership

rate is the percentage of households in which the owner or a

co-owner is a member of the

household, whether or not the

housing unit is mortgaged or not

otherwise fully paid for. Households are classified as foreign

born or native based on the nativity of the householder, regardless of the nativity of other

household members.

 The higher rate of homeownership among naturalized-citizen

households than among noncitizen

households reflects two factors. The

first is differences by homeownership rates within specific categories

of length of residence. The second is

differences in distributions by length

of residence in the United States

between naturalized-citizen

householders and noncitizen house- spouse (regardless of which one is reholders.1

 In 1997, among household- ported as the householder). For the

ers who were naturalized citizens, 45.9 million married-couple families

65 percent had lived in the United with both husband and wife native,

States 20 years and over whereas the the ownership rate was 84 percent.

corresponding proportion for house- For married-couple families with

holders who were not citizens was husband native and wife foreign

only 22 percent. born (1.7 million) and with wife naWithin specific categories of tive and husband foreign born (1.3

length of residence, the home- million), the ownership rates were

ownership rate is significantly both 73 percent. For the 4.8 million

higher for householders who are married-couple families with both

naturalized citizens than for house- husband and wife foreign born, the

holders who are noncitizens (Figure ownership rate was 55 percent.

21-1). Where length of residence in

the United States was 5 to 9 years, Homeownership rates vary

the rates in 1997 were 40 percent for greatly by region of birth. naturalized citizen-householders verAmong the three regions of birth sus 25 percent for noncitizen- with 1 million or more householders householders. Corresponding rates

were 51 percent versus 30 percent in 1997, the homeownership rate

ranged from 63 percent for house- for length of residence of 10 to 14 holders from Europe to 38 percent years, 61 percent versus 38 percent for householders from Latin for length of residence of 15 to 19 America (Figure 21-3). The owner- years, and 73 percent versus 53 percent for length of residence of 20 ship rates for householders from

Asia was 50 percent, not signifi- years and over. cantly different from the overall

Married-couple families ownership rate of 47 percent for all

have the highest households with a foreign-born

householder. Within Latin America, homeownership rates. the ownership rate for householders

While the homeownership rate in from Mexico was 38 percent, the

1997 was lower among households same as for the region as a whole.

with foreign-born householders (47

percent) than with native household- 1

Of the 33 percentage-point difference in

homeownership rates between naturalized- ers (68 percent), the patterns of citizen households (65.6 percent) and nonciti- ownership rates by type of household zen households (32.3 percent), 18 percentage

were similar (Figure 21-2).2 The points are attributable to differences in

highest homeownership rates were homeownership rates within specific categofor married-couple families: 59 per- ries of length of residence, and 15 percentage

points are attributable to differences in distri- cent for families with a foreign-born butions of the foreign-born population by

householder and 83 percent for fami- length of residence. (Regarding standardizalies with a native householder. For tion, see U.S. Bureau of the Census, 1993b, esfamilies with a female householder, pecially Chapter 5.) As shown in Section 7,

age of the foreign-born population is positively no husband present, the homeowner- correlated with length of residence in the

ship rates were 32 percent for United States. Data on median age of foreignforeign-born households and 47 per- born householders by citizenship status and

cent for native households. length of residence in the United States are

shown in Figure 21-1. For married-couple families, 2

For a general discussion of households by

homeownership rates can be calcu- type, see Section 11.

lated based on the nativity of each
49

U.S. Census Bureau

1.3

0.9

1.0

1.4

1.3

5.8

3.0

0.8

0.5

0.3

4.6

10.4

90.6

101.0

Figure 21-1.

Homeownership Rates and Median Age of Householder by Nativity, Citizenship Status, 

and Length of Residence in the United States: 1997

(Civilian noninstitutional population plus Armed Forces living off post or with their families on post)

Homeownership rate Median age of householder

Households

(in millions)

1

Includes naturalized citizen less than 5 years, not shown separately.

Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census, 1999b, Tables 21-1A, 21-1B, 21-1C, 21-2A, 21-2B, and 21-2C.

Total

Native

Foreign born

Naturalized citizen1

5 to 9 years

10 to 14 years

15 to 19 years

20 years and over

Not a citizen

Less than 5 years

5 to 9 years

10 to 14 years

15 to 19 years

20 years and over

65.7

67.8

47.1

65.6

40.0

50.6

61.1

72.6

32.3

16.8

24.7

30.2

38.4

53.0

46.1

46.5

43.0

50.0

38.6

38.9

41.3

56.1

38.2

33.0

33.3

36.8

40.7

51.3

Figure 21-2.

Homeownership Rates by Nativity of Householder and Type of Household: 1997

(Civilian noninstitutional population plus Armed Forces living off post or with their families on post)

Foreign-born householder Native householder

Households

(in millions)

Households

(in millions)

1.3

1.2

2.5

1.4

0.6

6.0

7.9

10.4

15.8

12.5

28.3

11.4

3.3

47.6

62.3

90.6

Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census, 1999b, Table 21-1A.

Total

Family households

Married-couple family

Male householder, no wife present

Female householder, no husband present

Nonfamily households

Male householder

Female householder

47.1

52.2

58.7

31.8

32.4

31.0

23.4

38.6

67.8

75.6

83.5

58.1

47.4

50.8

44.8

55.6

Foreign-born householder

Native householder

0.3

0.6

0.6

2.4

3.0

1.2

4.9

0.3

2.7

2.2

10.4

Figure 21-3.

Homeownership Rates and Median Age of Householder for 

Foreign-Born Householders by Region of Birth: 1997

(Civilian noninstitutional population plus Armed Forces living off post or with their families on post)

Total1

Europe

Asia

Africa

Latin America

 Caribbean

 Central America

 Mexico

 Other

 South America

North America

Homeownership rate Median age of householder

Households

(in millions)

1

Total includes Oceania and region not reported, not shown separately.

Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census, 1999b, Tables 21-1D and 21-2D.

47.1

62.6

50.5

33.2

38.0

41.0

36.1

38.5

27.2

41.5

63.3

43.0

55.1

41.5

38.6

40.0

46.5

37.2

36.8

42.5

51.3

38.6
51

U.S. Census Bureau

References

U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. _____. 1998a. Household and Fam- _____. 1999. Legal Immigration,

1997. Employment and Earnings, ily Characteristics: March 1997. PPL- Fiscal Year 1997. Office of Policy

Vol. 44, No. 4 (April). 93. Detailed tables. Population Di- and Planning, Annual Report,

vision. No. 1. U.S. Bureau of the Census. 1973.

