Attachment F - Technical Note on the CPS

Attachment F

Household Data
(‘‘A” tables, monthly; “D” tables, quarterly)

COLLECTION AND COVERAGE

Each employed person is counted only once, even if he or
she holds more than one job. For purposes of occupation and
industry classification, multiple jobholders are counted in
the job at which they worked the greatest number of hours
during the reference week.
Included in the total are employed citizens of foreign countries who are temporarily in the United States but not living
on the premises of an embassy. Excluded are persons whose
only activity consisted of work around their own house (painting, repairing, or own home housework) or volunteer work
for religious, charitable, and other organizations.

Statistics on the employment status of the population and
related data are compiled by BLS using data from the Current Population Survey (CPS). This monthly survey of households is conducted for BLS by the U.S. Census Bureau
through a scientifically selected sample designed to represent the civilian noninstitutional population. Respondents
are interviewed to obtain information about the employment
status of each member of the household 16 years of age and
older. The inquiry relates to activity or status during the
calendar week, Sunday through Saturday, that includes the
12th day of the month. This is known as the “reference week.”
Actual field interviewing is conducted in the following week,
referred to as the “survey week.”
Each month, about 60,000 occupied units are eligible for
interview. Some 4,500 of these households are contacted but
interviews are not obtained because the occupants are not at
home after repeated calls or are unavailable for other reasons. This represents a noninterview rate for the survey that
ranges between 7 and 8 percent. In addition to the 60,000
occupied units, there are about 12,000 sample units in an
average month that are visited but found to be vacant or
otherwise not eligible for enumeration. Part of the sample is
changed each month. The rotation plan, as will be
explained later, provides for three-fourths of the sample to
be common from one month to the next, and one-half to be
common with the same month a year earlier.

Unemployed persons. All persons who had no employment
during the reference week, were available for work, except
for temporary illness, and had made specific efforts to find
employment sometime during the 4-week period ending with
the reference week. Persons who were waiting to be recalled
to a job from which they had been laid off need not have
been looking for work to be classified as unemployed.
Duration of unemployment. This represents the length of
time (through the current reference week) that persons classified as unemployed had been looking for work. For persons on layoff, duration of unemployment represents the
number of full weeks they had been on layoff. Mean duration is the arithmetic average computed from single weeks
of unemployment; median duration is the midpoint of a
distribution of weeks of unemployment.
Reason for unemployment. Unemployment also is categorized according to the status of individuals at the time they
began to look for work. The reasons for unemployment are
divided into five major groups: (1) Job losers, comprising
(a) persons on temporary layoff, who have been given a date
to return to work or who expect to return within 6 months
(persons on layoff need not be looking for work to qualify as
unemployed), and (b) permanent job losers, whose employment ended involuntarily and who began looking for work;
(2) Job leavers, persons who quit or otherwise terminated
their employment voluntarily and immediately began looking for work; (3) Persons who completed temporary jobs,
who began looking for work after the jobs ended; (4) Reentrants, persons who previously worked but who were out of
the labor force prior to beginning their job search; and (5)
New entrants, persons who had never worked. Each of these
five categories of the unemployed can be expressed as a
proportion of the entire civilian labor force; the sum of the
four rates thus equals the unemployment rate for all civilian
workers. (For statistical presentation purposes, “job losers”
and “persons who completed temporary jobs” are combined
into a single category until seasonal adjustments can be developed for the separate categories.)

CONCEPTS AND DEFINITIONS
The concepts and definitions underlying labor force data
have been modified, but not substantially altered, since the
inception of the survey in 1940; those in use as of January
1994 are as follows:
Civilian noninstitutional population. Included are persons
16 years of age and older residing in the 50 States and the
District of Columbia who are not inmates of institutions (for
example, penal and mental facilities, homes for the aged),
and who are not on active duty in the Armed Forces.
Employed persons. All persons who, during the reference
week, (a) did any work at all (at least 1 hour) as paid employees, worked in their own business, profession, or on their own
farm, or worked 15 hours or more as unpaid workers in an
enterprise operated by a member of the family, and (b) all those
who were not working but who had jobs or businesses from
which they were temporarily absent because of vacation, illness, bad weather, childcare problems, maternity or paternity
leave, labor-management dispute, job training, or other family or personal reasons, whether or not they were paid for the
time off or were seeking other jobs.
177

