4

Revisions to the Current Population

Survey Effective in January 2003

Mary Bowler, Randy E. Ilg, Stephen Miller, Ed Robison, and Anne Polivka

E

ffective with the release of January 2003 data, several

changes were introduced into the Current Population

Survey (CPS), also referred to as the “household survey.” These revisions are as follows:

• The questions on race and Hispanic origin in the

CPS were modified to comply with the new

standards for maintaining, collecting, and

presenting Federal data on race and ethnicity for

Federal statistical agencies. A major change under

those standards is that respondents may select more

than one race when answering the survey.

Respondents continued to be asked a separate

question to determine if they are Hispanic, which

is considered an ethnicity rather than a race. The

ethnicity question was reworded to ask directly

whether the respondent was Hispanic. Persons who

report they are Hispanic also are classified

separately in the race (or races) they consider

themselves to be. Based on the evidence currently

available, the new questions have little effect on

the overall unemployment rate and those for most

major worker groups. The jobless rate for Hispanics

may be somewhat higher. (Most of the analysis

presented in this article is based on data from a

supplement to the CPS conducted in May 2002.)

• Population controls that reflect the results of Census

2000 were used in the monthly CPS estimation

process. The new controls increased the size of the

civilian noninstitutional population by about 3.5

million in May 2002. As a result, they also increased

the estimated numbers of people unemployed and

employed. Because the increases were roughly

proportional, however, the overall unemployment

rate did not change significantly. Data from January

2000 through December 2002 were revised to reflect

these new controls. Over and above these revisions,

the U.S. Census Bureau introduced another large

upward adjustment to the controls as part of its

annual update of population estimates for 2003.

These updated population estimates were not

available in time to incorporate them into the

revised population controls for January 2000 to

December 2002. Thus, the data on employment and

unemployment levels for January 2003 (and

beyond) are not strictly comparable with those for

earlier months. The unemployment rate and other

ratios, however, were not substantially affected by

the 2003 population control revisions.

• Improvements were introduced to both the secondstage and composite weighting procedures. These

changes adapt the weighting procedures to the new

race/ethnic classification system and enhance the

stability over time of national and State/substate

labor force estimates for demographic groups.

Composite weights could not be calculated for the

January 2003 data, however, because that procedure

requires the use of both the current and the previous

month’s information. Because some people will

have changed race/ethnic groups between

December and January, compositing could not be

done for January. The effect of compositing is

different each month; thus, January estimates could

not be adjusted to make them comparable with

those for other months. The effect on the national

unemployment rate is probably negligible.

• The CPS adopted the 2002 Census Bureau industry

and occupational classification systems, which are

derived from the 2002 North American Industry

Classification System and the 2000 Standard

Occupational Classification system. These new

classification systems create breaks in the time

series for occupational and industry data at all

levels of aggregation.

The changes outlined above benchmark the CPS data to

the results of Census 2000, improve the estimation

procedures, and ensure that the data series produced from

the survey reflect the evolving composition of the U.S.

Mary Bowler and Randy E. Ilg are economists in the Division of

Labor Force Statistics; Stephen Miller is a mathematical statistician

and Ed Robison is a supervisory mathematical statistician on the

Statistical Methods staff; and Anne Polivka is a research economist

on the Employment Research and Program Development staff; Office

of Employment and Unemployment Statistics, Bureau of Labor

Statistics. Telephone: (202) 691-6378 (Bowler and Ilg), 691-7379

(Miller), 691-6363 (Robison), and 691-7395 (Polivka); e-mail:

Bowler_M@bls.gov, Ilg_R@bls.gov, Miller_S@bls.gov, Robison_E@bls.gov,

and Polivka_A@bls.gov.
5

population and the industry and occupational structure of

the economy. This article provides an overview of the

changes and discusses their impact on CPS data series. New

procedures also were used to seasonally adjust CPS data

series; seasonal adjustment is discussed in a separate article

in this issue of Employment and Earnings.

Changes in race and Hispanic origin data

Starting in January 2003, the CPS questions that inquire

about race and Hispanic ethnicity were altered to follow

new Office of Management and Budget (OMB) guidelines.

In accordance with the new guidelines, the following

changes were made to the CPS questions:

• Individuals now are asked whether they are of

Hispanic ethnicity before being asked about their

race. Prior to January 2003, individuals were asked

their ethnic origin after they were asked about their

race.

• Individuals are asked directly if they are Spanish,

Hispanic, or Latino. (Spanish and Latino are terms

often used interchangeably with Hispanic.)

Previously, individuals were identified as Hispanic

based on their, or their ancestors’, country of origin.

• With respect to race, the response category, Asian

and Pacific Islanders, was split into two categories:

1) Asian and 2) Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific

Islanders.

• Individuals are allowed to choose more than one

race category. Prior to January 2003, individuals

who considered themselves to belong to more than

one race were required to select a single primary

race.

• The questions were reworded to indicate that

individuals could select more than one race

category and to convey more clearly that

individuals should report their own perception of

what their race is.

Figure 1 presents the question order and wording that

were used prior to January 2003, along with the ordering

and wording that are being used from January 2003 forward.

In order to implement the new race/ethnic guidelines, the

new questions were asked for all individuals in the CPS

sample in January 2003. Normally, the questions on race

and ethnicity are asked only the first time an individual is

included in the CPS sample.2 In addition to changes in the

survey questions, the editing and imputation components

of the CPS processing system were altered to accommodate

the possibility of individuals identifying themselves in more

than one race.

To accommodate the new guidelines, the race categories

that now appear in Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS)

publications are white (and no other race), black or African

American (and no other race), and Asian (and no other race).

The number of respondents in the remaining categories—

American Indian or Alaska Native, Native Hawaiian or Other

Pacific Islanders, and persons who selected more than one

race category—was determined to be too small to develop

employment and unemployment estimates of sufficient

reliability for monthly publication. These groups are

included in the estimates of total employment and

unemployment. BLS continues to publish data separately

for persons whose ethnicity is identified as Hispanic or

Latino. Hispanics may be of any race. Table 1 shows the

distribution of the civilian noninstitutional population aged

16 and older in May 2002 under the new race/ethnic

categories.

Change in population controls

The CPS is a multistage stratified probability sample of

households designed to produce national and State estimates

of the labor force characteristics of the civilian

noninstitutional population of the United States aged 16

and older. The demographic characteristics of the CPS

sample can differ from known population distributions due

to sampling variability and differential nonresponse. To

account for these differences, along with changes in the size

of the population and subpopulations over time, the survey

estimates of various subpopulation groups are weighted to

agree with independent population controls developed by

the Census Bureau. Because many demographic

characteristics are closely correlated with labor force status,

sample estimates are more accurate when weighting is done

separately for specific age-sex-race groups than when a

single population estimate for the sample as a whole is used.

These population estimates are derived by taking population

counts by age, sex, and race from the preceding decennial

census and adjusting them monthly throughout the ensuing

decade to take into account the aging of the population,

death, and net migration. If the decennial census indicates

that the population controls being used in the CPS are too

high or too low, the controls are adjusted to bring them into

line with the census results. This adjustment usually occurs

3 to 4 years after the census, and, if the adjustment is

substantial, historical data will be revised. Thus, data for

January 2000 through December 2002 were revised to reflect

the higher population estimates from Census 2000 and

higher rates of population growth since the census. At the

start of the revision period (January 2000), the new controls

raised the civilian noninstitutional population (CNP) by

about 2.6 million. By December 2002, the CNP was 3.8

million higher than originally estimated.

2

 The CPS uses a 4-8-4 rotation scheme. Households are in the

sample for 4 months, leave the sample for 8 months, and then return

for another 4 months. Throughout 2003, individuals returning to the

CPS after their household’s 8-month break from interviewing will be

asked the new race and ethnicity questions.
6

The Census Bureau also conducts an annual review of

the population controls and updates them based on current

data and research. The population adjustments resulting

from these annual reviews typically are introduced into the

CPS in January. The adjustments sometimes can be

substantial, and this was the case for January 2003.

Information from the latest annual review was not available

in time for incorporation into the already planned revisions

of data for January 2000 to December 2002. Thus, the entire

amount of this adjustment (+941,000) was added to the

civilian noninstitutional population in January 2003.

In addition to new population controls, changes were

made in the weighting procedures to increase the precision

of national and State estimates. These changes included

altering the racial categories to which estimates are

controlled, increasing the number of age and sex groups

that are controlled, and including, for the first time,

demographic controls within the 50 States and the District

of Columbia. More information about changes in the

weighting and processing procedures can be found below.