National Origin and Language. 1970 _____. 1998b. How Well Does the U.S. National Center for Health StaCensus of Population. PC(2)-1A. Current Population Survey Measure tistics. 1975. Volume I, Natality,

Washington, DC: U.S. Government the Foreign-Born Population in the 1970. Washington, DC: U.S. GovPrinting Office. United States? By A. Dianne ernment Printing Office.

Schmidley and J. Gregory Robinson. _____. 1980. The Methods and Mate- _____. 1998. Unpublished tabula- Population Division Working Paper rials of Demography. By Henry S. tions for 1995. No. 22. Shryock, Jacob S. Siegel, and Associ- U.S. Office of Management and Bud- ates. Fourth printing (rev.). Two _____. 1998c. Health Insurance Cov- get. 1977. Race and Ethnic Stan- volumes. Washington, DC: U.S. erage: 1997. By Robert L. Bennefield. dards for Federal Statistics and Ad- Government Printing Office. Current Population Reports, Series ministrative Reporting. Directive No. P60-202. Washington, DC: U.S. _____. 1985. Foreign-Born Popula- 15. Washington, DC. Government Printing Office. tion in the United States Microfiche. _____. 1990. Revised Standards for 1980 Census of Population. _____. 1999a. Historical Census Sta- Defining Metropolitan Areas in the tistics on the Foreign-Born Population _____. 1993a. The Foreign-Born 1990’s. Federal Register, Vol. 55, of the United States: 1850 to 1990. By Population in the United States. 1990 No. 62 (March 30), pp. 12154-12160. Campbell Gibson and Emily Lennon. Census of Population. 1990 CP-3-1. Population Division Working Paper _____. 1993. Revised Statistical Washington, DC: U.S. Government No. 29. Definitions for Metropolitan Areas Printing Office. (MAs). OMB Bulletin No. 93-17. _____. 1999b. The Foreign-Born _____. 1993b. Standardization and Population of the United States: March _____. 1997. Revisions to the Stan- Decomposition of Rates: A User’s 1997. PPL-115. Detailed tables. dards for the Classification of Federal Manual. By Prithwis Das Gupta. Population Division. Data on Race and Ethnicity. Federal Current Population Reports, Series Register, Vol. 62, No. 210 (October P23-186. Washington, DC: U.S. U.S. Department of Labor, Social Se- 30), pp. 58782-58790. Government Printing Office. curity Administration, U.S. Small

Business Administration, and Pen- United Nations. 1996. 1995 Demo- _____. 1997a. Money Income in the sion Benefit Guaranty Corporation. graphic Yearbook. Department for United States: 1996. Current Popula- 1994. Pension and Health Benefits of Economic and Social Information tion Reports, Series P60-197. Wash- American Workers: New Findings and Policy Analysis, Statistics Divi- ington, DC: U.S. Government Print- from the April 1993 Current Popula- sion. New York, NY. ing Office. tion Survey. Warren, Robert J. and Ellen Percy _____. 1997b. Poverty in the United U.S. Immigration and Naturalization Kraly. 1985. The Elusive Exodus: States: 1996. By Leatha Lamison- Service. 1991. Statistical Yearbook of Emigration from the United States. White. Current Population Reports, the Immigration and Naturalization Population Trends and Public Policy Series P60-198. Washington, DC: Service, 1990. Washington, DC: U.S. Occasional Paper No. 8, Population U.S. Government Printing Office. Government Printing Office. Reference Bureau. Washington, DC.

_____. 1997. Statistical Yearbook of

the Immigration and Naturalization

Service, 1996. Washington, DC: U.S.

Government Printing Office.
52

U.S. Census Bureau

Appendix A.

The Foreign-Born Population and Immigration:

Definitions and Concepts

The terms “foreign-born popula- process, or statistical aggregate

tion” and “immigration” are related, (number of individuals) are probut they are not interchangeable. vided also (e.g., immigrant and the

There is more than one way to de- corresponding term, immigration).

fine each term for purposes of col- An international in-migrant is

lecting and tabulating statistical in- either a citizen in-migrant (i.e., a

formation.1 In addition, there are person who has citizenship in the

conceptual differences between the country of destination) or an alien

two terms. in-migrant (i.e., a person who does

Because of these important dif- not have citizenship in the country

ferences, the foreign-born popula- of destination). For the United

tion, immigration, and some related States, citizen in-migrants include

terms are defined for use in this re- individuals who were born in outport and are discussed here. Since lying areas of the United States

migration from foreign countries to (e.g., Puerto Rico or Guam), indithe United States is the source (and viduals born abroad with at least

the only source) of the foreign-born one parent who was a U.S. citizen,

population residing in the United and U.S. citizens returning from

States, terms related to migration are residence abroad (including memdiscussed first. bers of the Armed Forces).

Alien in-migrants may be divided

Immigration and into three broad categories: immirelated terms grants, long-term nonimmigrants,

and undocumented aliens.

Before defining immigration, it is Immigrants, as defined by the

helpful to provide a few other terms Immigration and Naturalization

first, starting with the most general. Service (INS), are aliens admitted

Each term appears in bold print in to the United States for lawful perthe sentence in which it is defined. manent residence.

An international migrant is a “Immigrants are those individuperson who changes his or her als lawfully accorded the privilege of

usual place of residence from one residing permanently in the United

country to another.2 An interna- States. They may be issued immitional migrant is an international grant visas by the Department of

in-migrant to the country of desti- State overseas or adjusted to permanation and an international out- nent resident status by the Immigramigrant from the country of ori- tion and Naturalization Service in

gin. These are demographic terms the United States.” 3

(rather than legal terms) that include It is important to note that the

all in-migrants or out-migrants, re- year of lawful permanent residence

gardless of country of citizenship or of an immigrant may differ from

legal status. the year in which he or she became

The subcategories of interna- a resident of the United States. For

tional in-migrants defined here are example, in 1990 and 1991, when

shown in the diagram below. Cor- the numbers of immigrants were

responding terms for the act, or the highest on record (1.5 million

and 1.8 million, respectively), more

than one-half of the immigrants

had resided in the United States

since 1986 or earlier and were adjusted to permanent resident status

under provisions of the Immigration Reform and Control Act of

1986 (IRCA).4

Immigration is thus the act or

process of becoming an immigrant or

is the number of immigrants during

a specified period of time.

Long-term nonimmigrants are

aliens admitted by INS on “longterm” visas (i.e., excluding tourists

and temporary visitors for business).

