2010 Census Special Reports

U.S. Department of Commerce

Economics and Statistics Administration

U.S. CENSUS BUREAU

census.gov

Centenarians: 2010

Issued December 2012

C2010SR-03

By Julie Meyer
This report was prepared by Julie Meyer, Statistician, Age and 

Special Populations Branch, under the general direction of Amy 

Symens Smith, Chief of the Age and Special Populations Branch, 

and Karen Humes, Assistant Division Chief for Special Population 

Statistics, Population Division. Enrique Lamas, Associate Director 

for Demographic Programs, and Nancy Potok, Deputy Director and 

Chief Operating Officer at the U.S. Census Bureau, provided overall 

direction. 

Special thanks are extended to many individuals involved in the creation and review of the report. Charles Holmberg, Age and Special 

Populations Branch, prepared the maps. Janet Wysocki, Census 

Activities and Tabulation Staff, Brian Kincel, Age and Special Populations Branch, and Benjamin Bolender, Population Estimates Branch, 

Population Division, provided data assistance. Extensive review and 

comments were provided by Frank Hobbs, Population Division. 

Additional comments were provided by J. Gregory Robinson, Special Assistant, Population Division, and Victoria Velkoff, Assistant 

Division Chief for Population Estimates and Projections. Principal statistical assistance was provided by Patrick Cantwell and Richard 

Griffin of the Decennial Statistical Studies Division, with additional 

review by James Dinwiddie of the Decennial Management Division. 

Editorial comments were provided by Marjorie Hanson. Additionally, the late Gregory Spencer provided valuable mentorship on 

centenarian data quality analysis, which provided the foundation for 

the data quality section in this report. 

Coordination of the project within Population Division was provided by Julie VanEerden. Linda Chen, Amanda Perry, and Joel 

Pugatsky, of the Administrative and Customer Services Division, 

Francis Grailand Hall, Chief, provided publications and printing 

management, graphics design and composition, and editorial review 

for print and electronic media. General direction and production 

management were provided by Claudette E. Bennett, Assistant 

Division Chief. Melanie Deal in the Public Information Office coordinated the public release of this product.

Acknowledgments
U.S. Department of Commerce

Rebecca M. Blank,

Acting Secretary

Rebecca M. Blank,

Deputy Secretary

Economics and Statistics Administration

Vacant,

Under Secretary

for Economic Affairs

U.S. CENSUS BUREAU

Thomas L. Mesenbourg,

Acting Director

Centenarians: 2010 Issued December 2012

C2010SR-03 2010 Census Special Reports
ECONOMICS

AND STATISTICS

ADMINISTRATION

Economics 

and Statistics

Administration

Vacant,

Under Secretary for 

Economic Affairs

U.S. CENSUS BUREAU

Thomas L. Mesenbourg,

Acting Director

Nancy A. Potok, 

Deputy Director and 

Chief Operating Officer

Enrique J. Lamas,

Associate Director

for Demographic Programs

Enrique J. Lamas,

Acting Chief, Population Division

SUGGESTED CITATION

U.S. Census Bureau,

2010 Census Special Reports,

Centenarians: 2010,

C2010SR-03,

U.S. Government Printing Office,

Washington, DC,

2012
Text

Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

Numbers, Proportions, and Trends Over Time . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

Characteristics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2

Sex . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2

Race, Hispanic Origin, and Sex . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3

Living Arrangements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4

Geographic Distribution . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9

Data Quality . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9

Source of Final Age Text Box . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12

Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13

About the 2010 Census . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13

For More Information . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14

References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14

Tables

Table 1. Population by Race and Hispanic Origin for Selected Older 

 Age Groups: 2010 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4

Table 2. Population by Selected Older Age Group for the United States, 

 Regions, States, and Puerto Rico: 2010 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8

Table 3. Percent Distribution of Centenarian and Total Populations by 

 Source of Final Age: 2000 and 2010 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12

Figures

Figure 1. Centenarians and Their Proportion of Total Population: 

 1980 to 2010 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

Figure 2. Percent Change by Selected Older Age Group: 

 2000 to 2010 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2

Figure 3. Percent Distribution by Sex and Sex Ratios for 

 Selected Older Age Groups: 2010 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3

Figure 4. Living Arrangements of Selected Older 

 Age-Sex Groups: 2010 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5

Figure 5. Sex by Selected Living Arrangement for 

 Centenarians: 2010 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6

Figure 6. Living Arrangements of Centenarians by Race and 

 Hispanic Origin: 2010 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6

Figure 7. Race and Hispanic Origin by Selected Living Arrangement 

 for Centenarians: 2010 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7

Figure 8. Centenarians: 2010 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10

Figure 9. Comparison of Centenarian Population From 

 Alternative Sources: 2010 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11

Figure 10. Reproduction of the Question on Age and Date of 

 Birth From the 2010 Census . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11

Contents

U.S. Census Bureau Centenarians: 2010 iii

U.S. Census Bureau Centenarians: 2010 1

INTRODUCTION

Centenarians, or people aged 

100 or older, are both rare and 

distinct from the rest of the older 

population. This report provides an 

updated portrait of the centenarian 

population based on age, sex, race, 

Hispanic origin, and living arrangements information collected during 

the 2010 Census. It also describes 

the geographic distribution of 

this population. The characteristic 

profile and geographic distribution 

of centenarians are compared with 

those of other age groups in the 

older population to illustrate how 

centenarians are distinct. Although 

some comparisons over time are 

included in this report, these are 

limited due to variations in data 

quality across censuses. 

Any study of the centenarian population must take into account data 

quality issues, since they have in 

the past, and continue to be, obstacles to obtaining a clear picture of 

this population. Examples of issues 

affecting centenarian data include 

deliberate age misreporting by the 

respondent (e.g., age exaggeration), 

form or question design problems, 

and misallocation of extreme ages 

during data processing. In addition, the relatively small number 

of people in a population, as is the 

case with centenarians, can cause 

data to be particularly sensitive to 

these data issues. More information 

describing centenarian data quality 

is included at the end of this report. 

NUMBERS, PROPORTIONS, 

AND TRENDS OVER TIME

Centenarians make up a very small 

portion of the total population. 

Figure 1 shows that, in 2010, there 

were just 53,364 centenarians in 

the United States, or 1.73 centenarians per 10,000 people in the total 

population. Even among the older 

population, centenarians are rare. Of 

those aged 70 and older, only 0.19 

percent (or 19 per 10,000) were 

centenarians, while 6.5 percent 

were in their 90s, 33.6 percent were 

in their 80s, and 59.6 percent were 

in their 70s. 

The centenarian share of the total 

population is smaller than that for 

other developed countries. The 

U.S. proportion, 1.73 centenarians 

per 10,000 people, is lower than 

the proportion in Sweden (1.92 per 

10,000), the United Kingdom (1.95 

per 10,000), and France (2.70 per 

10,000) (Statistics Sweden, 2010; 

Human Mortality Database, 2012). 

The U.S. proportion is about half 

the level found in Japan, 3.43 per 

10,000 (Statistics Bureau of Japan, 

2011).

In the period 1980 to 2010, the 

centenarian population experienced a larger percentage increase 

than did the total population. The 

number of centenarians increased 

from 32,194 to 53,364, resulting 

in a 65.8 percent increase, while 

the total population increased 36.3 

percent. Consequently, the centenarian share of the total U.S. population 

increased from 1.42 per 10,000 in 

1980 to 1.73 per 10,000 in 2010. 