Figure 1. Comparison of CPS questions on race and ethnicity 1

Prior to January 2003 Starting in January 2003

What is your race? Are you Spanish, Hispanic, or Latino?

Respondents are shown a flash card with the following: Yes

No

RACE

1. White

2. Black

3. American Indian, Eskimo, or Aleut

4. Asian or Pacific Islander

(Chinese, Filipino, Japanese, Asian Indian, Korean,

Vietnamese, Laotian, Thai, Other Asian, Hawaiian,

Samoan, other Pacific Islander)

What is your origin or descent? 2 Please choose one or more races that you consider yourself to be

Respondents are shown a flash card with the following: Respondents are shown a flash card with the following:

 

ORIGIN OR DESCENT CHOOSE ONE OR MORE

12 Mexican

01 German 14 Puerto Rican White

02 Italian 15 Cuban Black or African American

03 Irish 16 Central or South American American Indian or Alaska Native

04 French (Hispanic Countries) Asian

05 Polish 17 Other Hispanic Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander

06 Russian 20 Afro-American

07 English 26 Dutch

08 Scottish 27 Swedish

10 Mexican-American 28 Hungarian

11 Chicano OR

 30 Another group not listed

1 The question wording is slightly different when the questions are

asked during interviews by telephone.

2

Individuals whose answers were coded in categories 10 through

17 were classified as Hispanics.

Table 1. Civilian noninstitutional population 16 years and

over by race and Hispanic or Latino ethnicity, May 2002 1

(Numbers in thousands)

Race and Hispanic Number Percent or Latino ethnicity

Race

Total, 16 years and over .............................. 217,198 100.0

White 2....................................................... 178,579 82.2

Black or African American 2..................... 25,192 11.6

Asian 2....................................................... 8,663 4.0

Native Hawaiian or Other

Pacific Islander 2..................................... 473 .2

American Indian or Alaska Native 2......... 1,419 .7

More than one race selected ................... 2,872 1.3

Hispanic or Latino ethnicity

Total, 16 years and over .............................. 217,198 100.0

Hispanic or Latino ..................................... 25,827 11.9

Not Hispanic or Latino .............................. 191,371 88.1

1 Estimates based on Census 2000 population controls.

2Persons who selected this race group only; persons who selected more

than one race group are excluded.
7

Impact on labor force estimates

Changes in the race and ethnicity categories, the

introduction of Census 2000-based population controls, and

the modifications of weighting procedures alter some CPS

data series and, therefore, affect the comparability of those

series over time. To gauge the extent to which these changes

did (or did not) affect estimates, the Census Bureau and

BLS sponsored a supplement to the CPS in May 2002. In

the supplement, the new questions on race and Hispanic

ethnicity were asked at the end of the interview. Data were

then processed using the new editing and weighting

procedures and the Census 2000-based population controls.

Employment and unemployment estimates based on the new

race/ethnic categories, weighting procedures, and

population controls were compared with estimates based

on the old race/ethnic criteria, weighting procedures, and

population controls to gauge the “total combined effect” of

the changes implemented in January 2003. (The total

combined effect does not include the population adjustment

of 941,000 taken in January 2003. That adjustment is

discussed separately.)

The “total combined effect” can be disaggregated into

two other effects that can be estimated from the May

supplement—the effect of switching from 1990-based

population controls to 2000-based population controls (the

“population control effect”) and the effect of changing from

pre-2003 race/ethnicity questions and weighting procedures

to 2003 and beyond race/ethnicity questions and weighting

procedures (the “new procedures effect”). CPS time series

data were revised back to January 2000 to reflect the impact

of using 2000-based population controls, but no revisions

will be made to reflect new race/ethnicity questions or the

new weighting procedures. It was decided that the

information from the May supplement, while useful for

gauging the effects of the changes to the race/ethnicity

classification, was too limited for use in revising historical

race and ethnicity data. The May results reflect only 1

month’s data that were collected via supplement questions

to the CPS. It is not known whether different results might

be obtained when the new questions are used over a longer

period in regular CPS production. BLS plans to conduct

additional research on the impact of the new race and

Hispanic ethnicity categories on the labor force estimates.

Specifically, given the rotation scheme for the CPS sample,

there will be several months in which it will be possible to

match the same individuals across months and to examine

their answers to both the old and new race and ethnicity

questions. The results of this research, in combination with

further analysis of the May supplement data, may aid

individuals who examine CPS data historically. The “new

procedures effect” represents the best gauge, at this time, of

differences in employment and unemployment data due to

the new race/ethnicity questions and weighting procedures.

Major findings. Table 2 shows the “total combined effect”

on major labor force estimates for May 2002. Table 3 shows

the “new procedures effect”—that is, the effect when the

change due to the use of Census 2000-based population

controls is removed. As shown in the tables, both the “total

combined effect” and the “new procedures effect” had

minimal impact on the overall rates (unemployment rate,

employment-to-population ratio, and labor force

participation rate.) Generally, differences in rates were not

statistically significant even for the major worker groups.

The most notable exception is for Hispanics. The “total

combined effect” shows a higher unemployment rate,

employment-to-population ratio, and labor force

participation rate for Hispanics. Under the “new procedures

effect,” however, only the change in the unemployment rate

(up by 0.4 percentage point) is statistically significant. The

higher unemployment rate for Hispanics results because the

new question identifies additional and different people as

Hispanic. Even though the new question identifies more

Hispanics than the old question, the size of the Hispanic

population is not affected (when Census 2000-based

population controls are used), because it is controlled to an

independent population estimate. The change in the

composition of those identified as Hispanic, however, is

what causes the higher unemployment rate.

Data in table 3 show that the “new procedures effect”

reduces the levels of population and employment for whites,

blacks or African Americans, and Asians. For whites and

blacks, these differences result from the exclusion of

individuals who report more than one race from these groups.

For Asians, the difference reflects the same restriction as

well as the split of the old Asian and Pacific Islander category

into the two separate categories—1) Asian and 2) Native

Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander. When examining the

“new procedures effect” for Hispanics it is important to note

that the number of individuals identified as Hispanic is being

controlled to the same 2000-based census population totals

under each procedure. Hence, even though the new question

identifies more survey respondents as Hispanic, the estimated

size of the Hispanic population does not change.

Overall, the estimated numbers of people unemployed

and employed are higher under the “total combined effect.”

Most of this change reflects the “population effect”—the

shift to Census 2000-based population controls. (See table

4.3) Census 2000 found that the United States population

was larger than previously estimated. As a result, the new

population controls increase the size of the civilian

noninstitutional population aged 16 and older—the

universe for CPS employment and unemployment

estimates—by about 3.5 million at the time of the May

supplement.4 Hispanics and Asians account for a

disproportionate share of this increase in the population.

The population level for blacks is actually lower than

3 To obtain these estimates, the 2000 decennial racial catego ries

have been bridged back to the four unrevised race groups.

4 As previously stated, the increase is smaller at the starting date of

the revisions, January 2000, and larger by the end of the revision

period in December 2002.
8

Table 2. Employment status of the population for selected labor force groups, May 2002 (Total combined effect)

(Numbers in thousands)

Old New

Total

Employment status, sex, age, race,

estimate 1 estimate 2

combined Statistically

and Hispanic or Latino ethnicity (1) (2) effect significant 3

(2-1)

TOTAL

Civilian noninstitutional population .................................................... 213,658 217,198 3,540 X

Civilian labor force ........................................................................ 142,772 145,005 2,233 X

Participation rate .................................................................... 66.8 66.8 0.0

Employed ................................................................................... 134,798 136,912 2,114 X

Employment-population ratio ................................................. 63.1 63.0 -.1

Unemployed .............................................................................. 7,974 8,093 119 X

Unemployment rate ............................................................... 5.6 5.6 .0

Not in labor force .......................................................................... 70,886 72,193 1,307 X

Men, 20 years and over

Civilian noninstitutional population .................................................... 94,480 96,260 1,780 X

Civilian labor force ........................................................................ 72,449 73,958 1,509 X

Participation rate .................................................................... 76.7 76.8 .1 X

Employed ................................................................................... 68,894 70,337 1,443 X

Employment-population ratio ................................................. 72.9 73.1 .2 X

Unemployed .............................................................................. 3,555 3,621 66 X

Unemployment rate ............................................................... 4.9 4.9 0.0

Not in labor force .......................................................................... 22,031 22,302 271 X

Women, 20 years and over

Civilian noninstitutional population .................................................... 102,939 104,947 2,008 X