Long-term nonimmigrants include,

for example, students, representatives of foreign governments, and

their dependents.

Undocumented aliens are individuals residing illegally in the

United States, including individuals

who entered illegally and individuals

whose nonimmigrant terms of admission have expired. INS estimated

the undocumented alien population

of the United States in October 1996

at 5 million.5

Foreign-born population

It is simpler to define the native population before defining the

foreign-born population. As defined by the Census Bureau, the

native population includes individuals born in the United States or

an outlying area of the United States,

and individuals who were born in a

foreign country, but who had at least

one parent who was a U.S. citizen.

All other residents of the United

States are classified as foreign born.

The foreign-born population is

thus all individuals born in a foreign

country except those who had at

least one parent who was an U.S.

citizen. The foreign-born population includes all foreign-born individuals residing in the United

States, regardless of their legal status.

The classification of the resident population of the United

Person Act, or process, or statistical aggregate

International in-migrant International in-migration

Citizen in-migrant Citizen in-migration

Alien in-migrant Alien in-migration

Immigrant Immigration

Long-term nonimmigrant Legal in-migration other than immigration

Undocumented alien Undocumented alien in-migration
53

U.S. Census Bureau

States by place of birth and nativity become an immigrant. In any case,

(native and foreign born) is shown there is no change in the person’s

in Figure A-1 and reflects the defini- classification as foreign born.

tions presented above. The foreignborn population is composed of indi- Conceptual differences: viduals who, at the time of their mi- flow data and stock data gration to the United States, were in

one of the three broad categories of Reflecting the preceding definialien in-migrants: immigrants, long- tions of terms, the conceptual differterm nonimmigrants, and undocu- ences between immigration and the

mented aliens. foreign-born population are disAfter migration to the United cussed here. Data on immigration

States, some foreign-born residents (and on other categories of migrabecome naturalized citizens. This tion) are flow data. Flow data cover

process usually requires 5 years of a period of time such as one year or

residence in the United States. one decade (e.g., annual data on imThose who have not become U.S. migration). Data on the foreign-born

citizens may have changes in their population are stock data. Stock

“immigration status,” which corre- data are for one point in time such

sponds to their alien in-migrant cat- as data from a census or survey (e.g.,

egory. For example, a person who data from the 1990 census of populaentered the United States as a long- tion or the March 1997 Current

term nonimmigrant may have over- Population Survey).

stayed his or her visa and become an The change over time (which is a

undocumented alien, or a person flow concept) in the size of the foreignwho entered the United States as an born population is the result of three

undocumented alien may have been processes of population change: alien

able to adjust his or her status and in-migration, emigration (i.e.,

international out-migration) of the

foreign-born population,6

 and mortality to the foreign-born population.7

 Thus if the number of alien

in-migrants to the United States

(additions to the foreign-born

population) exceeds the combined

number of foreign-born emigrants

from the United States and deaths

to the foreign-born population residing in the United States (subtractions from the foreign-born

population), the foreign-born population will increase, and vice-versa.

1

 For example, the term immigration can

refer most broadly to all migration to the

United States (a demographic approach) or

more narrowly to the legal migration of nonU.S. citizens (aliens) to the United States (a legal approach). The legal approach is used here,

with the demographic approach represented by

the term “international in-migration.” For a

comprehensive discussion of demographic concepts and definitions, see U.S. Bureau of the

Census, 1980. 2

 The basic rule for where to enumerate a

person in U.S. censuses is his or her usual

place of residence. This is the place where the

person lives or sleeps most of the time or the

place the person considers to be his or her

usual home. This includes citizens of foreign

countries who have established regular living

arrangements (such as living in a house, apartment, or dormitory) while working or studying

in the United States. 3

 U.S. Immigration and Naturalization

Service, 1997, p. A.3-5. 4

 Ibid., pp. 34, A.3-6, and A.3-10.

5

 Ibid., pp. 182-186.

6

 Whereas immigrant (a legal term) differs

from international in-migrant (a demographic

term), as defined earlier in this section, there is

not a corresponding need to identify the legal

status of international out-migrants. Thus the

term “international out-migration” and the

shorter term “emigration” can be used interchangeably. 7

 These processes correspond to three

of the four general demographic components

of population change: in-migration, outmigration, and mortality. The fourth demographic component of population change –

fertility – is not relevant for the foreign-born

population because, as discussed earlier, all

individuals born in the United States are defined as native, regardless of the birthplace

or citizenship status of their parents.

Figure A-1.

Classification of the Population of the United States 

by Nativity and Place of Birth: 1997

Born in the United States (50 states and DC)

88.9%

Born in outlying areas of the United States 

(Puerto Rico, Guam, etc.),or born abroad with at

least one parent who was a U.S. citizen

1.4%

Foreign born

9.7%

Native population (residents with U.S. citizenship at birth)

Foreign-born population (residents without U.S. citizenship at birth)

Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census, 1999b, Table 1-1.

(Civilian noninstitutional population plus Armed Forces living off post 

or with their families on post)
U.S. Census Bureau

Appendix B.

Source and Accuracy of Estimates

Source of Data Since the introduction of the The independent population estiCPS, the Bureau of the Census has mates used for 1994 to present were Estimates in this report come redesigned the CPS sample several based on updates to controls estab- from data obtained from the Current times. These redesigns have im- lished by the 1990 decennial census. Population Survey (CPS) conducted proved the quality and accuracy of Before 1994, independent population in March of 1997. The Bureau of the the data and have satisfied changing estimates from the latest available Census conducts the survey every data needs. The most recent changes decennial census data were used. month, although this report uses were completely implemented in For more details on the change in in- July 1995. only March data for its estimates. dependent estimates, see the section Also, some estimates come from de- March 1997 supplement. In ad- entitled “Introduction of 1990 Cen- cennial census data for years 1850 dition to the basic CPS questions, sus Population Controls” in an ear- through 1990, and from the adminis- field representatives asked supple- lier report (Series P60, No. 188). trative records of the Immigration mentary questions in March about The estimation procedure for the and Naturalization Service. The poverty status, money income re- March supplement included a fur- March survey uses two sets of ques- ceived in the previous calender year, ther adjustment so husband and wife tions, the basic CPS and the supple- educational attainment, household of a household received the same

ments. and family characteristics, marital weight. The independent population status, and geographic mobility. Basic CPS. The basic CPS col- estimates include some, but not all,

lects primarily labor force data about To obtain more reliable data for undocumented immigrants.