Since 2000, census data showed a 

modest 5.8 percent increase in centenarians, while the total population 

increased 9.7 percent and those in 

their 80s and 90s increased at much 

higher rates (21.1 percent and 30.0 

percent, respectively) (Figure 2). 

As mentioned in the introduction, 

data quality issues have affected 

centenarian data in many ways 

over time, making comparisons 

of centenarians across censuses 

difficult. Analysis by Humes and 

Velkoff (2007) concluded that the 

Census 2000 centenarian count was 

too high. Further analysis leading to 

the 2010 Census indicated that the 

elevated Census 2000 centenarian count was impacted in great 

measure by the familiar combination of a specific census relationship 

reporting error and an associated 

error in the procedures that assign 

an age to those with blank or invalid 

ages by using that relationship 

information (Spencer, 1987). New 

diagnostic tools introduced during 

the 2010 Census dress rehearsal in 

2008 led to pinpointing and adjusting the specific allocation procedures involved in over-allocation of 

extreme ages in order to minimize 

Figure 1.

Centenarians and Their Proportion of Total Population: 

1980 to 2010

(For information on confidentiality protection, nonsampling error, and 

definitions, see www.census.gov/prod/cen2010/doc/sf1.pdf)

Number Proportion (per 10,000)

1980 1990 2000 2010

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2010 Census Summary File 1; Census 2000 Summary File 1; 

1990 Census of Population, General Population Characteristics, United States (1990 CP-1-1); 

1980 Census of Population, General Population Characteristics, United States (1980 PC80-1-B1).

32,194

1.42 1.50

1.79 1.73

37,306

50,454

53,364
2 Centenarians: 2010 U.S. Census Bureau

the effect on the centenarian 

population in 2010. Since these 

procedures were improved for the 

2010 Census, this inconsistency of 

procedure between the censuses 

resulted in the appearance of a relatively small increase of 5.8 percent 

shown for the centenarian population between 2000 and 2010. The 

actual change was likely larger.

To account for this quality issue and 

obtain a better picture of change 

for the centenarian population 

over the past decade, data from 

only the respondents reporting 

high-quality age and date of birth 

information (i.e., those respondents 

who reported a consistent age and 

date of birth on their census form) 

were compared.1 This comparison 

showed that centenarians with 

1 For Census 2000, consistent age and 

date of birth data is defined as the condition 

when the difference between the reported age 

and the age calculated from the reported date 

of birth is fewer than 4 years. For the 2010 

Census, consistent age and date of birth data 

is defined more strictly as the condition when 

the difference between the reported age and 

the age calculated from the reported date of 

birth is fewer than 2 years.

these highest quality age and date 

of birth data increased by 28.4 

percent between 2000 and 2010. 

This percentage increase was similar to that of other age groups in 

the older population. It was lower 

than the 32.0 percent increase for 

people in their 90s, higher than the 

22.5 percent increase for people in 

their 80s, and much higher than the 

1.9 percent increase for those in 

their 70s.2

CHARACTERISTICS

Centenarians are concentrated in 

the “youngest” centenarian ages. 

In 2010, over half (62.5 percent) of 

the 53,364 centenarians were age 

100 or 101. Ninety-two percent 

were 100 to 104 years old. This 

is consistent with the average 

life expectancy for people age 

100, which was 2.4 years in 2010 

(Murphy et al., 2012). Supercentenarians, those 110 years or 

2 Percent growth of a given age group 

is also driven by the size of the population 

aging into that age group.

older, numbered 330 nationwide 

or just 0.6 percent of the centenarian population. Caution is 

recommended when interpreting 

data for super-centenarians since 

data quality generally declines as 

age increases within the centenarian age category. (See data quality 

discussion later in this report.)

Sex

Due to sex differences in mortality 

over the lifespan, the proportion of 

females in the population increases 

with age. This is especially true in 

the oldest ages, where the percentage female increases sharply (Figure 

3). In 2010, 55.3 percent of those in 

their 70s were female, 61.9 percent 

of those in their 80s were female, 

72.2 percent of those in their 90s 

were female, and 82.8 percent of 

centenarians were female. 

The sex ratio is a measure that 

describes the balance of males 

and females in a population. It 

represents the number of males per 

100 females. A sex ratio above 100 

Figure 2.

Percent Change by Selected Older Age Group: 2000 to 2010

(For information on confidentiality protection, nonsampling error, and definitions, see www.census.gov/prod/cen2010

/doc/sf1.pdf)

Total Consistent age and date of birth cases

70 to 79 years 80 to 89 years 90 to 99 years 100 years and over

2.0 1.9

21.1 22.5

30.0

5.8

28.4

32.0

Note: For Census 2000, consistent age and date of birth data is defined as the condition when the difference between the reported age

and the age calculated from the reported date of birth is fewer than 4 years. For the 2010 Census, consistent age and date of birth data 

is defined more strictly as the condition when the difference between the reported age and the age calculated from the reported date of 

birth is fewer than 2 years.

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2000 and 2010 Census unpublished tabulations.
U.S. Census Bureau Centenarians: 2010 3

indicates more males than females 

in a population. A sex ratio below 

100 indicates more females than 

males in a population. Figure 3 

shows that for those in their 70s, 

the sex ratio was 81.0 males per 

100 females. For those in their 80s, 

it was 61.6 males per 100 females. 

For those in their 90s, the sex ratio 

dropped to 38.6 males per 100 

females. For every 100 centenarian females, there were only 20.7 

centenarian males. 

Race, Hispanic Origin, and Sex3

The 2010 Census shows that centenarians are less diverse than the 

3 The Revisions to the Standards for the 

Classification of Federal Data on Race and 

Ethnicity, issued by the Office of Management 

and Budget (OMB) in 1997, is available at 

<www.whitehouse.gov/omb/fedreg

/1997standards.html>. OMB requires federal 

agencies to use a minimum of two ethnicities: 

Hispanic or Latino and Not Hispanic or Latino. 

Hispanic origin can be viewed as the heritage, 

nationality group, lineage, or country of birth 

of the person or the person’s parents or ancestors before their arrival in the United States. 

People who identify their origin as Hispanic, 

Latino, or Spanish may be any race. “Hispanic 

or Latino” refers to a person of Cuban, 

Mexican, Puerto Rican, South or Central 

American, or other Spanish culture or origin 

regardless of race.

total U.S. population. In 2010, 82.5 

percent of centenarians were White 

alone, compared with 72.4 percent 

White alone in the total population 

(Table 1).4 Of the centenarian population, 12.2 percent were Black or 

African American alone, compared 

with 12.6 percent in the total population.5 The Asian alone share of 

the centenarian population was 2.5 

percent, while its share of the total 

population was 4.8 percent. Those 

who were Some Other Race alone in 

2010 made up 1.3 percent of centenarians but 6.2 percent of the total 

population. Those answering Two 

or More Races in the 2010 Census 

constituted 1.0 percent of the centenarian population, but 2.9 percent 

of the total population. Those who 

were American Indian and Alaska 

4 As a matter of policy, the Census Bureau 

does not advocate the use of the alone

population over the alone-or-in-combination 

population or vice versa. The use of the alone

population in this report does not imply that it 

is a preferred method of presenting or analyzing data. Data on race from the 2010 Census 

can be presented and discussed in a variety 

of ways. 5 The terms “Black or African American” 

and “Black” are used interchangeably in 

this report.