Civilian labor force ........................................................................ 62,710 63,658 948 X

Participation rate .................................................................... 60.9 60.7 -.2 X

Employed ................................................................................... 59,543 60,390 847 X

Employment-population ratio ................................................. 57.8 57.5 -.3 X

Unemployed .............................................................................. 3,167 3,268 101 X

Unemployment rate ............................................................... 5.1 5.1 .0 X

Not in labor force .......................................................................... 40,229 41,289 1,060 X

Both sexes, 16 to 19 years

Civilian noninstitutional population ................................................... 16,239 15,992 -247 X

Civilian labor force ........................................................................ 7,613 7,389 -224 X

Participation rate .................................................................... 46.9 46.2 -.7 X

Employed ................................................................................... 6,361 6,185 -176 X

Employment-population ratio ................................................. 39.2 38.7 -.5 X

Unemployed .............................................................................. 1,251 1,204 -47 X

Unemployment rate ............................................................... 16.4 16.3 -.1

Not in labor force .......................................................................... 8,626 8,602 -24

WHITE 4

Civilian noninstitutional population .................................................... 177,087 178,579 1,492 X

Civilian labor force ........................................................................ 118,706 119,520 814 X

Participation rate .................................................................... 67.0 66.9 -.1

Employed .................................................................................... 112,901 113,716 815 X

Employment-population ratio ................................................. 63.8 63.7 -.1

Unemployed .............................................................................. 5,805 5,804 -1

Unemployment rate ............................................................... 4.9 4.9 .0

Not in labor force .......................................................................... 58,382 59,059 677 X

BLACK OR AFRICAN AMERICAN 4

Civilian noninstitutional population .................................................... 25,898 25,192 -706 X

Civilian labor force ........................................................................ 17,019 16,497 -522 X

Participation rate .................................................................... 65.7 65.5 -.2

Employed ................................................................................... 15,312 14,832 -480 X

Employment-population ratio ................................................. 59.1 58.9 -.2

Unemployed .............................................................................. 1,707 1,665 -42

Unemployment rate ............................................................... 10.0 10.1 .1

Not in labor force .......................................................................... 8,879 8,695 -184 X
9

Table 2. Employment status of the population for selected labor force groups, May 2002 (Total combined effect)—

Continued

(Numbers in thousands)

Old New

Total

Employment status, sex, age, race,

estimate 1 estimate 2

combined Statistically

and Hispanic or Latino ethnicity (1) (2) effect significant 3

(2-1)

ASIAN 4

Civilian noninstitutional population .................................................... 8,643 8,663 20

Civilian labor force ........................................................................ 5,761 5,808 47

Participation rate .................................................................... 66.7 67.0 .3

Employed ................................................................................... 5,415 5,486 71

Employment-population ratio ................................................. 62.7 63.3 .6

Unemployed .............................................................................. 346 322 -24

Unemployment rate ............................................................... 6.0 5.5 -.5

Not in labor force .......................................................................... 2,882 2,855 -27

HISPANIC OR LATINO ETHNICITY

Civilian noninstitutional population .................................................... 23,797 25,827 2,030 X

Civilian labor force ........................................................................ 15,976 17,770 1,794 X

Participation rate .................................................................... 67.1 68.8 1.7 X

Employed ................................................................................... 14,948 16,557 1,609 X

Employment-population ratio ................................................. 62.8 64.1 1.3 X

Unemployed .............................................................................. 1,028 1,213 185 X

Unemployment rate ............................................................... 6.4 6.8 .4 X

Not in labor force .......................................................................... 7,821 8,058 237 X

1 Estimates obtained using pre-January 2003 race/ethnic questions and

weighting procedures and 1990 Census-based population controls adjusted

for the estimated undercount.

2 Estimates obtained using new race/ethnic questions and weighting

procedures and Census 2000-based population controls, excluding the January

2003 population adjustment.

3 An "x" indicates that a difference was statistically significant at a 90

percent level. Standard errors for these tests were generated using replicate

weights in order to account for the complex design of the CPS. The standard

errors on differences are smaller than the standard errors on corresponding

monthly estimates and the standard errors for the estimate under either

procedure due to the high correlation between the estimates for each procedure

which arises because the same individuals were being used in both estimates.

4Old estimate based on the pre-January 2003 race question under which

respondents could select only one race. New estimate based on the new

race question that allows respondents to select more than one race. Categories

shown under the new estimate exclude persons who selected more than one

race. For old estimate, the Asian category included Pacific Islanders. For the

new estimate, the Asian category does not include Native Hawaiians and

other Pacific Islanders.

NOTE: Estimates for the above race groups (white, black or African

American, and Asian) do not sum to totals because data are not presented

for all races. In addition, persons whose ethnicity is identifed as Hispanic or

Latino may be of any race and, therefore, are classified by ethnicity as well

as by race.
10

Table 3. Employment status of the population for selected labor force groups, May 2002 (New procedures effect)

(Numbers in thousands)

Old New

New

Employment status, sex, age, race,

estimate 1 estimate 2

procedures Statistically

and Hispanic or Latino ethnicity (1) (2) effect significant 3

(2-1)

TOTAL

Civilian noninstitutional population .................................................... 217,198 217,198 0

Civilian labor force ........................................................................ 145,044 145,005 -39

Participation rate .................................................................... 66.8 66.8 0.0

Employed ................................................................................... 136,991 136,912 -79

Employment-population ratio ................................................. 63.1 63.0 -.1

Unemployed .............................................................................. 8,052 8,093 41

Unemployment rate ............................................................... 5.6 5.6 .0

Not in labor force .......................................................................... 72,154 72,193 39

Men, 20 years and over

Civilian noninstitutional population .................................................... 96,205 96,260 55

Civilian labor force ........................................................................ 73,916 73,958 42

Participation rate .................................................................... 76.8 76.8 .0

Employed ................................................................................... 70,304 70,337 33

Employment-population ratio ................................................. 73.1 73.1 .0

Unemployed .............................................................................. 3,613 3,621 8

Unemployment rate ............................................................... 4.9 4.9 .0

Not in labor force .......................................................................... 22,289 22,302 13

Women, 20 years and over

Civilian noninstitutional population .................................................... 104,980 104,947 -33

Civilian labor force ........................................................................ 63,656 63,658 2

Participation rate .................................................................... 60.6 60.7 -.1

Employed ................................................................................... 60,445 60,390 -55

Employment-population ratio ................................................. 57.6 57.5 -.1

Unemployed .............................................................................. 3,211 3,268 57 X

Unemployment rate ............................................................... 5.0 5.1 .1 X

Not in labor force .......................................................................... 41,324 41,289 -35

Both sexes, 16 to 19 years

Civilian noninstitutional population ................................................... 16,013 15,992 -21

Civilian labor force ........................................................................ 7,471 7,389 -82 X

Participation rate .................................................................... 46.7 46.2 -.5 X

Employed ................................................................................... 6,243 6,185 -58

Employment-population ratio ................................................. 39.0 38.7 -.3

Unemployed .............................................................................. 1,228 1,204 -24

Unemployment rate ............................................................... 16.4 16.3 -.1

Not in labor force .......................................................................... 8,542 8,602 60

WHITE 4

Civilian noninstitutional population .................................................... 179,524 178,579 -945 X

Civilian labor force ........................................................................ 120,251 119,520 -731 X

Participation rate .................................................................... 67.0 66.9 -.1

Employed ................................................................................... 114,400 113,716 -684 X

Employment-population ratio ................................................. 63.7 63.7 .0

Unemployed .............................................................................. 5,851 5,804 -47

Unemployment rate ............................................................... 4.9 4.9 .0

Not in labor force .......................................................................... 59,273 59,059 -214 X

BLACK OR AFRICAN AMERICAN 4

Civilian noninstitutional population .................................................... 25,514 25,192 -322 X

Civilian labor force ........................................................................ 16,740 16,497 -243 X

Participation rate .................................................................... 65.6 65.5 -.1

Employed ................................................................................... 15,066 14,832 -234 X

Employment-population ratio ................................................. 59.0 58.9 -.1

Unemployed .............................................................................. 1,675 1,665 -10

Unemployment rate ............................................................... 10.0 10.1 .1

Not in labor force .......................................................................... 8,773 8,695 -78
11

Table 3. Employment status of the population for selected labor force groups, May 2002 (New procedures effect)—

Continued

(Numbers in thousands)

Old New

New

Employment status, sex, age, race,

estimate 1 estimate 2

procedures Statistically

and Hispanic or Latino ethnicity (1) (2) effect significant 3

(2-1)

ASIAN 4

Civilian noninstitutional population .................................................... 9,779 8,663 -1,116 X

Civilian labor force ........................................................................ 6,531 5,808 -723 X

Participation rate .................................................................... 66.8 67.0 .2

Employed ................................................................................... 6,140 5,486 -654 X

Employment-population ratio ................................................. 62.8 63.3 .5

Unemployed .............................................................................. 391 322 -69 X

Unemployment rate ............................................................... 6.0 5.5 -.5

Not in labor force .......................................................................... 3,248 2,855 -393 X

HISPANIC OR LATINO ETHNICITY

Civilian noninstitutional population .................................................... 25,827 25,827 0

Civilian labor force ........................................................................ 17,700 17,770 70

Participation rate .................................................................... 68.5 68.8 .3

Employed ................................................................................... 16,567 16,557 -10

Employment-population ratio ................................................. 64.1 64.1 .0

Unemployed .............................................................................. 1,133 1,213 80 X

Unemployment rate ............................................................... 6.4 6.8 .4 X

Not in labor force .......................................................................... 8,127 8,057 -70

1 Estimates obtained using pre-January 2003 race/ethnic questions and

weighting procedures and Census 2000-based population controls, excluding

the January 2003 population adjustment.