the civilian noninstitutional popula- the Hispanic population, the March

tion. Interviewers ask questions CPS sample was increased by about Accuracy of the Estimates concerning labor force participation 2,500 eligible housing units. These

about each member 15 years old and housing units were interviewed the Since the CPS estimates come

over in every sample household. The previous November and contained at from a sample, they may differ from

basic CPS also includes questions on figures from a complete census using least one sample person of Hispanic country of birth, citizenship, and the same questionnaires, instruc- origin. In addition, the sample year of entry into the United States. tions, and enumerators. A sample included persons in the Armed The CPS sample used in this re- survey estimate has two possible Forces living off post or with their port was selected from the 1990 de- types of error: sampling and families on post. nonsampling. The accuracy of an es- cennial census files with coverage in timate depends on both types of er- all 50 states and the District of Co- Estimation procedure. The ror, but the full extent of the lumbia. The sample is continually survey’s estimation procedure in- nonsampling error is unknown. updated to account for new residen- flates weighted sample results to in- Consequently, one should be particu- tial construction. The United States dependent estimates of the civilian larly careful when interpreting re- was divided into 2,007 geographic ar- noninstitutional population of the sults based on a relatively small

eas. In most states, a geographic area United States by age, sex, race, and number of cases or on small differconsisted of a county or several con- Hispanic/non-Hispanic origin, and ences between estimates. The stantiguous counties. In some areas of state of residence. The adjusted esti- dard errors for CPS estimates primaNew England and Hawaii, minor mate is called the post-stratification rily indicate the magnitude of samcivil divisions are used instead of ratio estimate. The independent esti- pling error. They also partially meacounties. A total of 754 geographic mates were calculated based on in- sure the effect of some nonsampling

errors in responses and enumera- areas was selected for sample. About formation from four primary tion, but do not measure systematic 50,000 occupied households are eli- sources: biases in the data. (Bias is the aver- gible for interview every month. • The 1990 Decennial Census of age over all possible samples of the Field representatives are unable to Population and Housing. differences between the sample esti- obtain interviews at about 3,200 of • An adjustment for undercoverage mates and the desired value.)

these units. This occurs when the in the 1990 census. Nonsampling variability. Sev- occupants are not found at home af- • Statistics on births, deaths, immi- eral sources of nonsampling errors ter repeated calls or are unavailable gration, and emigration. include the following: for some other reason. • Statistics on the size of the • Inability to get information about Armed Forces. all sample cases.

54
55

U.S. Census Bureau

• Definitional difficulties. larger for Blacks and other races

combined than for Whites. As de- • Differences in the interpretation scribed previously, ratio estimation of questions. to independent age-sex-race-Hispanic • Respondents’ inability or unwill- population controls partially corrects ingness to provide correct infor- for bias due to undercoverage. How- mation. ever, biases exist in the estimates to • Respondents’ inability to recall the extent that missed persons in information. missed households or missed persons

• Errors made in data collection in interviewed households have difsuch as recording and coding ferent characteristics from those of

data. interviewed persons in the same agesex-race-Hispanic origin group. • Errors made in processing the A common measure of survey data.

coverage is the coverage ratio, the es- • Errors made in estimating values timated population before post-strati- for missing data. fication divided by the independent • Failure to represent all units with population control. Table A shows the sample (undercoverage). CPS coverage ratios for age-sex-race

CPS undercoverage results from groups for a typical month. The CPS

missed housing units and missed coverage ratios can exhibit some

persons within sample households. variability from month to month.

Overall CPS undercoverage is esti- Other Census Bureau household surmated at 8 percent. CPS under- veys experience similar coverage.

coverage varies with age, sex, and Comparability of data. Data ob- race. Generally, undercoverage is tained from the CPS and other larger for males than for females and sources are not entirely comparable.

This results from differences in interviewer training and experience

and in differing survey processes.

This is an example of nonsampling

variability not reflected in the standard errors. Use caution when comparing results from different sources.

A number of changes were made

in data collection and estimation procedures beginning with the January

1994 CPS. The major change was

the use of a new questionnaire. The

questionnaire was redesigned to

measure the official labor force concepts more precisely, to expand the

amount of data available, to implement several definitional changes,

and to adapt to a computer-assisted

interviewing environment. The

March supplemental income questions were also modified for adaptation to computer-assisted interviewing, although there were no changes

in definition and concepts. Due to

these and other changes, one should

use caution when comparing estimates from data collected in 1994

and later years with estimates from

earlier years. See Appendix C, P60-

188 on “Conversion to a Computer

Assisted Questionnaire” for a description of these changes and the effect they had on the data.

Caution should also be used

when comparing estimates in this report (which reflects 1990 censusbased population controls) with estimates from the March 1993 CPS and

earlier years (which reflect 1980 census-based population controls).1

This change in population controls

had relatively little impact on summary measures such as means, medians, and percent distributions. It did

have a significant impact on levels.

For example, use of 1990-based

population controls results in about a

1-percent increase in the civilian

1

 CPS began collecting nativity data in

1994.

Table A.

CPS Coverage Ratios

Non-Black Black All persons

Age Male Female Male Female Male Female Total

0-14

15

16-19

20-29

30-39

40-49

50-59

60-64

65-69

70+

15+

0+

0.929

0.933

0.881

0.847

0.904

0.928

0.953

0.961

0.919

0.993

0.914

0.918

0.964

0.895

0.891

0.897

0.931

0.966

0.974

0.941

0.972

1.004

0.945

0.949

0.850

0.763

0.711

0.660

0.680

0.816

0.896

0.954

0.982

0.996

0.767

0.793

0.838

0.824

0.802

0.811

0.845

0.911

0.927

0.953

0.984

0.979

0.874

0.864

0.916

0.905

0.855

0.823

0.877

0.917

0.948

0.960

0.924

0.993

0.898

0.902

0.943

0.883

0.877

0.884

0.920

0.959

0.969

0.942

0.973

1.002

0.927

0.931

0.929

0.895

0.866

0.854

0.899

0.938

0.959

0.950

0.951

0.998

0.918

0.921

For additional information on nonsampling error including the possible impact on CPS nativity data when known, refer to Statistical Policy Working Paper 3, An Error Profile: Employment as

Measured by the Current Population Survey, Office of Federal Statistical Policy and Standards, U.S.