Native alone made up 0.5 percent 

of centenarians, while this group 

constituted 0.9 percent in the total 

population. Of the population 100 

and older, 0.1 percent was Native 

Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander 

alone, while this group made up 

0.2 percent of the total population. 

Among centenarians, 5.8 percent 

were Hispanic. Of the total population, the percentage Hispanic was 

16.3 percent. 

Even among age groups within the 

older population, in general, as age 

increases, the population becomes 

less diverse with an increasing 

percentage in each age group of 

the older population that is White 

alone and not Hispanic. This pattern establishes itself for those in 

their 70s, 80s, and 90s. However, 

there is a departure from this pattern for centenarians. For example, 

of people in their 70s, 84.1 percent 

were White alone. This increases to 

87.6 percent among those in their 

80s and 88.5 percent among those 

in their 90s. For centenarians, the 

percentage White alone decreases 

Figure 3.

Percent Distribution by Sex and Sex Ratios for Selected Older Age Groups: 2010

(For information on confidentiality protection, nonsampling error, and definitions, see www.census.gov/prod/cen2010

/doc/sf1.pdf)

Percent male Percent female Males per 100 females

70 to 79 years 80 to 89 years 90 to 99 years 100 years and over

44.7

55.3

38.1

61.9

38.6

72.2

27.8

20.7

17.2

82.8

61.6

81.0

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2010 Census Summary File 1.
4 Centenarians: 2010 U.S. Census Bureau

to 82.5 percent. The opposite pattern exists for the other race groups 

and Hispanics. There is a decrease 

in percentage for these groups 

as age increases. For example, 

the percent Black alone was 8.9 

percent for those in their 70s. It 

decreases to 7.1 percent for those 

in their 80s, and increases slightly 

to 7.2 percent for those in their 

90s. The percentage Black alone 

for centenarians increases to 12.2 

percent. Similarly, the percentage 

Hispanic among those in their 70s 

is 7.3 percent. This decreases to 5.7 

percent for those in their 80s, and 

4.5 percent for those in their 90s. 

The percent Hispanic increases to 

5.8 percent for centenarians. This 

anomalous result for centenarians 

is, in part, likely due to data quality issues. To shed light on these 

inconsistencies for centenarians, a 

brief comparison with Census 2000 

data may be useful. 

Since this decade’s centenarian population is essentially the 

surviving portion of last decade’s 

nonagenarians, an examination 

of the race and Hispanic-origin 

composition for people in their 

90s in Census 2000 can aid in 

interpretation. For people in their 

90s in Census 2000, the percent 

White alone was 89.0 percent, the 

percent Black alone was 7.7 percent, and the percent Hispanic was 

3.5 percent. Additionally, in Census 

2000, a similar abrupt break in the 

pattern of race and Hispanic-origin 

composition appears uniquely for 

centenarians. 

Given the marked shift in composition for centenarians in 2010 as 

well as the inconsistent composition for this same group of people 

in the prior census when they were 

in their 90s, the anomalous findings for centenarians are likely due 

more to data quality issues than 

an actual unique racial and ethnic 

diversity among centenarians. (See 

the data quality discussion later in 

this report.) The race and Hispanicorigin composition for the centenarian population is likely similar to the 

composition for those in their 90s. 

Sex ratios for centenarians differed significantly across race and 

Hispanic origin groups. The race 

groups with the highest sex ratios 

were also those with extremely 

small numbers of centenarians. 

This is true especially for the Native 

Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander 

alone population, which had 44 

centenarians nationwide (76.0 centenarian males per 100 centenarian 

females) and the American Indian 

and Alaska Native alone population, which had 255 centenarians 

(65.6 centenarian males per 100 

centenarian females). Because of 

the small numbers, one should 

be cautious when interpreting 

data for these groups. Those with 

the next highest sex ratios were 

centenarians reporting Some Other 

Race alone or Two or More Races, 

which had around 50 centenarian 

males per 100 centenarian females 

each. The Asian alone population 

was the race group with the next 

highest sex ratio, 39.1 centenarian 

males per 100 centenarian females. 

The Black alone and White alone 

populations had the lowest centenarian sex ratios among the race 

groups. The Black alone centenarian 

population had 21.3 males per 100 

females, while the White alone centenarian population had 19.3 males 

per 100 females. Hispanic centenarians had a relatively high sex ratio 

of 41.6 males per 100 females, 

while non-Hispanic centenarians 

had a sex ratio of 19.6 males per 

100 females.

Living Arrangements

As people get older, the likelihood of widowhood and disability 

increases, and living arrangements 

change as a result. A comparison 

Table 1. 

Population by Race and Hispanic Origin for Selected Older Age Groups: 2010

(For information on confidentiality protection, nonsampling error, and definitions, see www.census.gov/prod/cen2010/doc/sf1.pdf)

Race and Hispanic origin Total population 70 to 79 years 80 to 89 years 90 to 99 years 100 years and over

Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent

 Total population . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 308,745,538 100.0 16,595,961 100.0 9,363,786 100.0 1,819,610 100.0 53,364 100.0

RACE

One Race . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 299,736,465 97.1 16,426,479 99.0 9,288,661 99.2 1,807,321 99.3 52,816 99.0

White . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 223,553,265 72.4 13,965,501 84.1 8,206,290 87.6 1,610,445 88.5 43,999 82.5

Black or African American . . . . . . . . . . . . 38,929,319 12.6 1,469,106 8.9 669,471 7.1 130,727 7.2 6,516 12.2

American Indian and Alaska Native . . . . . 2,932,248 0.9 89,194 0.5 33,325 0.4 5,207 0.3 255 0.5

Asian . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14,674,252 4.8 605,478 3.6 262,015 2.8 43,482 2.4 1,324 2.5

Native Hawaiian and Other 

Pacific Islander . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 540,013 0.2 13,512 0.1 4,840 0.1 747 – 44 0.1

Some Other Race . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19,107,368 6.2 283,688 1.7 112,720 1.2 16,713 0.9 678 1.3

Two or More Races . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9,009,073 2.9 169,482 1.0 75,125 0.8 12,289 0.7 548 1.0

HISPANIC OR LATINO

Hispanic or Latino . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50,477,594 16.3 1,210,950 7.3 536,916 5.7 82,093 4.5 3,089 5.8

Not Hispanic or Latino . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 258,267,944 83.7 15,385,011 92.7 8,826,870 94.3 1,737,517 95.5 50,275 94.2

– Percentage rounds to 0.0.

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2010 Census Summary File 1.
U.S. Census Bureau Centenarians: 2010 5

across the older age groups 

illustrates this and is presented in 

Figure 4. In 2010, the majority of 

people in their 70s were living with 

others in a household, especially 

males (81.5 percent of males and 

65.9 percent of females). However, 

as age increases, a mix of living 

arrangements becomes apparent. 

Most people in their 80s were living 

at home, although the situation 

was different for men and women. 

Women were about equally likely 

to be living at home alone (46.0 

percent) as they were to be living 

at home with others (46.2 percent). 