2Estimates obtained using new race/ethnic questions and weighting

procedures and Census 2000-based population controls, excluding the January

2003 population adjustment.

3 An "x" indicates that a difference was statistically significant at a 90

percent level. Standard errors for these tests were generated using replicate

weights in order to account for the complex design of the CPS. The standard

errors on differences are smaller than the standard errors on corresponding

monthly estimates and the standard errors for the estimate under either

procedure due to the high correlation between the estimates for each procedure

which arises because the same individuals were being used in both estimates.

4 Old estimate based on the pre-January 2003 race question under which

respondents could select only one race. New estimate based on the new race

question that allows respondents to select more than one race. Categories

shown under the new estimate exclude persons who selected more than one

race. For the old estimate, the Asian category included Pacific Islanders. For

the new estimate, the Asian category does not include Native Hawaiians and

other Pacific Islanders.

NOTE: Estimates for the above race groups (white, black or African

American, and Asian) do not sum to totals because data are not presented

for all races. In addition, persons whose ethnicity is identifed as Hispanic or

Latino may be of any race and, therefore, are classified by ethnicity as well

as by race.
12

Table 4. Employment status of the population for selected labor force groups, May 2002 (Population control effect)

(Numbers in thousands)

Old New

Population

Employment status, sex, age, race,

estimate 1 estimate 2

control Statistically

and Hispanic or Latino ethnicity (1) (2) effect significant 3

(2-1)

TOTAL

Civilian noninstitutional population .................................................... 213,658 217,198 3,540 X

Civilian labor force ........................................................................ 142,772 145,044 2,272 X

Participation rate .................................................................... 66.8 66.8 0.0 X

Employed ................................................................................... 134,798 136,991 2,193 X

Employment-population ratio ................................................. 63.1 63.1 .0

Unemployed .............................................................................. 7,974 8,052 78 X

Unemployment rate ............................................................... 5.6 5.6 .0 X

Not in labor force .......................................................................... 70,886 72,154 1,268 X

Men, 20 years and over

Civilian noninstitutional population .................................................... 94,480 96,205 1,725

Civilian labor force ........................................................................ 72,449 73,916 1,467 X

Participation rate .................................................................... 76.7 76.8 .1 X

Employed ................................................................................... 68,894 70,304 1,410 X

Employment-population ratio ................................................. 72.9 73.1 .2 X

Unemployed .............................................................................. 3,555 3,613 58 X

Unemployment rate ............................................................... 4.9 4.9 .0

Not in labor force .......................................................................... 22,031 22,289 258 X

Women, 20 years and over

Civilian noninstitutional population .................................................... 102,939 104,980 2,041 X

Civilian labor force ........................................................................ 62,710 63,656 946 X

Participation rate .................................................................... 60.9 60.6 -.3 X

Employed ................................................................................... 59,543 60,445 902 X

Employment-population ratio ................................................. 57.8 57.6 -.2 X

Unemployed .............................................................................. 3,167 3,211 44 X

Unemployment rate ............................................................... 5.1 5.0 -.1

Not in labor force .......................................................................... 40,229 41,324 1,095 X

Both sexes, 16 to 19 years

Civilian noninstitutional population ................................................... 16,239 16,013 -226 X

Civilian labor force ........................................................................ 7,612 7,471 -141 X

Participation rate .................................................................... 46.9 46.7 -.2 X

Employed ................................................................................... 6,361 6,243 -118 X

Employment-population ratio ................................................. 39.2 39.0 -.2 X

Unemployed .............................................................................. 1,251 1,228 -23 X

Unemployment rate ............................................................... 16.4 16.4 .0

Not in labor force .......................................................................... 8,626 8,542 -84 X

WHITE 4

Civilian noninstitutional population .................................................... 177,087 179,524 2,437 X

Civilian labor force ........................................................................ 118,706 120,251 1,545 X

Participation rate .................................................................... 67.0 67.0 .0 X

Employed ................................................................................... 112,901 114,400 1,499 X

Employment-population ratio ................................................. 63.8 63.7 -.1 X

Unemployed .............................................................................. 5,805 5,851 46 X

Unemployment rate ............................................................... 4.9 4.9 .0 X

Not in labor force .......................................................................... 58,382 59,273 891 X

BLACK OR AFRICAN AMERICAN 4

Civilian noninstitutional population .................................................... 25,898 25,514 -384 X

Civilian labor force ........................................................................ 17,019 16,740 -279 X

Participation rate .................................................................... 65.7 65.6 -.1 X

Employed ................................................................................... 15,312 15,066 -246 X

Employment-population ratio ................................................. 59.1 59.0 -.1 X

Unemployed .............................................................................. 1,707 1,675 -32 X

Unemployment rate ............................................................... 10.0 10.0 .0

Not in labor force .......................................................................... 8,879 8,773 -106 X
13

Table 4. Employment status of the population for selected labor force groups, May 2002 (Population control effect)—

Continued

(Numbers in thousands)

Old New

Population

Employment status, sex, age, race,

estimate 1 estimate 2

control Statistically

and Hispanic or Latino ethnicity (1) (2) effect significant 3

(2-1)

ASIAN 4

Civilian noninstitutional population .................................................... 8,643 9,779 1,136 X

Civilian labor force ........................................................................ 5,761 6,531 770 X

Participation rate .................................................................... 66.7 66.8 .1 X

Employed ................................................................................... 5,415 6,140 725 X

Employment-population ratio ................................................. 62.7 62.8 .1 X

Unemployed .............................................................................. 346 391 45 X

Unemployment rate ............................................................... 6.0 6.0 .0

Not in labor force .......................................................................... 2,882 3,248 366 X

HISPANIC OR LATINO ETHNICITY

Civilian noninstitutional population .................................................... 23,797 25,827 2,030 X

Civilian labor force ........................................................................ 15,976 17,700 1,724 X

Participation rate .................................................................... 67.1 68.5 1.4 X

Employed ................................................................................... 14,948 16,567 1,619 X

Employment-population ratio ................................................. 62.8 64.1 1.3 X

Unemployed .............................................................................. 1,028 1,133 105 X

Unemployment rate ............................................................... 6.4 6.4 .0

Not in labor force .......................................................................... 7,821 8,127 306 X

1 Estimates obtained using pre-January 2003 race/ethnic questions and

weighting procedures and 1990 Census-based population controls adjusted

for the estimated undercount.

2 Estimates obtained using pre-January 2003 race/ethnic questions and

weighting procedures and Census 2000-based population controls, excluding

the January 2003 population adjustment.

3 An "x" indicates that a difference was statistically significant at a 90

percent level. Standard errors for these tests were generated using replicate

weights in order to account for the complex design of the CPS. Since individuals

did not change racial or ethnic classification in these comparisons, quite

small differences can be detected as being statistically significant. In

comparisons, when individuals did change classification due to questionnaire

changes the standard error on differences will be larger. Consequently,

differences due to change in population controls will be significant, when

differences of a similar magnitude for procedural changes will not be significant.

4 Old and new estimates based on the pre-January 2003 race question

under which respondents could select only one race. For both the old and

new estimates, the Asian category includes Pacific Islanders.

NOTE: Estimates for the above race groups (white, black or African

American, and Asian) do not sum to totals because data are not presented

for all races. In addition, persons whose ethnicity is identifed as Hispanic or

Latino may be of any race and, therefore, are classified by ethnicity as well

as by race.
14

previously estimated. The new population controls also

change the age profile of the population. The number of

teenagers is reduced, while the number of persons aged 20

and older is increased.