Department of Commerce, 1978, Technical Paper 40, The Current Population Survey: Design and

Methodology, Bureau of the Census, U.S. Department of Commerce, and Population Division

Working Paper No. 22, “How Well Does the Current Population Survey Measure the Foreign-Born

Population in the United States?” by Dianne Schmidley and J. Gregory Robinson.
56

U.S. Census Bureau

noninstitutional population and in 100,000 or greater. Because of the samples with a known probability.

the number of families and house- large standard errors involved, sum- For example, if all possible samples

holds. Thus, estimates of levels for mary measures would probably not were surveyed under essentially the

data collected in 1994 and later years reveal useful information when com- same general conditions and using

will differ from those for earlier puted on a smaller base. However, the same sample design and if an esyears by more than what could be estimated numbers are shown even timate and its standard error were

attributed to actual changes in the though the relative standard errors of calculated from each sample, then

population. These differences could these numbers are larger than those approximately 90 percent of the inbe disproportionately greater for cer- for corresponding percentages. tervals from 1.645 standard errors

tain subpopulation groups than for These smaller estimates permit com- below the estimate to 1.645 standard

the total population. binations of the categories to suit errors above the estimate would inDuring the period April 1994 data users’ needs. clude the average result of all possithrough June 1995, the U.S. Census Take care in the interpretation ble samples.

Bureau systematically introduced a of small differences. For instance, A particular confidence interval

new sample design for the CPS based even a small amount of non- may or may not contain the average

on the results of the 1990 decennial sampling error can cause a bor- estimate derived from all possible

census. During this phase-in period, derline difference to appear signifi- samples. However, one can say with

CPS estimates were being made from cant or not, thus distorting a seem- specified confidence that the interval

two distinct sample designs: the old ingly valid hypothesis test. includes the average estimate calculated from all possible samples. 1980 sample design and the new Sampling variability. Sampling Standard errors may also be used 1990 sample design. The March variability is variation that occurred to perform hypothesis testing. This is 1995 CPS consisted of 55 percent by chance because a sample was sur- a procedure for distinguishing be- new (1990) sample and 45 percent veyed rather than the entire popula- tween population parameters using old (1980) sample.1

 The data based tion. Standard errors, as calculated sample estimates. One common type on the March 1996 CPS were the by methods described in Standard of hypothesis appearing in this re- first estimates based entirely on errors and their use, are primarily port is that two population param- households selected from the 1990 measures of sampling variability, but eters are different. An example of census-based sample design. they may include some nonsampling this would be comparing the median One of the effects of the introduc- error. age of natives to the median age of tion of the 1990 census sample de- foreign-born persons. sign is the change in the definition of Standard errors and their use. Tests may be performed at vari- metropolitan and nonmetropolitan A number of approximations are re- ous levels of significance. The sigareas. The 1990 census sample de- quired to derive, at a moderate cost, nificance level of a test is the probsign incorporates the geographic defi- standard errors applicable to the esti- ability of concluding that the characnitions officially released in 19932

; mates in this report. Instead of pro- teristics are different when, in fact,

the 1980 census sample design incor- viding an individual standard error they are the same. All statements of

porates the geographic definitions re- for each estimate, two parameters, comparison in the text were tested at

leased in 1983. While most CPS esti- “a” and “b,” are provided to calculate the 0.10 level of significance. Thus,

mates have been unaffected by this standard errors for each estimate. if the absolute value of the estimated

mixed sample, geographic estimates Table B provides standard error difference between characteristics

are subject to greater error and vari- parameters for native and foreign- was greater than or equal to 1.645

ability. Users should exercise cau- born persons. Multiply the param- times the standard error of the differtion when comparing estimates eters in Table B by the factors in ence, then the conclusion was that

acr ables C and D to get region, state, e oss years for metropolitan and T the characteristics w re different.

The Census Bureau uses 90-per- nonmetropolitan categories. and nonmetropolitan parameters.

The sample estimate and its stan- cent confidence intervals and 0.10

Note when using small esti- levels of significance to determine dard error enable one to construct a

mates. Summary measures (such as statistical validity. Consult standard confidence interval. A confidence medians and percent distributions) statistical textbooks for alternative interval is a range that would include are shown only when the base is criteria. the average result of all possible
57

U.S. Census Bureau

Standard errors of estimated Standard errors of estimated The standard error is calculated

numbers. The approximate stan- percentages. The reliability of an es- as

dard error, sx, of an estimated timated percentage, computed using

number shown in this report can be sample data from both numerator 13,494

obtained using the formula: and denominator, depends on both sx,p  x 9.9 x 100  9.9  1.6 4,806,000

the size of the percentage and its

 s ax2 x  bx (1) base. Estimated percentages are rela- The 90-percent confidence inter- tively more reliable than the corre- val is calculated as 9.9 ± 1.645×1.6. sponding estimates of the numera- Here x is the size of the estimate, tors of the percentages, particularly Standard error of a difference. and a and b are the parameters in if the percentages are 50 percent or The standard error of the difference Table B associated with the par- more. When the numerator and de- between two sample estimates is ap- ticular type of characteristic. When nominator of the percentage are in proximately equal to calculating standard errors from different categories, use the param- cross-tabulations involving different eter from Table B indicated by the characteristics, use the set of param- sxy s

2

x  s

2 (3) numerator. y

eters for the characteristic which

The approximate standard error, will give the largest standard error.

s , of an estimated percentage can where s and s are the standard

Illustration x,p x y

be obtained by using the formula errors of the estimates, x and y. The

Suppose there are 913,000 per- estimates can be numbers, proporsons living in the United States who tions, ratios, etc. This will represent b

were born in Cuba. Use the appro- sx,p   p 100  p (2) the actual standard error quite accu- x priate parameters from Table B and rately for the difference between esformula (1) to get timates of the same characteristic in Here x is the total number of per- two different areas or for the differ- Number, x 913,000 sons, families, households, or unre- ence between separate and a parameter -0.000042 lated individuals in the base of the uncorrelated characteristics in the b parameter 11,054 percentage, p is the percentage (0 ≤ p same area. However, if there is a Standard error 100,000 ≤ 100), and b is the parameter in high positive (negative) correlation 90% conf. int. 740,000 to 1,078,000 Table B associated with the charac- between the two characteristics, the

The standard error is calculated teristic in the numerator of the per- formula will overestimate (underestias centage. mate) the true standard error.