Men in their 80s, on the other 

hand, were much more likely to be 

living in a household with others 

(71.4 percent) than living alone at 

home (23.7 percent). Of people in 

their 90s, there was a noticeable 

percentage living in nursing homes 

(10.9 percent for males and 19.2 

percent for females). Still, the 

women in this age group were 

likeliest to live alone at home (47.6 

percent), while the majority of men 

in this age group were living at 

home with others (54.7 percent). 

Centenarian females were slightly 

more likely to live in a nursing 

home (35.2 percent) than alone at 

home (34.0 percent). Centenarian 

males, however, were still most 

likely to be living with others in a 

household (43.5 percent) than any 

other living arrangement. About the 

same percentage of male centenarians as female centenarians lived 

alone in the home (33.3 percent 

and 34.0 percent, respectively). 

The sex distribution of centenarians 

varies across living arrangements

(Figure 5). Overall, the percentage 

female among centenarians was 

82.8 percent. However, centenarians living with others in a household were only 76.0 percent female 

while centenarians living in nursing 

homes were 90.3 percent female. 

Those living alone in the household 

were 83.1 percent female. Some of 

these differences may arise from 

variation in widowhood and disability in the population by sex.

A comparison of centenarian living arrangements across race and 

Hispanic-origin groups shows considerable differences in the living 

arrangements of each group’s oldest 

members (Figure 6). Centenarians 

who are White alone or nonHispanic had the highest likelihood 

of living alone (36.4 percent and 

35.0 percent, respectively), while 

Figure 4.

Living Arrangements of Selected Older Age-Sex Groups: 2010

(In percent. For information on confidentiality protection, nonsampling error, and definitions, see www.census.gov

/prod/cen2010/doc/sf1.pdf)

With others in household Alone in household Nursing home Other group quarters

Males Females Males Females Males Females Males Females 

81.5

65.9 71.4

46.2

46.0

23.7 31.9

16.6

33.4

54.7

47.6

31.6

10.9 7.1

0.5 0.7 1.0 1.6

4.3 1.8 0.4 0.3

1.4

34.0

43.5

28.5

33.3

18.2

35.2

5.1 2.3

19.2

Notes: A group quarters is a place where people live or stay, in a group living arrangement, that is owned or managed by an entity or 

organization providing housing and/or services for residents. 

Percentages may not sum to 100.0 due to rounding.

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2010 Census unpublished tabulation.

70 to 79 years 80 to 89 years 90 to 99 years 100 years and over
6 Centenarians: 2010 U.S. Census Bureau

centenarians reporting Some Other 

Race alone, Hispanic, or Asian alone 

were the least likely to be living 

alone in the home (14.5 percent, 

16.6 percent, and 19.0 percent, 

respectively). Centenarians with 

the highest likelihood of living with 

others in households were Some 

Other Race alone (74.2 percent), 

Hispanic (66.8 percent), and American Indian and Alaska Native alone 

(64.7 percent). The groups with the 

lowest percentage who were living 

with others in the household were 

White alone (26.4 percent) and Not 

Hispanic (28.9 percent). The groups 

with the highest percentage living 

in a nursing home were White alone 

Not Hispanic

Hispanic

Two or 

More Races

SOR alone

NHPI alone

Asian alone

AIAN alone

Black alone

White alone

All

Figure 6.

Living Arrangements of Centenarians by Race and Hispanic Origin: 2010

(In percent. For information on confidentiality protection, nonsampling error, and definitions, see www.census.gov

/prod/cen2010/doc/sf1.pdf)

33.9 32.3 2.8

2.9

2.3

1.6

2.8

2.3

1.5

1.8

2.3

2.8

With others in household Alone in household Nursing home Other group quarters

31.1

26.4 36.4 34.3

47.8 23.1 26.9

64.7 24.3 9.4

61.2 19.0 17.0

61.4 20.5 15.9

74.2 14.5 9.9

59.9 24.1 14.2

66.8 16.6 14.3

28.9 35.0 33.4

Notes: A group quarters is a place where people live or stay, in a group living arrangement, that is owned or managed by an entity or 

organization providing housing and/or services for residents. 

Black refers to Black or African American; AIAN refers to American Indian and Alaska Native; NHPI refers to Native Hawaiian and Other 

Pacific Islander; SOR refers to Some Other Race.

Percentages may not sum to 100.0 due to rounding.

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2010 Census unpublished tabulation. 

With others in

 household

Alone in

household

Nursing home

All

Figure 5.

Sex by Selected Living Arrangement for Centenarians: 2010

(In percent. For information on confidentiality protection, nonsampling error, and definitions, see www.census.gov

/prod/cen2010/doc/sf1.pdf)

83.1

76.0

82.8

90.3

Male Female

17.2

9.7

16.9

24.0

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2010 Census unpublished tabulation.
U.S. Census Bureau Centenarians: 2010 7

(34.3 percent) and Not Hispanic 

(33.4 percent). The groups with the 

lowest percentage of centenarians 

living in nursing homes were American Indian and Alaska Native alone 

(9.4 percent) and Some Other Race 

alone (9.9 percent).

The race distribution of centenarians varies across living arrangements. Generally, centenarians 

living with others in households 

were a more racially diverse population than centenarians living alone 

in households and those living in 

nursing homes (Figure 7). Among 

those centenarians living with others in households, 70.2 percent 

were White alone, 18.8 percent were 

Black alone, and 4.9 percent were 

Asian alone. In contrast, among 

those centenarians living alone, 

88.6 percent were White alone, 8.3 

percent were Black alone, and 1.4 

percent were Asian alone. Among 

those living in nursing homes, 87.5 

percent were White alone, 10.2 

percent were Black alone, and 1.3 

percent were Asian alone.

Comparisons of centenarians across 

selected living arrangements also 

shows a noticeably larger percentage Hispanic among those 

centenarians living with others in 

households (12.4 percent) than 

Figure 7.

Race and Hispanic Origin by Selected Living Arrangement for Centenarians: 2010

(In percent. For information on confidentiality protection, nonsampling error, and definitions, see www.census.gov

/prod/cen2010/doc/sf1.pdf)

17.224.0 82.8

With others

 in household

Alone in

 household

Nursing home

All 12.2

8.3

70.2 18.8 4.9

88.6

10.2

82.5

87.5

17.224.0 82.8

With others

 in household

Alone in

 household

Nursing home

All 5.8

87.6

2.8 97.2

12.4

94.2

2.6 97.4

RACE

HISPANIC ORIGIN

Note: Black refers to Black or African American; AIAN refers to American Indian and Alaska Native; NHPI refers to Native Hawaiian and 

Other Pacific Islander; SOR refers to Some Other Race.

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2010 Census unpublished tabulation.

White alone Black alone AIAN alone Asian alone NHPI alone SOR alone Two or More Races

Hispanic Not Hispanic
8 Centenarians: 2010 U.S. Census Bureau

Table 2. 