Because the switch to the Census 2000 population

controls increased the number of employed and unemployed

proportionately, the changes to the CPS resulted in no

statistically significant differences in unemployment rates,

employment-to-population ratios, and labor force

participation rates overall and for most of the major worker

groups.

Among Hispanics there was no statistically significant

change in the unemployment rate due to the new population

controls, but the employment-to-population ratio and the

labor force participation rate rose by 1.3 percentage points

and 1.4 percentage points, respectively. These measures

rose for both adult Hispanic men and women, but the

increases were larger for the men.

As noted above, data for January 2000 to December 2002

were revised to incorporate Census 2000-based population

controls. This would have made the impact of the

“population effect” transparent to users who were comparing

data for January 2003 and beyond with data for January

2000 through December 2002. As part of its annual revision

of intercensal population estimates, however, the Census

Bureau determined that another upward adjustment should

be made to the CPS controls. This adjustment reflects more

current information and research on net migration. It was

not possible prior to the release of data for January 2003 to

include this additional adjustment in the revisions planned

for the 2000 through 2002 period. Therefore, the entire

amount (+941,000) was added to the civilian

noninstitutional population in January 2003. Based on a

comparison of data for December 2002, the increase in

population raised the estimated levels for the labor force

(+615,000), employment (+576,000), and unemployment

(+38,000). However, the overall unemployment rate,

employment-population ratio, and other percentages

generally were not affected. (See table 5.) At this time, there

are no plans to revise the January 2000 to December 2002

data to reflect this additional adjustment.

Changes in weighting

Changes to both the second-stage weighting procedure and

the composite weighting procedure were introduced to

improve the stability over time of national and State/substate

labor force estimates for demographic groups. A major

change in the second-stage procedure is the addition of two

new steps, called 0A and 0B. These steps, which take place

only once at the beginning of the second-stage weighting

process and are not iterated, were added to enhance the

control for differences between the racial and ethnic

composition of the sample and the racial and ethnic

composition of the population, termed “undercoverage.”

Both the second-stage and composite procedures continue

to have three basic steps (State step, ethnicity step, and race

step). In each successive step of the two procedures, the

weights attached to responding persons are adjusted within

State/substate/ethnicity/race/gender/age cells so that, in the

case of second-stage weighting, estimates made from a

monthly CPS data file can exactly match a set of independent

monthly population controls prepared by the Census

Bureau. In the case of composite weighting, there is an

exact match at each step to a set of labor force estimates

obtained from specialized composite estimation formulas

that tend to improve estimates of monthly labor force levels

and month-to-month changes.

New second-stage weighting procedure. The second-stage

weighting procedure substantially reduces the variability

of estimates and corrects, to some extent, for CPS

undercoverage. (Undercoverage exists when the survey

identifies fewer individuals in sampled households than

would be predicted by the decennial census. Some groups,

such as young black males, are particularly difficult to

enumerate in household surveys.) Five sets of civilian

noninstitutional population (CNP) estimates, including

persons under 16 years of age, are used in different steps of

the procedure. The race terms “white,” “black,” and “Asian”

in this abbreviated presentation of the five steps include

only single-race persons.

National coverage step (0A): National CNP controls for 34

white non-Hispanic, 26 black non-Hispanic, 18 Asian nonHispanic, 18 residual race non-Hispanic, 26 white Hispanic,

and 4 non-white Hispanic age-gender categories.

State coverage step (0B): CNP controls for six nonblack

age-gender cells in the Los Angeles–Long Beach

metropolitan area, the balance of California, New York City,

the balance of New York State, each of the remaining 48

States, and the District of Columbia. CNP controls for six

black age-gender cells in the Los Angeles–Long Beach

metropolitan area, the balance of California, New York City,

the balance of New York State, the District of Columbia, and

each of 21 States (Alabama, Arkansas, Connecticut, Delaware,

Florida, Georgia, Illinois, Louisiana, Massachusetts,

Maryland, Michigan, Missouri, Mississippi, North Carolina,

New Jersey, Ohio, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, Tennessee,

Texas, and Virginia); two CNP controls by gender in each of

14 States (Alaska, Arizona, Colorado, Indiana, Kansas,

Kentucky, Minnesota, Nebraska, Nevada, Oklahoma, Rhode

Island, Washington, Wisconsin, and West Virginia); and one

CNP control in each of the remaining 13 States (Hawaii,

Iowa, Idaho, Maine, Montana, North Dakota, New

Hampshire, New Mexico, Oregon, South Dakota, Utah,

Vermont, and Wyoming).

(1) State step: CNP controls for 6 age-gender cells in

the Los Angeles– Long Beach metropolitan area, the balance
15

Table 5. Employment status of the population for selected labor force groups, December 2002

(2003 population adjustment effect)

(Numbers in thousands)

Census 2000 Census 2000 Effect of

population population population

Employment status, sex, age, race, controls controls adjustment

and Hispanic or Latino ethnicity without with introduced in

adjustment 1 adjustment 2 January 2003

(1) (2) (2-1)

TOTAL

Civilian noninstitutional population ............................................................................... 218,741 219,682 941

Civilian labor force ................................................................................................... 145,361 145,975 614

Participation rate ............................................................................................... 66.5 66.4 -0.1

Employed .............................................................................................................. 137,159 137,735 576

Employment-population ratio ............................................................................ 62.7 62.7 .0

Unemployed ......................................................................................................... 8,202 8,240 38

Unemployment rate .......................................................................................... 5.6 5.6 .0

Not in labor force ..................................................................................................... 73,381 73,707 326

Men, 20 years and over

Civilian noninstitutional population ............................................................................... 97,122 97,574 452

Civilian labor force ................................................................................................... 73,693 74,033 340

Participation rate ............................................................................................... 75.9 75.9 .0

Employed .............................................................................................................. 69,516 69,836 320

Employment-population ratio ............................................................................ 71.6 71.6 .0

Unemployed ......................................................................................................... 4,177 4,197 20

Unemployment rate .......................................................................................... 5.7 5.7 .0

Not in labor force ..................................................................................................... 23,429 23,541 112

Women, 20 years and over

Civilian noninstitutional population ............................................................................... 105,683 106,144 461

Civilian labor force ................................................................................................... 64,528 64,801 273

Participation rate ............................................................................................... 61.1 61.1 .0

Employed .............................................................................................................. 61,556 61,810 254

Employment-population ratio ............................................................................ 58.2 58.2 .0

Unemployed ......................................................................................................... 2,973 2,991 18

Unemployment rate .......................................................................................... 4.6 4.6 .0

Not in labor force ..................................................................................................... 41,155 41,343 188

Both sexes, 16 to 19 years

Civilian noninstitutional population .............................................................................. 15,937 15,965 28

Civilian labor force ................................................................................................... 7,139 7,141 2

Participation rate ............................................................................................... 44.8 44.7 -.1

Employed .............................................................................................................. 6,088 6,089 1

Employment-population ratio ............................................................................ 38.2 38.1 -.1

Unemployed ......................................................................................................... 1,052 1,052 0

Unemployment rate .......................................................................................... 14.7 14.7 .0

Not in labor force ..................................................................................................... 8,798 8,824 26

WHITE

Civilian noninstitutional population ............................................................................... 180,580 181,286 706

Civilian labor force ................................................................................................... 120,160 120,620 460

Participation rate ............................................................................................... 66.5 66.5 .0

Employed .............................................................................................................. 114,300 114,730 430

Employment-population ratio ............................................................................ 63.3 63.3 .0

Unemployed ......................................................................................................... 5,860 5,890 30

Unemployment rate .......................................................................................... 4.9 4.9 .0

Not in labor force ..................................................................................................... 60,420 60,666 246
16

Table 5. Employment status of the population for selected labor force groups, December 2002

(2003 population adjustment effect)—Continued

(Numbers in thousands)

Census 2000 Census 2000 Effect of

population population population

Employment status, sex, age, race, controls controls adjustment

and Hispanic or Latino ethnicity without with introduced in

adjustment 1 adjustment 2 January 2003

(1) (2) (2-1)

BLACK OR AFRICAN AMERICAN

Civilian noninstitutional population ............................................................................... 25,784 25,784 0

Civilian labor force ................................................................................................... 16,805 16,801 -4

Participation rate ............................................................................................... 65.2 65.2 .0

Employed .............................................................................................................. 15,011 15,009 -2

Employment-population ratio ............................................................................ 58.2 58.2 0.0

Unemployed ......................................................................................................... 1,795 1,791 -4

Unemployment rate .......................................................................................... 10.7 10.7 .0

Not in labor force ..................................................................................................... 8,979 8,984 5

HISPANIC OR LATINO ETHNICITY

Civilian noninstitutional population ............................................................................... 26,436 26,897 460

Civilian labor force ................................................................................................... 18,258 18,616 358

Participation rate ............................................................................................... 69.1 69.2 .1

Employed .............................................................................................................. 16,840 17,172 332

Employment-population ratio ............................................................................ 63.7 63.8 .1

Unemployed ......................................................................................................... 1,418 1,444 26

Unemployment rate .......................................................................................... 7.8 7.8 .0

Not in labor force ..................................................................................................... 8,178 8,281 103

1 Estimates obtained using pre-January 2003 race/ethnic questions and

weighting procedures and Census 2000-based population controls, excluding

the January 2003 population adjustment.