Illustration Illustration

s −0.000042x913,0002 Suppose 9.9 percent, or about x = √ + 11,054x913,000 Suppose from the March 1996 478,000, of the 4,806,000 foreign = 100,000 CPS, 4.6 percent of the 178,343,000 born who came to the United States natives who are 16+ years old in the before 1970 are in poverty. Use the United States receive public assis- The 90-percent confidence appropriate parameter from Table B tance income. Also, suppose that 5.8 interval is calculated as and formula (2) to get percent of the 22,378,000 foreign 913,000 ± 1.645×100,000. born who are 16+ years old in the A conclusion that the average es- Percentage, p 9.9 United States receive public assis- timate derived from all possible Base, x 4,806,000 tance income. Use the appropriate samples lies within a range com- b parameter 13,494 parameters from Table B and formu- puted in this way would be correct Standard error 1.6 las (2) and (3) to get for roughly 90 percent of all possible 90% conf. int. 7.3 to 12.5 samples.
58

U.S. Census Bureau

x y difference N1

, N2 = for distribution of numbers: the estimated Percentage, p 4.6 5.8 1.2 number of units (persons, Base, x 178,343,000 22,378,000 - households, etc.) with val- b parameter 10,380 13,494 - ues of the characteristic Standard error 0.2 0.6 0.6 greater than or equal to A 90% conf. int. 4.3 to 4.9 4.8 to 6.8 0.2 to 2.2 1

and A2, respectively.

 = for distribution of percentages: the estimated per- The standard error of the difference 3. Using the distribution of the centage of units (persons, is calculated as characteristic, determine upper households, etc.) having and lower limits of the 68-

s 0.22  0.62 values of the characteristic x  y  0.6 percent confidence interval by greater than or equal to A calculating values corresponding 1

and A , respectively. to the two points established in The 90-percent confidence inter- 2

step 2. val around the difference is calcu- 4. Divide the difference between lated as 1.2 ± 1.645×0.6. Since this the two points determined in step interval does not include zero, we Use the following formula to cal- 3 by two to obtain the standard can conclude with 90-percent confi- culate the upper and lower limits. error of the median. dence that the percentage of foreign

born in the United States who re- Illustration

pN N ceive public assistance income is  1 XpN A N 2  A (4) wing distribution higher than the per 2  N 1  A1 Use the follo

centage of natives 1

and median income for United States

who receive public assistance in- naturalized citizens 16+ years old where come. who are receiving income.

Standard Error of a Median. X Naturalized = estimated upper and lower The sampling variability of an esti- pN

bounds for the confidence Income levels citizens 16+

mated median depends on the form interval (0 p o Total 7,177,000 of the distribution and the size of the ≤ ≤ 1). F r

purposes of calculating the Under $10,000 or loss 2,060,000 base. One can approximate the reli- confidence interval, p takes $10,000 to $19,999 1,795,000 ability of an estimated median by de- on the values determined $20,000 to $34,999 1,565,000 termining a confidence interval in step 2. Note that X es- $35,000 to $49,999 828,000 about it. (See the section on standard pN

timates the median when p $50,000 or more 929,000 errors and their use for a general dis- = 0.50. cussion of confidence intervals.) Median income $18,515

N = for distribution of num- Estimate the 68-percent confi- (1) Using b = 2,913 from Table B bers: the total number of dence limits of a median based on and formula (2), the standard er- units (persons, households, sample data using the following pro- ror of 50 percent on a base of etc.) for the characteristic cedure. 7,177,000 is about 1.0 percent. in the distribution. 1. Determine, using formula (2), (2) To obtain a 68 percent confi- = for distribution of percent- the standard error of the estimate dence interval for an estimated ages: the value 1.0. of 50 percent from the distribu- median, add to and subtract tion. p = the values obtained in step from 50 percent, the standard er- 2. 2. Add to and subtract from 50 per- ror found in step 1. This yields

cent the standard error deter- A1

, A2 = the lower and upper limits of 49.0 and 51.0 percent.

mined in step 1. bounds, respectively, of the (3) The lower and upper limits for interval containing XpN. the interval in which the median
59

U.S. Census Bureau

falls are $10,000 and $19,999, The standard error of the numerator, Illustration

respectively. sx, and that of the denominator, sy , Suppose there are 8,000,000 forThen, by addition, the estimated may be calculated using formulas de- eign-born residents in California and scribed earlier. In formula (5), r rep- number of naturalized citizens 3,600,000 foreign-born residents in resents the correlation between the 16+ receiving income with an New York. The ratio of the number

numerator and the denominator of income greater than or equal to of foreign-born residents in Califor- the estimate. $10,000 and $19,999 are nia, x, to the number of foreign-born

5,117,000 and 3,322,000, respec- For one type of ratio, the denomi- residents in New York, y, is 2.20.

tively. nator is a count of families or house- Using the parameters in Table B and

Using formula (4), the upper holds and the numerator is a count the state factors for California and

limit for the confidence interval of persons in those families or house- New York in Table C, the standard

of the median is about holds with a certain characteristic. If error of this ratio is calculated as folthere is at least one person with the lows:

0.490x7,177,000  5,117,000 characteristic in every family or Using formula (5) with r = 0, x 20,000 3,322,000  5,117,000 household, use 0.7 as an estimate of the estimate of the standard error is

 10,000  10,000  18,900 r. An example of this type is the

mean number of children per family Similarly, the lower limit is with children. 8,000,000 146,000 s

about y [ ]2

 8,000,000 [

For all other types of ratios, r is  260,000

x  3,600,000 3,600,000]

2

 0.12

0.510x7,177,000  5,117,000 assumed to be zero. If r is actually

x 20,000 positive (negative), then this proce- 3,322,000  5,117,000 The 90-percent confidence dure will provide an overestimate  10,000  10,000  18,100 interval is calculated as 2.50 ±

(underestimate) of the standard er- 1.645×0.12.

Thus, a 68-percent confidence ror of the ratio. Examples of this

interval for the median income type are the mean number of chil- 1

For detailed information on the 1990

is from $18,100 to $18,900. dren per family and the poverty rate. sample redesign, see the Department of Labor,

NOTE: For estimates expressed Bureau of Labor Statistics report, Employment

(4) The standard error of the me- and Earnings, Volume 41, Number 5, May as the ratio of x per 100 y or x per dian is, therefore 1994.

1,000 y, multiply formula (5) by 100 2

For additional information on the new

18,900  18,100 or 1,000, respectively, to obtain the metropolitan area definitions, see Revised Sta-

 400 standard error. tistical Definitions for Metropolitan Areas 2 (MAs), Office of Management and Budget,

Bulletin No. 93-17, June 30, 1993. Standard Error of a Ratio. Certain estimates may be calculated as

the ratio of two numbers. The stan- x y ratio

dard error of a ratio, x/y, may be Estimate 8,000,000 3,600,000 2.22

computed using a parameter (national) -0.000025 -0.000025 -

b parameter (national) 6,774 6,774 -

x s 2 2 x sy sxsy State factors 1.29 0.89 - sxy  )  y

( x

)  ( 2r y xy a parameter (state) -0.000032 -0.000022 -

b parameter (state) 8,738 6,029 -

Standard error 268,000 146,000 0.12 Formula (5) 90% conf. int. 2.02 to 2.42
60

U.S. Census Bureau

Table B.