Population by Selected Older Age Group for the United States, Regions, States, and 

Puerto Rico: 2010

(For information on confidentiality protection, nonsampling error, and definitions, see www.census.gov/prod/cen2010/doc/sf1.pdf)

Area

Total 70 to 79 years 80 to 89 years 90 to 99 years 100 years and over

Number Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent

 United States . . . 308,745,538 16,595,961 5.4 9,363,786 3.0 1,819,610 0.59 53,364 0.0173

Region

Northeast . . . . . . . . . . . . 55,317,240 3,128,472 5.7 1,971,291 3.6 407,519 0.74 12,244 0.0221

Midwest . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66,927,001 3,678,562 5.5 2,195,247 3.3 448,229 0.67 13,112 0.0196

South . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 114,555,744 6,280,049 5.5 3,255,625 2.8 584,533 0.51 17,444 0.0152

West . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71,945,553 3,508,878 4.9 1,941,623 2.7 379,329 0.53 10,564 0.0147

State

Alabama . . . . . . . . . . . . 4,779,736 283,700 5.9 139,515 2.9 24,181 0.51 759 0.0159

Alaska . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 710,231 22,040 3.1 9,258 1.3 1,398 0.20 40 0.0056

Arizona . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6,392,017 377,287 5.9 188,529 2.9 32,317 0.51 832 0.0130

Arkansas . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,915,918 178,976 6.1 89,968 3.1 17,090 0.59 580 0.0199

California . . . . . . . . . . . . 37,253,956 1,738,749 4.7 1,000,475 2.7 197,811 0.53 5,921 0.0159

Colorado . . . . . . . . . . . . 5,029,196 224,376 4.5 119,141 2.4 23,023 0.46 593 0.0118

Connecticut . . . . . . . . . . 3,574,097 194,915 5.5 131,224 3.7 30,209 0.85 930 0.0260

Delaware . . . . . . . . . . . . 897,934 54,529 6.1 27,708 3.1 5,085 0.57 146 0.0163

District of Columbia . . . . 601,723 27,301 4.5 16,201 2.7 3,663 0.61 156 0.0259

Florida . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18,801,310 1,384,221 7.4 772,905 4.1 139,153 0.74 4,090 0.0218

Georgia . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9,687,653 433,157 4.5 204,451 2.1 37,279 0.38 1,141 0.0118

Hawaii . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,360,301 76,028 5.6 49,464 3.6 10,170 0.75 306 0.0225

Idaho . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,567,582 80,384 5.1 42,051 2.7 8,585 0.55 220 0.0140

Illinois . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12,830,632 653,860 5.1 388,169 3.0 79,705 0.62 2,419 0.0189

Indiana . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6,483,802 345,121 5.3 197,754 3.0 38,093 0.59 1,083 0.0167

Iowa . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,046,355 183,678 6.0 117,253 3.8 26,746 0.88 846 0.0278

Kansas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,853,118 152,100 5.3 94,892 3.3 20,743 0.73 626 0.0219

Kentucky . . . . . . . . . . . . 4,339,367 245,042 5.6 125,100 2.9 21,825 0.50 596 0.0137

Louisiana . . . . . . . . . . . . 4,533,372 236,505 5.2 121,662 2.7 20,731 0.46 594 0.0131

Maine . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,328,361 86,531 6.5 49,571 3.7 9,666 0.73 298 0.0224

Maryland . . . . . . . . . . . . 5,773,552 284,340 4.9 163,351 2.8 32,444 0.56 911 0.0158

Massachusetts . . . . . . . . 6,547,629 354,593 5.4 231,894 3.5 50,258 0.77 1,520 0.0232

Michigan . . . . . . . . . . . . 9,883,640 550,169 5.6 327,790 3.3 63,217 0.64 1,729 0.0175

Minnesota . . . . . . . . . . . 5,303,925 273,971 5.2 166,972 3.1 38,397 0.72 1,211 0.0228

Mississippi . . . . . . . . . . . 2,967,297 163,822 5.5 80,849 2.7 14,671 0.49 542 0.0183

Missouri . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5,988,927 348,708 5.8 193,616 3.2 37,751 0.63 1,166 0.0195

Montana . . . . . . . . . . . . . 989,415 59,823 6.0 33,148 3.4 7,040 0.71 175 0.0177

Nebraska . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,826,341 100,727 5.5 62,714 3.4 13,901 0.76 501 0.0274

Nevada . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,700,551 139,783 5.2 59,946 2.2 8,926 0.33 203 0.0075

New Hampshire . . . . . . . 1,316,470 71,360 5.4 41,038 3.1 8,462 0.64 232 0.0176

New Jersey . . . . . . . . . . 8,791,894 476,177 5.4 296,548 3.4 60,527 0.69 1,769 0.0201

New Mexico . . . . . . . . . . 2,059,179 116,134 5.6 57,860 2.8 10,087 0.49 284 0.0138

New York . . . . . . . . . . . . 19,378,102 1,062,198 5.5 644,187 3.3 133,742 0.69 4,605 0.0238

North Carolina . . . . . . . . 9,535,483 518,198 5.4 264,261 2.8 47,192 0.49 1,404 0.0147

North Dakota . . . . . . . . . 672,591 39,213 5.8 25,731 3.8 6,284 0.93 221 0.0329

Ohio . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11,536,504 668,889 5.8 397,707 3.4 74,664 0.65 1,891 0.0164

Oklahoma . . . . . . . . . . . 3,751,351 216,126 5.8 110,924 3.0 19,726 0.53 546 0.0146

Oregon . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,831,074 211,795 5.5 124,365 3.2 26,849 0.70 677 0.0177

Pennsylvania . . . . . . . . . 12,702,379 788,868 6.2 513,878 4.0 101,049 0.80 2,510 0.0198

Rhode Island . . . . . . . . . 1,052,567 57,722 5.5 41,960 4.0 9,150 0.87 247 0.0235

South Carolina . . . . . . . . 4,625,364 266,730 5.8 126,778 2.7 22,146 0.48 659 0.0142

South Dakota . . . . . . . . . 814,180 47,407 5.8 29,985 3.7 7,005 0.86 240 0.0295

Tennessee . . . . . . . . . . . 6,346,105 361,053 5.7 178,931 2.8 32,000 0.50 940 0.0148

Texas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25,145,561 1,096,401 4.4 552,707 2.2 96,761 0.38 2,917 0.0116

Utah . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,763,885 104,579 3.8 55,303 2.0 9,914 0.36 186 0.0067

Vermont . . . . . . . . . . . . . 625,741 36,108 5.8 20,991 3.4 4,456 0.71 133 0.0213

Virginia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8,001,024 403,431 5.0 212,553 2.7 39,461 0.49 1,190 0.0149

Washington . . . . . . . . . . 6,724,540 328,814 4.9 186,952 2.8 40,382 0.60 1,055 0.0157

West Virginia . . . . . . . . . 1,852,994 126,517 6.8 67,761 3.7 11,125 0.60 273 0.0147

Wisconsin . . . . . . . . . . . 5,686,986 314,719 5.5 192,664 3.4 41,723 0.73 1,179 0.0207

Wyoming . . . . . . . . . . . . 563,626 29,086 5.2 15,131 2.7 2,827 0.50 72 0.0128

 Puerto Rico . . . . . 3,725,789 236,991 6.4 106,942 2.9 21,693 0.58 961 0.0258

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2010 Census Summary File 1.
U.S. Census Bureau Centenarians: 2010 9

those living alone (2.8 percent) and 

those living in a nursing home (2.6 

percent).