2 Estimates obtained using pre-January 2003 race/ethnic questions and

weighting procedures and Census 2000-based population controls, plus the

January 2003 population adjustment.

NOTE: Estimates for the above race groups (white and black or African

American) do not sum to totals because data are not presented for all races.

In addition, persons whose ethnicity is identified as Hispanic or Latino may

be of any race and, therefore, are classified by ethnicity as well as by race.
17

of California, New York City, the balance of New York State,

each of the remaining 48 States, and the District of Columbia.

(2) Ethnicity step: National CNP controls for 26

Hispanic and 26 non-Hispanic age-gender cells.

(3) Race step: National CNP controls for 34 white, 26

black, and 26 Asian-plus-residual-race age-gender cells.

All second-stage cells in steps 0A, 1, 2, and 3 are further

divided by rotation group pair. Except for those relating to

the District of Columbia, all nonblack cells in step 0B are

further divided by rotation group pair. The black cells in

step 0B are not further divided by rotation group pair. In

any given month, the CPS sample is divided into eight

panels or rotation groups. One panel is in sample for the

first time, one for the second time, and so forth. Each rotation

group is referred to according to its month-in-sample (MIS),

so that the first rotation group is designated as MIS 1, the

second as MIS 2, and the eighth as MIS 8. The rotation

group pairings based on MIS are: (1,5); (2,6); (3,7); and

(4,8). For cells divided by rotation group pair, person weights

for each pair are adjusted so that the sum of weights equals

one-fourth of the associated population control.

The national coverage step and the State coverage step

(steps 0A and 0B) are executed just once. Steps 1, 2, and 3

are successively iterated ten times. After each step, the CPS

weights add up to exactly match a set of population controls

for the step, but the steps that follow “undo” the exact

matching. By iterating steps 1 through 3 ten times, the

system converges and all controls for the three steps are

nearly exactly matched.

The independent population controls are prepared by

projecting forward the resident population as enumerated

on April 1, 2000. The projections are derived by updating

demographic census data with information from a variety of

other data sources that account for births, deaths, and net

migration. Estimated numbers of resident Armed Forces

personnel and institutionalized persons reduce the resident

population to the civilian noninstitutional population.

Changes in second-stage weighting. The old second-stage

weighting procedure further divided all cells by rotation

group. The new procedure pairs rotation groups in most

cells (and combines all rotation groups in others). Pairing

rotation groups allows finer cell detail. Because of known

biases by month-in-sample and the structure of the

composite estimator (used after second-stage weighting), it

is usually not advisable to go farther than pairing the rotation

groups.

Steps 1 through 3 are similar to the corresponding steps

of the old second-stage weighting procedure. The old

procedure had no 0A or 0B steps and iterated steps 1 through

3 six times. The new procedure increases the number of

iterations of steps 1 through 3 to ten, which ensures a better

convergence to population controls.

State step 1 is expanded to include the following substate

areas: Los Angeles–Long Beach metropolitan area, the

balance of California, New York City, and the balance of

New York State. Step 1 now has six gender-by-age controls

for each State/area (age groupings 1 to under 16 years, 16 to

44 years, and 45 years and older). The old procedure had a

single population control for the CNP aged 16 years and

older for each State and the District of Columbia.

Ethnicity step 2 has increased gender and age detail. The

26-cell detail for Hispanics now matches the cell detail for

blacks in the race step. The old step had only five population

controls for non-Hispanic but other “implied controls” could

be derived by subtraction. The new step uses the same 26-

cell detail for non-Hispanics, and this eliminates implied

controls and speeds convergence to population controls.

New race step 3 and the old step differ somewhat in white

and black cell detail. The 26-cell detail for Asian-plusresidual-race is markedly different from the 10-cell detail

for “other” race in the old step. In addition, all age groupings

for this step are now consistent with those for the other steps

in the second-step weighting procedure as well as with those

for the new composite weighting procedure.

As discussed earlier, the national and State coverage

steps—designated 0A and 0B, respectively—are entirely

new. One of the chief purposes of second-stage weighting is

to adjust for undercoverage of the CPS relative to the

projected population controls. The undercoverage is known

to vary by State, ethnicity, race, gender, and age. For example,

CPS undercoverage is more severe for young black persons

than for middle-aged blacks or young white persons.

Analysis of the old second-stage procedure showed that there

were interactions between coverage by ethnicity and race

that were not properly handled by the separate ethnicity

and race steps. The new 0A step overcomes the problem by

combining ethnicity and race in a single dimension (white

non-Hispanic, black non-Hispanic, Asian non-Hispanic,

residual race non-Hispanic, white Hispanic, and non-white

Hispanic). The new 0B step compensates for some remaining

coverage differences by race.

The only step in second-stage weighting that has explicit

Asian population controls is the new national coverage step

0B (26 gender-by-age cells for Asian non-Hispanic). The

step cannot be iterated, but still affords a substantial amount

of approximate population control for Asians.

New composite weighting procedure. Composite estimation

is applied only to categories of persons 16 years of age and

older. Based on second-stage weights, composite estimators

are made up of employment and unemployment within cells

defined by geography or demographic group. No change

has been made to the formula for composite estimation. Each

cell has a population control, and the number of persons not

in the labor force (NILF) for the cell is obtained by

subtraction. The composite estimates of employed,

unemployed, and NILF are then used as controls in the
18

composite weighting procedure. All eight rotation groups

are combined for composite weighting.

(1) State step: A single cell for CNP aged 16 years and

older is used for the Los Angeles–Long Beach metropolitan

area, the balance of California, New York City, the balance

of New York State, each of the remaining 48 States, and the

District of Columbia.

(2) Ethnicity step: 10 Hispanic and 10 non-Hispanic

age-gender cells.

(3) Race step: 22 white, 14 black, and 10 Asian-plusresidual-race age-gender cells.

Steps 1 through 3 are iterated ten times. In each successive

step, weights attached to responding persons (all rotation

groups combined, but split into employed, unemployed, and

NILF) are adjusted within cells to exactly match the controls

for employment, unemployment, and NILF. After each step,

the CPS weights add up to exactly match a set of controls for

the step, but the steps that follow “undo” the exact matching.

By iterating steps 1 through 3 ten times, the system converges

and all controls for the three steps are nearly exactly matched.

Changes in composite weighting. State step 1 is expanded

to include the following substate areas: Los Angeles–Long

Beach metropolitan area, the balance of California, New

York City, and the balance of New York State.

Ethnicity step 2 has increased gender and age detail. The

10-cell detail for Hispanics is only slightly finer than the

old 8-cell detail. The old step, however, had only a single

cell for non-Hispanics, whereas the new step uses the same

10-cell detail for both groups.

Race step 3 differs somewhat in cell detail from the old

step. An analysis of the old procedure showed that there

were too many defined white and black cells that had too

few unemployed responses. These cells were automatically

collapsed, with results differing from month to month. The

new step “precollapses” these cells, so that there are fewer

defined black and white cells. The old procedure’s four

cells for “other” race is increased to 10 cells for Asian-plusresidual race. This is the same 10-cell detail used in the

ethnicity step. In general, all age groupings for the

composite weighting steps are now consistent with each

other and with the second-stage weighting steps.

Conversion to the 2002 occupational and industry

classification systems

In January 2003, the CPS adopted the 2002 Census Bureau

occupational and industry classification systems, which are

derived from the 2000 Standard Occupational Classification

(SOC) system and the 2002 North American Industry

Classification System (NAICS). CPS questions asked to

obtain the occupational and industry information were not

modified in any form; the information gathered was simply

classified according to the new standards and definitions.