Standard Error Parameters for Native and Foreign-Born Characteristics: March 1997

Natives Foreign born

Characteristic a b a b

Age

Total ...................................................

Under 15 years......................................

15 years and over ..................................

15 to 24 years ..................................

25 to 34 years ..................................

35 to 44 years ..................................

45 to 64 years ..................................

65 years and over ..............................

Median age (years) ................................

Sex

Male....................................................

Female ................................................

Race and Hispanic Origin

Some Household Members

Total/White ......................................

Black ..............................................

Asian or Pacific Islander .....................

Hispanic origin .................................

All Household Members

Total/White ......................................

Black ..................................................

Asian or Pacific Islander..........................

Hispanic origin .....................................

Educational Attainment...............................

Labor Force Status

In the civilian labor force .......................

Employed .........................................

Unemployed .....................................

Not in the labor force .............................

Income in 1996 .........................................

Received Public Assistance ...........................

Received AFDC ......................................

Poverty Status ...........................................

Tenure .....................................................

Country of Birth

Mexico, North/Central America .................

Europe.................................................

Asia, Africa, Oceania ..............................

United States .......................................

-0.000020

-0.000088

-0.000025

-0.000142

-0.000131

-0.000119

-0.000096

-0.000163

(NA)

-0.000040

-0.000038

-0.000020

-0.000220

-0.000602

-0.000253

-0.000024

-0.000324

-0.000887

-0.000373

-0.000011

-0.000018

-0.000018

-0.000018

0.000006

-0.000013

-0.000039

-0.000039

-0.000039

-0.000030

(NA)

(NA)

(NA)

-0.000021

5,211

5,211

5,211

 5,211

5,211

5,211

5,211

5,211

5,211

5,211

5,211

5,211

7,486

7,486

7,486

6,332

11,039

11,039

11,039

2,369

2,985

2,985

2,957

829

2,241

10,380

10,380

10,380

7,791

(NA)

(NA)

(NA)

5,556

-0.000025

-0.000114

 -0.000033

 -0.000185

-0.000170

-0.000155

 -0.000125

-0.000212

(NA)

-0.000052

-0.000050

-0.000025

-0.000220

-0.000602

-0.000253

-0.000031

-0.000324

-0.000887

-0.000373

-0.000014

-0.000023

-0.000023

-0.000023

0.000008

-0.000017

-0.000051

-0.000051

-0.000051

-0.000039

-0.000042

-0.000024

-0.000039

(NA)

6,774

6,774

6,774

6,774

6,774

6,774

6,774

6,774

6,774

6,774

6,774

6,774

7,486

7,486

7,486

8,232

11,039

11,039

11,039

3,080

3,881

3,881

3,844

1,078

2,913

13,494

13,494

13,494

10,128

11,054

 6,351

10,351

(NA)

NA Not applicable.
61

U.S. Census Bureau

Table C.

State Factors

State Factor State Factor

Alabama ............................ 1.01 Montana ............................ 0.20

Alaska ............................... 0.15 Nebraska ........................... 0.42

Arizona ............................. 0.97 Nevada .............................. 0.44

Arkansas............................ 0.59 New Hampshire ................... 0.38

California .......................... 1.29 New Jersey ........................ 0.82

Colorado ............................ 0.93 New Mexico........................ 0.40

Connecticut ....................... 1.00 New York ........................... 0.89

Delaware ........................... 0.22 North Carolina .................... 0.94

Dist. of Col. ....................... 0.16 North Dakota ..................... 0.16

Florida .............................. 0.97 Ohio ................................. 1.02

Georgia ............................. 1.40 Oklahoma .......................... 0.73

Hawaii .............................. 0.35 Oregon .............................. 0.86

Idaho ............................... 0.27 Pennsylvania ...................... 0.96

Illinois .............................. 1.00 Rhode Island ...................... 0.30

Indiana ............................. 1.38 South Carolina .................... 1.01

Iowa................................. 0.71 South Dakota ..................... 0.17

Kansas .............................. 0.65 Tennessee .......................... 1.34

Kentucky ........................... 0.92 Texas ................................ 1.21

Louisiana ........................... 0.95 Utah ................................. 0.43

Maine ............................... 0.37 Vermont ............................ 0.18

Maryland ........................... 1.38 Virginia ............................. 1.48

Massachusetts .................... 0.81 Washington ........................ 1.47

Michigan ........................... 0.93 West Virginia ...................... 0.39

Minnesota ......................... 1.11 Wisconsin .......................... 1.23

Mississippi ......................... 0.64 Wyoming ........................... 0.12

Missouri ............................ 1.37

Table D.

Region and Nonmetropolitan Factors

Characteristic Factor

Region .............................

Northeast .................. 0.85

Midwest .................... 1.03

South ....................... 1.08

West ......................... 1.09

Nonmetropolitan

 characteristics ................. 1.5
62

U.S. Census Bureau

Appendix C.

Comparison of Population Universes

The population universes in the

March Current Population Survey

(CPS) and in the decennial census of

population are not totally comparable. While the universe for the

census of population is the entire

resident population of the United

States, the universe for the March

CPS is the civilian noninstitutional

population plus Armed Forces living

off post or with their families on

post.1 The coverage of the noninstitutional group quarters population in

the CPS is limited primarily to individuals living in college dormitories

who generally are reported with

their parental households and not in

group quarters; however, relatively

few foreign-born students would be

reported in this way. As a result, the

foreign-born population in the 1990

census corresponding to the CPS universe is essentially the foreign-born

population of 19.3 million living in

households, which is about 0.5 million less than the total foreign-born

population of 19.8 million in the

1990 census.

Foreign-Born Population in the CPS and in the Census of Population

 (Numbers in thousands)

 Foreign-born population

...................................................... Total population Number Percent of total

March 1997 CPS

Civilian noninstitutional population

plus Armed Forces living off post

or with their families on post .................. 266,800 25,779 9.7

1990 Census of Population

Total population ................................

In households ........................................

In group quarters ....................................

In institutions .....................................

In other group quarters ..........................