GEOGRAPHIC DISTRIBUTION

Comparing geographic patterns of 

age groups among the population 

70 and over provides some information about where people are living as they age. According to 2010 

Census data, there is an increasing 

tendency toward living in an urban 

area as one ages. 6 Among those 

aged 70 and over, centenarians are 

the likeliest to live in an urban area. 

Around 85.7 percent of the centenarian population lived in an urban 

area in 2010, compared with 84.2 

percent of those in their 90s, 81.5 

percent of those in their 80s, and 

76.6 percent of those in their 70s.

A comparison among regions shows 

that while the West ranked second 

among the four regions when 

ranking on the total population, 

it ranked last among the regions 

6 Census Bureau’s Urban and Rural Classification: The Census Bureau’s urban areas 

represent densely developed territory and 

encompass residential, commercial, and other 

nonresidential urban land uses. The Census 

Bureau identifies two types of urban areas: 

“urbanized areas” of 50,000 or more people 

and “urban clusters” of at least 2,500 and 

fewer than 50,000 people. “Rural” encompasses all population, housing, and territory not included within an urban area. The 

Census Bureau’s urban and rural classification 

provides an important baseline for analyzing 

changes in the distribution and characteristics 

of urban and rural populations. The Census 

Bureau’s urban areas also form the cores of 

metropolitan and micropolitan statistical 

areas, as defined by the Office of Management 

and Budget, and they are used in other agencies’ and organizations’ urban and rural classifications. More information about the Census 

Bureau’s Urban-Rural Classification—including 

the criteria used to delineate urban areas, lists 

of urbanized areas and urban clusters, maps, 

and files providing relationships with other 

geographic areas—can be found on the 

Census Bureau’s Web site at <www.census

.gov/geo/www/ua/2010urbanruralclass

.html>.

for number of centenarians. 7 The 

region with the most centenarians 

was the South (17,444), followed 

by the Midwest (13,112), Northeast 

(12,244), and West (10,564). 

A comparison of states according to 

the size of their centenarian populations shows that states with the 

largest total populations generally 

also have the most centenarians. 

California had the largest number 

of centenarians (5,921) followed 

by New York, Florida, and Texas. 

Alaska had the fewest centenarians (40) followed by Wyoming, 

Vermont, and Delaware. See Table 2 

and Figure 8 for information on all 

the states. 

Comparing regions on the share 

of their populations made up of 

centenarians shows which had 

higher concentrations of centenarians. The Northeast and Midwest 

had proportions that were higher 

than the national average of 1.73 

per 10,000 people, while the West 

and the South had proportions that 

were lower. 

Although the Northeast region 

ranked highest overall, the 

individual states with the largest number of centenarians per 

10,000 people were in the Midwest. 

North Dakota was the only state 

with more than 3 centenarians per 

10,000 people in the state (3.29 per 

10,000) followed by South Dakota, 

Iowa, and Nebraska. Three states 

had less than 1 centenarian per 

10,000 people. All three were in the 

7 The Northeast region includes 

Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, 

New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, 

Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, and Vermont. 

The Midwest includes Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, 

Kansas, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, 

Nebraska, North Dakota, Ohio, South Dakota, 

and Wisconsin. The South includes Alabama, 

Arkansas, Delaware, the District of Columbia, 

Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Louisiana, 

Maryland, Mississippi, North Carolina, 

Oklahoma, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, 

Virginia, and West Virginia. The West includes 

Alaska, Arizona, California, Colorado, Hawaii, 

Idaho, Montana, Nevada, New Mexico, 

Oregon, Utah, Washington, and Wyoming.

West: Alaska, Utah, and Nevada. To 

contrast this with rankings for other 

age groups among the older population, the states with the highest 

percentage in their 70s were 

Florida, West Virginia, and Maine. 

The states with the lowest percentage in their 70s included Alaska 

and Utah. The states with the highest percentage of those in their 80s 

were Florida, Pennsylvania, and 

Rhode Island. The state that stood 

out as having a particularly low percentage of those in their 80s was 

Alaska (1.3 percent). The state with 

the highest percentage of those in 

their 90s was North Dakota while 

the state with the lowest percentage in their 90s was Alaska. 

DATA QUALITY

Data quality issues have affected 

census centenarian data for 

decades (Siegel and Passel, 1976; 

Spencer, 1987; Krach and Velkoff, 

1999; Humes and Velkoff, 2007). 

The types of errors and the magnitude of their effect on centenarian 

data have varied from one census 

to another. Types of error include 

misreporting, form design issues, 

data capture or keying errors, and 

processing errors. 

Misreporting occurs when a respondent does not answer the question 

accurately. With respect to centenarian data, it can result from illiteracy, 

cognition difficulties, proxy reporting (i.e., response by someone 

other than the person, such as a 

neighbor or healthcare provider), or 

simply a desire to attain the status 

of being a centenarian. 

Form design issues can also cause 

misreporting. They occur when the 

question or overall census form is 

confusing to the respondent. For 

example, in the 1970 Census, a 

form design that included FOSDIC 

(i.e., Film Optical Sensing Device 

for Input to Computers) circles 

confused some respondents and 
10 Centenarians: 2010 U.S. Census Bureau

MT

AK

NM

OR MN

KS

SD

ND

MO

WA

FL

IL IN

WI NY

PA

MI

OH

IA

ME

MA

CT 

AZ

HI

NV

TX

CA CO

WY

UT

ID

NE

OK

GA

AR

AL

NC

MS

LA

TN

KY VA

SC

WV

RI 

DE 

MD 

DC 

NJ 

Figure 8.

Centenarians: 2010

VT NH

U.S.: 53,364

Number

2,500 or more

1,500 to 2,499

500 to 1,499

Less than 500

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2010 Census Summary File 1.

PR

(For information on confidentiality protection, nonsampling error, and definitions,

see www.census.gov/prod/cen2010/doc/sf1.pdf)

MT

AK

NM

OR MN

KS

SD

ND

MO

WA

FL

IL IN

WI NY

PA

MI

OH

IA

ME

MA

CT 

AZ

HI

NV

TX

CA CO

WY

UT

ID

NE

OK

GA

AR

AL

NC

MS

LA

TN

KY VA

SC

WV

RI 

DE 

MD 

DC 

NJ 

VT NH

U.S.: 1.73 per 10,000

Per 10,000 state 

population

2.50 or more

1.73 to 2.49

1.00 to 1.72

Less than 1.00

PR
U.S. Census Bureau Centenarians: 2010 11

led them to mark the incorrect 

century for year of birth, resulting 

in an unexpectedly large number 

of people with centenarian ages in 

that year’s census data (Siegel and 

Passel, 1976). 

Data capture or keying errors affect 

data when the data keyer (i.e., 

a census employee who enters 

census responses into a database) 

or the automated data capture 

program misinterprets or incorrectly records a census response. 

In Census 2000, a few centenarian 

ages resulted when dates of birth 

including months beginning with 

the digit “1” (e.g., January, October, 

or November) were reported by 

the respondent in the age entry 

box instead of the date of birth 

entry boxes. For example, a person 

may have written the date of birth 

10-1-90 in the age entry area on 

the form. The automated capture 

program would have interpreted 

this as an age entry. Since the 

capture system was designed to 

record only the first three digits of 

an age response, it would then have 

captured this response as a false 

centenarian with age 101 (Humes 

and Velkoff, 2007). 