The composition of specific, or detailed, industry and

occupational classifications in the new industry and

occupational classification systems has been substantially

changed, as has the structure for aggregating them into broad

groups. Thus, use of the new classification systems creates

breaks in existing data series at all levels of aggregation.

For 2000-02, employment estimates using the new

classification systems were derived by coding previously

collected information. Some of these estimates will be

available on the BLS Web site. A decision was made to link

the new series for agriculture and nonagriculture to the

existing series despite a significant change in the

composition of agriculture because these categories are

fundamental to labor force analysis.

The following discussion focuses on the classification

differences at the major occupational and industry group

level. Further research planned for 2003 will examine

differences for detailed occupations and industries. The

major occupational and industry categories, displayed by

their 2002 and 1990 classification schemes, are presented

in table 6.

Major occupational classification differences. The

Standard Occupational Classification (SOC) is the Federal

Government’s standard for classifying occupational data for

statistical purposes. Occupational information presented in

the “A” tables of this publication is classified by the census

occupational classification system, an adaptation of the SOC

designed to meet the specific needs of classifying household

data. The 2002 Census Bureau occupational classification

system is based on the SOC first issued by the U.S. Office of

Management and Budget in August 1998 and published in

its final form in October 2000. The 1990 Census Bureau

occupational classification previously in use was based on

the 1980 SOC.

The major occupational groups of the new SOC and the

derivative 2002 Census Bureau occupational classification

place more emphasis on the type of work performed and less

emphasis on skill or education level. For example, legal

support workers such as paralegals and legal assistants now

are grouped with lawyers and judges within the major group

called “professional and related occupations”; previously,

the support workers were classified in a different broad group.

The move away from skill-based groupings is perhaps the

most notable distinction between the 1990 and 2002 major

occupational groups. A summary of some specific differences

between the 1990 and 2002 major occupational groups used

for the household survey data is provided below. 5

Management, business, and financial operations occupations. Although the overall scope of this group did not

5 For further information on the SOC revision that led to the changes

in the census occupational classification, see “Revising the Standard

Occupational Classification System,” Report 929 (Bureau of Labor

Statistics, June 1999), on the Internet at http://www.bls.gov/soc/

socrpt929.pdf.
19

change significantly, historical comparability has been

disrupted by the reclassification of some specific

occupations. In particular, farmers and ranchers and farm,

ranch, and other agricultural managers currently are

classified in this group; in the 1990 classification, these

occupations were included in the farming, forestry, and

fishing group.

Professional and related occupations. There is little

comparability between this group and the professional

specialty group from the previous occupational

classification system, even though the titles are quite similar.

The scope of this occupational group has been expanded

significantly to include many of the occupations that were

previously categorized as technicians and related support

in the 1990 classification.

Service occupations. Although the title remains unchanged

from the 1990 classification, the scope of the occupational

group has been significantly expanded under the new

classification. This was partly due to the reclassification of

grounds maintenance workers to this group; groundskeepers

and gardeners previously were classified as farming, forestry,

and fishing occupations.

Sales and related occupations. This group is relatively

comparable with the sales occupations group in the 1990

classification. The scope of the group has been slightly

reduced, primarily due to the reclassification of some

occupations to the service occupations group.

Office and administrative support occupations. This group

is fairly comparable with the administrative support,

including clerical, group from the 1990 classification,

although the scope has been somewhat expanded.

Farming, fishing, and forestry occupations. This is another

case in which the group title is little changed, but the scope

of the group has been greatly reduced. This is primarily

because of the aforementioned reclassifications of grounds

maintenance workers; farmers and ranchers; and farm, ranch,

and agricultural managers to other major groupings.

Construction and extraction occupations. This is a new

occupational grouping in the 2002 classification; there was

no directly comparable group in the 1990 classification.

The new group represents a realignment of various

occupations that were previously categorized in separate

groups, primarily the precision production, craft, and repair

group and the handlers, equipment cleaners, helpers, and

laborers category.

Installation, maintenance, and repair occupations. This is

another new occupational grouping that did not exist in the

1990 classification. This group combines selected occupations that, for the most part, were classified in the former

precision production, craft, and repair group.

Production occupations. This new occupational group

merges selected occupations that were previously included

in the precision production, craft, and repair and operators,

fabricators, and laborers groups.

Transportation and material moving occupations.

Previously, this group was a component of the larger

operators, fabricators, and laborers grouping. In the 2002

classification, the scope of the group has changed

significantly. In particular, some transportation occupations

that were previously categorized as technicians and

related support in the 1990 classification are now part of

this group.

Major industry classification differences. The North

American Industry Classification System (NAICS) is the

product of collaboration among Federal statistical agencies

from Mexico, Canada, and the United States to provide a

consistent framework for the collection, analysis, and

dissemination of industrial statistics. The 2002 NAICS has

been revised from the original 1997 version issued in the

United States by the Office of Management and Budget.

The 2002 Census Bureau industry classification used in the

CPS is an adaptation of the 2002 NAICS. The 1990 Census

Bureau industry classification previously used was based

on the 1987 Standard Industrial Classification (SIC). The

hierarchical structure of the 2002 NAICS and the derivative

2002 Census Bureau industry classification was developed

in accordance with a single principle of aggregation, the

principle that producing units that use similar production

processes should be grouped together. This concept

provides a framework for grouping industries that share the

same production function.6 For example, goods-producing

activities such as growing crops, raising animals, harvesting

timber, and harvesting fish and other animals from farms,

ranches, or the animals’ natural habitats are grouped together

under agriculture, forestry, fishing, and hunting. Under the

1990 classification, service-providing activities such as

landscaping services and veterinary services were grouped

with agriculture; under the 2002 Census Bureau

classification, these services now are distributed among

professional and business services. A summary of some

specific differences between the 1990 and 2002 major

industry groups used in the household survey data (A tables)

is provided below. 7

6 U.S. Office of Management and Budget, North American Industry

Classification System, United States, 1997 (Springfield, VA, National

Technical Information Service, 1997), p. 13.

7 For more information on underlying NAICS concepts, visit the

Census Bureau’s NAICS Web page at http://www.census.gov/epcd

www/naics.html. Information on the revisions made to NAICS in

2002 can be found at http://www.census.gov/epcd/naics02/.
20

Agriculture, forestry, fishing, and hunting. Prior to

implementation of the 2002 Census industry classification,

forestry, fishing, hunting, and trapping were presented with

the services group; now these industries are included with

agriculture. Logging has been reclassified from the

manufacturing sector to this group also. Despite these

additions, the overall scope of this sector has been

significantly reduced because veterinary services and

landscaping services have been moved largely into the new

professional and business services sector. In household data

tabulations, the title “agriculture and related industries” will

be used interchangeably with the full title “agriculture,

forestry, fishing, and hunting.”

Mining. This sector is still relatively comparable with the

mining division in the 1990 classification. Some mining

support activities, such as surveying and mapping, were

moved to professional and technical services, however, the

scope of the sector under the 2002 Census Bureau

classification was little changed.

Construction. The scope of the construction sector has

expanded slightly, due partly to the reclassification of some

activities that were previously part of the former services

(construction management services) and finance, insurance,

and real estate divisions (land subdividers and developers).

Manufacturing. The manufacturing sector is not directly

comparable with the 1990 classification. The scope has been

reduced in part by the reclassification of logging to the

agriculture, forestry, fishing, and hunting sector. In addition,

newspaper, book, and other print media publishing was

reclassified to the new information sector. Some research

and development activities previously classified in

manufacturing are now part of professional and technical

services.

Wholesale and retail trade. The scope of the wholesale

trade and retail trade industries was reduced in the 2002

classification. Within wholesale trade, various sales activities

across many categories were redefined as retail in nature

and moved to that sector. Within retail trade, food services

and drinking places have been reclassified from retail to

become part of the new leisure and hospitality group.

Transportation and utilities. This sector is not comparable

with its counterpart in the 1990 classification primarily

because communications were previously included; that

industry now is part of the new information sector. The

scope of this group has been further reduced with the

reclassification of waste collection activities and travel

agencies from transportation to the management,

administrative, and waste services component of professional

and business services. Within utilities, solid waste treatment

and disposal, landfills, and remediation services have

likewise been reclassified under the 2002 system.

Information. This new sector was created to combine

activities that: 1) produce and distribute information and

cultural products, 2) provide the means to transmit these

products, as well as general communications, and 3) process

data and information.8 It groups component industries that

were classified in several different divisions in the 1990

classification, including publishing, broadcasting,

telecommunications, motion picture and sound recording,

and other information services.