College dormitories.............................

Military quarters ................................

Other ...............................................

1

In addition, data from the 1990 census and 

because the CPS data are inflated to independent

undercoverage in the 1990 census. See Appendix B, Source and Accuracy of the Estimates, and

U.S. Bureau of the Census, 1998b.

Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census, special ta

1997 Current Population Survey.

248,710

242,050

6,660

3,312

3,348

1,971

595

783

the March 1997 CP

 population control

bulations from the 

19,767

19,279

489

242

247

123

24

100

S are not totally co

s reflecting an adju

1990 census and t

7.9

8.0

7.3

7.3

7.4

6.2

4.1

12.8

mparable

stment for

he March
63

U.S. Census Bureau

Appendix D.

Nativity Questions on the Current Population Survey

(The following questions are asked about every member of every household in the CPS sample.

Information is also collected for persons joining the household at a later date.)

The next few questions ask about each household member’s country of birth.

NATVTY In what country (were/was) ................. born? (Enter Code) ________

MNTVTY In what country was .................’s mother born? __________

FNTVTY In what country was .................’s father born? __________

(screens with country codes not shown)

______________________________________________________________________________

AUTOMATED SKIP PATTERN:

If NATVTY = US (1) --> END sequence for this person

If NATVTY = PR* (2) or OA* (3) --> go to INUSYR

If MNTVTY and FNTVTY = US (1), PR* (2) or OA* (3) --> go to INUSYR

ALL OTHERS --> go to CITIZN

______________________________________________________________________________

CITIZN (Are/Is) . . . a CITIZEN of the United States?

(1) YES --> go to CITTYPA

(2) NO --> go to INUSYR

(3) DK* --> go to INUSYR

(4) R* --> go to INUSYR

______________________________________________________________________________

CITTYPA (Were/Was) . . . born a citizen of the United States?

(1) Yes --> go to INUSYR

(2) No --> go to CITTYPB

(3) DK* --> go to CITTYPB

(4) R* --> go to INUSYR

CITTYPB Did . . . become a citizen of the United States through naturalization?

(1) Yes --> go to INUSYR

(2) No --> go to INUSYR

(3) DK* --> go to INUSYR

(4) R* --> go to INUSYR

_____________________________________________________________________________

 INUSYR When did . . . come to live in the United States?

(1) YEAR 19_____

(2) DK*

(3) R*

______________________________________________________________________________

 * PR= Puerto Rico; OA= Outlying Area; DK= Don’t Know; R= Refused.
64

U.S. Census Bureau

Appendix E.

Related Reports and Information

From the U.S. Immigration Previous printed reports (6 pages data included in Profile of the Foreignand Naturalization Service each) on the foreign-born population Born Population in the United States:

(INS) published in Current Population Re- 1997, P23-195 (this report).

ports include The Foreign-Born Popu- The Foreign-Born Population in the Statistical Yearbook of the Immi- lation: 1994, P20-486 (Kristin A. United States, 1990 Census of Popu- gration and Naturalization Service: Hansen and Amara Bachu, 1995), lation, 1990 CP-3-1 (1993) presents 1996 (1997) is the most recent an- and The Foreign-Born Population: data on the demographic, social, eco- nual yearbook providing comprehen- 1996, P20-494 (Kristin A. Hansen nomic, and housing characteristics of sive data on immigration, naturaliza- and Carol S. Faber, 1997). the foreign-born population of the tion, and other topics for fiscal year The data on the foreign-born United States as a whole by region 1996. The publication includes his- population in the reports noted and country of birth of the foreign- torical data on immigration. above are based on national survey born population. These data are Legal Immigration, Fiscal Year data for the 1994 to 1997 period. shown down to the state level in Sub1997 (1999), Office of Policy and For a detailed evaluation of these ject Summary Tape File (SSTF) 1, The Planning, Annual Report No. 1, data, see How Well Does the Current Foreign-Born Population in the United makes available selected data on im- Population Survey Measure the States, which is available also on CD- migration for fiscal year 1997 prior Foreign-Born Population in the United ROM.

to the publication of the annual Sta- States?, Population Division Working Social and Economic Characterististical Yearbook. Paper No. 22 (A. Dianne Schmidley tics, 1990 Census of Population, 1990 For additional information, in- and J. Gregory Robinson, 1998). CP-2 (1993) presents data on the citi- cluding data from the reports cited The Census Bureau produces an- zenship status, year of entry, and re- above, see INS’s Internet site nual estimates of population change gion and country of birth of the <http://www.ins.usdoj.gov>. and of the components of population foreign-born population. 1990 CP-2-

change (births, deaths, net interna- 1 includes data for the United States, From the U.S. Census Bureau tional migration, and net domestic regions and divisions of the United

migration) since the 1990 census for Recent population estimates States, and states. 1990 CP-2-2

the United States, regions and divi- through 1990 CP-2-52 (one report Profile of the Foreign-Born Popula- sions of the United States, states, and for each state and for the District of

tion in the United States: 1997, PPL- counties. These estimates are avail- Columbia) include data for states, 115 (1999) is a comprehensive set of able only on the Census Bureau’s counties, and places of 10,000 or detailed statistical tables and is the Internet site (http://www.census. more population (with less detail for source of all the data from the March gov). On this Internet site, go to places of 2,500 to 9,999 population). 1997 Current Population Survey in- People, select Estimates, and then 1990 CP-2-1B and CP-2-1C include

cluded in Profile of the Foreign-Born select State (which includes data for data for metropolitan areas and ur- Population in the United States: 1997, the United States, regions, and divi- banized areas, respectively. P23-195 (this report). sions) or County. Estimates of the

Previous sets of detailed statisti- component of population change are On the Internet

cal tables on the foreign-born popula- currently available for 4/1/90 to 7/1/ A wide range of information tion, which are less comprehensive 98 and for 7/1/97 to 7/1/98. from the Census Bureau, including than PPL-115, include The ForeignBorn Population data on some of the topics included : 1994, PPL-31 Decennial census data in this report, is available on the (1995); The Foreign-Born Population: Historical Census Statistics on the Census Bureau’s Internet site 1995, PPL-58 (1997); and The

Foreign-Born Population Foreign-Born Population of the United <http://www.census.gov>. : 1996, States: 1850 to 1990, Population Divi- PPL-59 (1997). sion Working Paper No. 29 (1999), is

the source of all the decennial census
Profile of the Foreign-Born Population in the United States: 199

7 P23-195 Current Population Reports Special Studies

U S C E N S U S B U R E A U