Other issues occur during data editing and allocation procedures, which 

clean and fill in missing information. Analysis of centenarian data 

after Census 2000 indicated that the 

count of centenarians in 2000 was 

artificially high (Humes and Velkoff, 

2007). This was due in large part to 

the already-documented combination of a specific relationship reporting error and procedures that based 

age allocations on those misreported 

relationship responses while maintaining consistency of relationships 

and ages among household members (Spencer, 1987). As illustrated 

in the examples above, many of the 

data quality issues affecting centenarian data result from a combination of the various types of errors 

rather than just one type. 

Early analysis of the 2010 centenarian count indicates some consistency between the 2010 Census 

centenarian number and estimates 

from other sources (Figure 9). The 

2010 comparison data in Figure 9 

range from 52,800 (Kestenbaum 

and Ferguson, 2005) to 68,361 

(U.S. Census Bureau, 2012).8 The 

2010 Census centenarian number, 

53,364, is in the lower end of this 

range. 

Census data quality can be further 

described by using information 

provided by the respondent to the 

two-part census age and date of 

birth question (Figure 10). 

8 The U.S. Census Bureau’s postcensal estimate is based on carrying Census 2000 data 

forward to 2010. It does not reflect the 2010 

Census results.

2010 Estimate

 by Kestenbaum 

and Ferguson

Vintage 2010 

Estimates

2010 Census

Figure 9.

Comparison of Centenarian Population From 

Alternative Sources: 2010

(For information on confidentiality protection, nonsampling error, and 

definitions, see www.census.gov/prod/cen2010/doc/sf1.pdf)

Note: Numbers for the 2010 Census and Vintage 2010 Estimates refer to April 1, 2010. 

Estimates by Kestenbaum and Ferguson refer to January 1.

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2010 Census Summary File 1, Vintage 2010 Postcensal

Estimates; Kestenbaum and Ferguson, 2005.

53,364

68,361

52,800

Figure 10.

Reproduction of the Question on Age and Date of 

Birth From the 2010 Census

(For information on confidentiality protection, nonsampling error, and 

definitions, see www.census.gov/prod/cen2010/doc/sf1.pdf)

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2010 Census questionnaire.
12 Centenarians: 2010 U.S. Census Bureau

Ideally, the 2010 Census centenarian and total populations should be 

similar in the source and quality of 

their age data. Any differences may 

give us insight into data quality 

issues. Indeed, 89.2 percent of the 

total population and 84.1 percent 

of centenarians reported the highest quality age and date of birth 

information on their census form 

in 2010 (Table 3). There are some 

differences, however, for the other 

categories. Centenarians were more 

likely than the total population to 

be assigned their age due to incomplete or inconsistent age and date 

of birth reporting, 13.0 percent for 

centenarians and 5.3 percent for 

the total population. Centenarians 

were less likely than the total 

population to have had their age 

allocated because they did not 

respond or reported an invalid age, 

1.9 percent for centenarians and 

3.6 percent for the total population.

In Census 2000, there were more 

differences in age data quality 

between the centenarian and total 

populations. In 2000, only 69.3 

percent of centenarian age data 

came from consistent age and date 

of birth information reported on the 

form, compared with 89.9 percent 

for the total population (Table 3). 

Additionally, 18.1 percent of centenarians obtained their centenarian 

age from procedures that allocated 

an age to respondents with a blank 

or invalid census age on their census form, while just 3.7 percent of 

the total population’s age responses 

came from this source. The Census 

2000 centenarian age data, like the 

2010 Census centenarian data, also 

had a higher assignment rate (12.0 

percent) than the total population 

(5.2 percent). 

The quality of centenarian age data 

improved between 2000 and 2010. 

Only 69.3 percent of the Census 

2000 centenarian population’s 

age data came from fully reported 

and consistent age and date of 

birth responses on the census 

form (Table 3).9 In 2010, this had 

increased to 84.1 percent. This 

9 This percentage would have been even 

lower if we had used the two-year difference 

quality measure that was used to evaluate the 

2010 census data. Consequently, the percentage change between 2000 to 2010 would 

have been even larger.

Table 3. 

Percent Distribution of Centenarian and Total Populations by Source of Final Age: 

2000 and 2010

(For information on confidentiality protection, nonsampling error, and definitions, see www.census.gov/prod/cen2010/doc/sf1.pdf)

Source of final age 2000 2010

Total population Centenarians Total population Centenarians

Consistent as reported . . . . . . . . . . . 89.9 69.3 89.2 84.1

Assigned . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.2 12.0 5.3 13.0

Allocated . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.7 18.1 3.6 1.9

Substituted . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.2 0.6 1.9 1.0

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2000 and 2010 Census unpublished tabulations.

SOURCE OF FINAL AGE

CONSISTENT 

AS REPORTED

Reported age and calculated age from reported 

date of birth differed by fewer than two years 

(fewer than four years in Census 2000). Age 

responses in this category are considered the 

highest quality age responses. 

ASSIGNED Incomplete or inconsistent age and date of 

birth information was reported: an age without 

a date of birth, a date of birth without an age, or 

an inconsistent age and date of birth (i.e., age 

and date-of-birth-implied age differed by two or 

more years). Other information provided by the 

respondent, such as household relationship, was 

used to choose between inconsistent age and 

date of birth. 

ALLOCATED No valid age or date of birth information 

was reported. Age was allocated from 

nearby households using the “hot deck” 

method of allocation. 

SUBSTITUTED Data were not reported for any person in the 

household. The characteristics of people in 

another household of the same size were duplicated to fill in this household’s characteristics. 

This information can be used as an evaluation tool that categorizes the 

source and quality of census age responses into four main groups. See 

text box. 
U.S. Census Bureau Centenarians: 2010 13

rate for centenarians in 2010 has 

become more consistent with that 

for other age groups in the older 

population. Another positive finding 

is that age allocation rates declined 

substantially between 2000 and 

2010. An age may be assigned by 

census allocation procedures when 

a person’s age is blank or invalid on 

their census form. In Census 2000, 

18.1 percent of centenarian ages 

were allocated. This declined to 1.9 

percent in the 2010 Census. 

The high allocation rate for centenarians in 2000 resulted from the 

combination of a census relationship reporting error referred to 

as the “generational inversion” 

reporting error and the erroneous use of this faulty relationship 

value to allocate an age for this 

person. The generational inversion reporting error occurs when a 

person filling out their census form 

misunderstands the direction of the 

relationship being requested in the 

relationship question. For example, 

a householder fills out the form and 

places their own name and information in the response area for Person 

1. Then, this person enters information in the Person 2 response area 

for another person in the household. The relationship question 

for Person 2 asks, “How is this 

person related to Person 1?” This 

is where the generational inversion relationship reporting error 

occurs. Sometimes, the respondent 

misunderstands the direction of 

the relationship that the question 

is intending to collect. If the householder is trying to fill out information for their biological child, the 

relationship response for Person 2 

should be “biological son or daughter.” This is how Person 2 is related 

to Person 1. However, sometimes 

the householder will mistakenly 

choose “father or mother” as the 

relationship response for Person 

2. In the special circumstance 

where this relationship cannot be 

corrected because the information 

on the census form is incomplete, 

Person 2 also happens to have a 

missing or invalid age, and Person 

1 has an older age (e.g., age 90), 

then allocation procedures would 

allocate an age difference to Person 

2 that would be consistent with 

an age for a parent of Person 1. 