Financial activities. The finance and insurance component

of this sector is little changed from the 1990 classification.

However, rental and leasing services, much of which was

formerly classified in the services division, is now grouped

here with real estate. These components include vehicle,

appliance, and video rental, as well as commercial equipment

and machinery rental and leasing. Overall, the scope of the

new financial activities industry has expanded.

Professional and business services. This is a new industry

grouping composed of two distinct subcategories. The

professional and technical services component combines

various professional, scientific, and technical services, many

of which previously were classified in the former services

division. It includes legal, accounting, architectural, and

engineering services as well as computer systems design,

scientific research, advertising, and veterinary services. The

management, administrative, and waste services component

combines business activities related to the management of

companies and enterprises, such as holding companies and

corporate offices, with administrative, support, and waste

management and remediation services. Included in this latter

group are temporary help and employee leasing services, travel

agencies, security services, janitorial and landscaping services,

and waste collection, disposal, and remediation services.

Education and health services. This new industry group

includes industries previously classified in the health

services and educational services categories of the 1990

services division classification. Social services also are part

of this group.

Leisure and hospitality. This is another new industry group

that comprises two fairly substantial categories. The arts,

entertainment, and recreation component includes

performing arts, spectator sports, museums, and recreational

activities, including gambling. Accommodation and food

services includes traveler accommodation and food services

and drinking places; eating and drinking establishments

previously were classified in retail trade.

Other services. This is a new miscellaneous concept that

captures private households, repair services, and personal

services.

8 U.S. Office of Management and Budget, North American Industry

Classification System, United States, 1997, p. 495.
21

Public administration. Public administration remains quite

similar in scope to its counterpart in the 1990 classification.

The extent of changes to the 2002 Census Bureau

occupational and industry classifications is further realized

when employment estimates are compared, based on dualcoded responses, for the major occupational and industry

groups. (See table 7.) As previously stated, there is little

comparability and, thus, a lack of continuity, between the

2002 and 1990 classifications. Hence, any comparisons

with historical data series are not possible without major

adjustments. Table 7 shows the relative size of employment

for each of the occupational and industry groups under the

different classifications. It also displays the distribution of

employment across the groups. The difficulty in trying to

compare the distinctly different occupational and industry

classifications is quite evident. The 2002 Census Bureau

occupational and industry classification systems, however,

do provide enhanced comparability between the CPS and

other data sources. More importantly, they better reflect the

current industry and occupational structure of the economy.

Annual average employment and unemployment estimates

based on the new classification schemes will be available

later in 2003 for years 2000 forward based on dual-coded

survey responses. The estimates also will incorporate the Census

2000-based population controls. Research is currently

underway at BLS to help data users bridge the gap created by

the breaks in occupational and industry series. Although

conversion factors will provide some linkage between the old

and new classifications, there undoubtedly will be some

limitations to their uses.

Seasonally adjusted occupational and industry estimates

at the broad level will not be available from the household

survey until sufficient data have been collected to allow for

seasonal adjustment of selected series. In the interim, only

employment and unemployment for occupations and

industries generated on a not seasonally adjusted basis will

be available.

Changes in data presentation

The changes to the Current Population Survey described

above have had an impact on the presentation of data in the

household survey “A tables” section of this publication

beginning with this issue. The principal changes are the

introduction of data for Asians and the addition of more

detailed data for persons of Hispanic or Latino ethnicity to

many of the existing tables (tables A-13, A-15 to A-18, A-20,

A-26, A-28, A-35, and A-38) and the introduction of industry

and occupational data classified under the new industry

and occupational classification systems (tables A-19 to

A-21, A-25, A-27, A-29, A-30, and A-36). (Table numbers

refer to the new table numbers used beginning with this

issue. See below for additional information on table number

changes.)

In addition, one table, “A-11. Unemployment rates by

occupation, industry, and selected demographic

characteristics, seasonally adjusted,” has been discontinued

because seasonally adjusted occupational and industry data

are no longer available. Data on unemployment rates by

marital status, formerly shown in this table, now appear in

table A-10. Also, two new tables have been added: “A-14.

Employment status of the Hispanic or Latino population by

age and sex” and “A-32. Unemployed persons by reason for

unemployment, race, and Hispanic or Latino ethnicity.” The

deletion and addition of tables resulted in a few changes in

the table numbers of the existing tables. Specifically, old

tables A-12 to A-14 have now been renumbered as tables A11 to A-13 and old tables A-32 to A-37 have now been

renumbered as tables A-33 to A-38.
22

Management, professional, and related occupations

Management, business, and financial operations

occupations

Professional and related occupations

Service occupations

Sales and office occupations

Sales and related occupations

Office and administrative support occupations

Natural resources, construction, and maintenance

occupations

Farming, fishing, and forestry occupations

Construction and extraction occupations

Installation, maintenance, and repair occupations

Production, transportation, and material moving occupations

Production occupations

Transportation and material moving occupations

Agriculture, forestry, fishing, and hunting

Mining

Construction

Manufacturing

Wholesale and retail trade

Transportation and utilities

Information

Financial activities

Professional and business services

Education and health services

Leisure and hospitality

Other services

Public administration

Table 6. Occupational and industry groupings based on the 2002 and 1990 census classification systems

2002 Occupational groups 1990 Occupational groups

Managerial and professional specialty

Excecutive, administrative, and managerial

Professional specialty

Technical, sales, and administrative support

Technicians and related support

Sales occupations

Administrative support, including clerical

Service occupations

Precision production, craft, and repair

Operators, fabricators, and laborers

Machine operators, assemblers, and inspectors

Transportation and material moving occupations

Handlers, equipment cleaners, helpers, and laborers

Farming, forestry, and fishing

2002 Industry groups 1990 Industry groups

Agriculture

Mining

Construction

Manufacturing

Transportation and public utilities

Wholesale and retail trade

Finance, insurance, and real estate

Services

Public administration
23

Total ...................................................... 136,485 100.0

Executive, administrative, and

managerial .......................................... 20,561 15.1

Professional specialty .......................... 21,921 16.1

Technicians and related support ......... 4,509 3.3

Sales occupations ................................ 16,254 11.9

Administrative support, including

clerical ................................................ 18,184 13.3

Service occupations ............................ 19,219 14.1

Precision production, craft,

and repair ........................................... 14,660 10.7

Operators, fabricators, and laborers .. 17,697 13.0

Farming, forestry, and fishing .............. 3,480 2.5

Total ...................................................... 136,485 100.0

Agriculture ............................................ 3,340 2.4

Mining ................................................... 516 .4

Construction ......................................... 9,669 7.1

Manufacturing ....................................... 18,147 13.3

Transportation and public utilities ........ 9,680 7.1

Wholesale and retail trade ................... 28,096 20.6

Finance, insurance, and real estate .... 9,125 6.7

Services ............................................... 51,727 37.9

Public administration ............................ 6,184 4.5

Total ........................................................ 136,485 100.0

Management, business, and financial

operations occupations ........................ 19,823 14.5

Professional and related occupations ... 27,358 20.0

Service occupations .............................. 21,766 15.9

Sales and related occupations .............. 15,828 11.6

Office and administrative support

occupations .......................................... 19,580 14.3

Farming, fishing, and forestry

occupations .......................................... 1,040 .8

Construction and extraction

occupations .......................................... 7,898 5.8

Installation, maintenance, and repair

occupations .......................................... 4,623 3.4

Production occupations ......................... 10,081 7.4

Transportation and material moving

occupations .......................................... 8,488 6.2

Total ........................................................ 136,485 100.0

Agriculture, forestry, fishing,

and hunting ........................................... 2,311 1.7

Mining ..................................................... 502 .4

Construction ........................................... 9,981 7.3

Manufacturing ......................................... 17,233 12.6

Wholesale and retail trade ..................... 19,807 14.5

Transportation and utilities ..................... 7,244 5.3

Information .............................................. 3,690 2.7

Financial activities .................................. 9,565 7.0

Professional and business services ..... 14,015 10.3

Education and health services .............. 27,624 20.2

Leisure and hospitality ........................... 11,541 8.5

Other services ....................................... 6,665 4.9

Public administration .............................. 6,307 4.6

Table 7. Number and distribution of employed persons based on the 2002 and 1990 occupational and industry

classification systems, 2002 annual averages

(Numbers in thousands)

Major occupational group, Number Percent Major occupational group,

2002 system 1990 system

Major industry group, Number Percent Major industry group,

2002 system 1990 system Number Percent

Number Percent