This set of conditions results in the 

allocation of an erroneous older, 

and sometimes centenarian, age for 

Person 2 with the faulty parent relationship (Spencer, 1987). New diagnostic tools introduced for the 2010 

Census dress rehearsal review in 

2008 helped to pinpoint the area of 

the allocation procedures that was 

producing most of these extreme 

ages. This allowed the Census 

Bureau to correct these procedures prior to processing the 2010 

Census. Thus, the proportion of 

centenarians with an allocated age 

in 2010 dropped to 1.9 percent. 

As a result, a greater proportion of 

the 2010 Census centenarian count 

consists of responses of the highest 

quality. 

CONCLUSION

In summary, there were 53,364 

centenarians in the United States in 

2010, representing only 1.73 per 

10,000 people in the total population. This proportion has increased 

slightly since 1980, when it was 

1.42 per 10,000. Centenarians are 

overwhelmingly more likely to be 

female. They are less diverse in 

terms of race and Hispanic origin 

than the population overall, with a 

larger percentage White alone and 

a larger percentage non-Hispanic. 

They are more likely to live in urban 

areas than the other age groups 

in the older population. They also 

live in a much greater variety 

of living arrangements, including group quarters living such as 

nursing homes, than the rest of 

the older population. Lastly, they 

are in higher concentrations in the 

Northeast and Midwest than in the 

other regions. 

ABOUT THE 2010 CENSUS 

Why was the 2010 Census 

conducted? 

The U.S. Constitution mandates 

that a census be taken in the 

United States every 10 years. This 

is required in order to determine 

the number of seats each state 

is to receive in the U.S. House of 

Representatives. Age data are used 

to determine the voting age population (age 18 and older) for use in 

the legislative redistricting process. 

Why did the 2010 Census ask 

the question on age and date 

of birth? 

The Census Bureau collects data on 

age to support a variety of legislative and program requirements. 

These data are also used to aid in 

the allocation of funds from federal 

programs, in particular to programs 

targeting the older population. This 

includes planning for hospitals, 

roads, and housing assistance. 

For example, the Department of 

Veterans Affairs uses census data to 

plan for nursing homes, hospitals, 

cemeteries, domiciliary services, 

and veterans benefits; the Department of Health and Human Services 

uses age data as part of the formula 

used to allocate funds for services 

to seniors with low incomes under 

the Older Americans Act; and the 

Equal Employment Opportunity 

Commission uses age data to 

enforce equal employment opportunities. These data are also used 

to forecast the number of people 

eligible for Social Security and Medicare benefits. 

How are data on age 

beneficial? 

Federal, state, and local governments need information on age 

to implement, evaluate, and aid 

programs that plan and develop 
14 Centenarians: 2010 U.S. Census Bureau

services for older adults. These 

include, but are not limited to, the 

Equal Employment Opportunity 

Act, the Older Americans Act, the 

Nutrition Education Program, the 

Rehabilitation Act, the Long Term 

Care Ombudsman Services for 

Older Americans Program, and the 

Supportive Housing for the Elderly 

Program. 

Other important uses for census 

data on age are in the planning and 

funding of services for the older 

population, such as health service 

centers, retirement homes, assisted 

living or skilled-nursing facilities, 

transportation availability, Social 

Security, and Medicare benefits. 

Census data can also be used by 

the private sector to determine 

business locations and advertising 

for goods and services targeting 

older adults, investment planning, employment opportunities, 

and specialized consumer needs. 

Researchers can use age data to 

project future population trends, 

assess mortality patterns, evaluate 

shifts in the geographic distribution 

of the older population, and plan 

ways to better serve the needs of a 

given community. 

FOR MORE INFORMATION 

For more information on age in 

the United States, visit the 

U.S. Census Bureau’s Internet site 

at <www.census.gov/population

/age/>.

Data on age from the 2010 Census 

Summary File 1 provide information 

at the national level and below 

and are available on the Internet 

at <factfinder2.census.gov

/main.html> and on DVD. Data on 

the centenarian population can be 

found in the 2010 Census Summary 

File 1 tables PCT12 and the table 

series PCT12A-O. 

Information on confidentiality 

protection, nonsampling error, 

and definitions is available on the 

Census Bureau’s Internet site at 

<www.census.gov/prod

/cen2010/doc/sf1.pdf>. 

For more information about the 

2010 Census, including data products, call the Customer Services 

Center at 1-800-923-8282. You 

can also visit the Census Bureau’s 

Question and Answer Center at 

<ask.census.gov> to submit your 

questions online.

REFERENCES

Human Mortality Database. University of California, Berkeley (USA), 

and Max Planck Institute for 

Demographic Research 

(Germany). Available at 

<www.mortality.org> or 

<www.humanmortality.de> (data 

downloaded on January 9, 2012). 

Humes, K.R. and V.A. Velkoff, 2007, 

“Centenarians in the United 

States: 2000,” poster presented 

at the 2007 Annual Meeting of 

the Population Association of 

America, New York, NY.

Kestenbaum, B. and B. R. Ferguson, 

2005, “Number of Centenarians 

in the United States Jan. 1, 1990, 

Jan. 1, 2000, and Jan. 1, 2010. 

Based on Improved Medicare 

Data,” paper presented at the 

2005 “Living to 100 and Beyond” 

International Symposium, 

Orlando, FL. 

Krach, C.A. and V.A. Velkoff, 1999, 

“Centenarians in the United 

States,” Current Population 

Reports Special Studies, P23-

199RV, Washington, DC.

Murphy, S.L., J.Q. Xu, and K.D. 

Kochanek, 2012, “Deaths: Preliminary Data for 2010.” National 

Vital Statistics Reports; Vol. 60, 

No. 4. Hyattsville, MD: National 

Center for Health Statistics.

Siegel, J.S. and J.S. Passel, 1976, 

“New Estimates of the Number 

of Centenarians in the United 

States,” Journal of the American 

Statistical Association, Vol. 71, 

No. 355, pp. 559–566.

Spencer, G., 1987, “Improvements 

in the Quality of Census Age 

Statistics for the Elderly,” Data 

for an Aging Population: Proceedings of the 1987 Public Health 

Conference on Records and 

Statistics, July 13–17, Washington, D.C. DHHS Pub. No. (PHS) 

88–1214, National Center for 

Health Statistics, Hyattsville, MD, 

pp. 231–235.

Statistics Bureau of Japan, 2011. 

“Table 3-1. Population (Total and 

Japanese Population, by Age 

(Single Years) and Sex, Percentage by Age, Average Age and 

Median Age – Japan and Prefectures.” Data Set: 2010 Census. 

Available at <www.stat.go.jp

/english/> (data downloaded on 

July 25, 2012).

Statistics Sweden. “Population on 

December 31, 2010 by sex and 

age.” Retrieved May 24, 2010. 

(<www.ssd.scb.se>). (Data 

obtained through the Human 

Mortality Database, 

<www.mortality.org> on January 

9, 2012.)

U.S. Census Bureau, 2012. Annual 

Resident Population Estimates 

by Age, Sex, Race, and Hispanic 

Origin for the United States: 

April 1, 2000 to July 1, 2010 

(NC-EST2010-ALLDATA).