Jobseekers. All unemployed persons who made specific
efforts to find a job sometime during the 4-week period preceding the survey week are classified as jobseekers. Jobseekers do not include persons classified as on temporary
layoff, who, although often looking for work, are not
required to do so to be classified as unemployed. Jobseekers
are grouped by the methods used to seek work. Only active
methods—which have the potential to result in a job offer
without further action on the part of the jobseeker—qualify
as job search. Examples include going to an employer
directly or to a public or private employment agency, seeking assistance from friends or relatives, placing or answering
ads, or using some other active method. Examples of the
“other” category include being on a union or professional
register, obtaining assistance from a community
organization, or waiting at a designated labor pickup point.
Passive methods, which do not qualify as job search, include
reading (as opposed to answering or placing) “help wanted”
ads and taking a job training course.

which are derived from the 2000 Standard Occupational
Classification (SOC) and the 2002 North American Industry
Classification System (NAICS). (See the following section
on historical comparability for a discussion of previous
classification systems used in the CPS.)
The class-of-worker breakdown assigns workers to the
following categories: Private and government wage and
salary workers, self-employed workers, and unpaid family
workers. Wage and salary workers receive wages, salary,
commissions, tips, or pay in kind from a private employer or
from a government unit. Self-employed persons are those
who work for profit or fees in their own business, profession,
trade, or farm. Only the unincorporated self-employed are
included in the self-employed category in the classof-worker typology. Self-employed persons who respond
that their businesses are incorporated are included among
wage and salary workers because, technically, they are
paid employees of a corporation. Unpaid family workers
are persons working without pay for 15 hours a week
or more on a farm or in a business operated by a member
of the household to whom they are related by birth or
marriage.

Labor force. This group comprises all persons classified as
employed or unemployed in accordance with the criteria
described above.

Multiple jobholders. These are employed persons who, during the reference week, either had two or more jobs as a wage
and salary worker, were self-employed and also held a wage
and salary job, or worked as an unpaid family worker and
also held a wage and salary job. Excluded are self-employed
persons with multiple businesses and persons with multiple
jobs as unpaid family workers.

Unemployment rate. The unemployment rate represents the
number unemployed as a percent of the labor force.
Participation rate. This represents the proportion of the population that is in the labor force.
Employment-population ratio. This represents the proportion of the population that is employed.

Hours of work. These statistics relate to the actual number of
hours worked during the reference week. For example, persons who normally work 40 hours a week but were off on the
Columbus Day holiday would be reported as working 32
hours, even though they were paid for the holiday. For persons working in more than one job, the published figures
relate to the number of hours worked in all jobs during the
week; all the hours are credited to the major job. Unpublished data are available for the hours worked in each job
and for usual hours.

Not in the labor force. Included in this group are all persons
in the civilian noninstitutional population who are neither
employed nor unemployed. Information is collected on their
desire for and availability to take a job at the time of the CPS
interview, job search activity in the prior year, and reason for
not looking in the 4-week period prior to the survey week.
This group includes discouraged workers, defined as persons not in the labor force who want and are available for a
job and who have looked for work sometime in the past 12
months (or since the end of their last job if they held one
within the past 12 months), but who are not currently looking because they believe there are no jobs available or there
are none for which they would qualify.
Persons classified as not in the labor force who are in
the sample for either their fourth or eighth month are
asked additional questions relating to job history and
workseeking intentions. These latter data are available on a
quarterly basis.

At work part time for economic reasons. Sometimes referred to as involuntary part time, this category refers to individuals who gave an economic reason for working 1 to 34
hours during the reference week. Economic reasons include
slack work or unfavorable business conditions, inability to
find full-time work, and seasonal declines in demand. Those
who usually work part time must also indicate that they want
and are available for full-time work to be classified as on part
time for economic reasons.

Occupation, industry, and class of worker. This information
for the employed applies to the job held in the reference
week. Persons with two or more jobs are classified in the job
at which they worked the greatest number of hours. The
unemployed are classified according to their last job.
Beginning in 2003, the occupational and industrial
classification of CPS data is based on the 2002 Census
Bureau occupational and industrial classification systems

At work part time for noneconomic reasons. This group includes those persons who usually work part time and were at
work 1 to 34 hours during the reference week for a noneconomic reason. Noneconomic reasons include, for example:
Illness or other medical limitations, childcare problems or
other family or personal obligations, school or training, retirement or Social Security limits on earnings, and being in a
178

job where full-time work is less than 35 hours. The group
also includes those who gave an economic reason for
usually working 1 to 34 hours but said they do not want
to work full time or are unavailable for such work.

Usual weekly earnings. Data represent earnings before taxes
and other deductions, and include any overtime pay, commissions, or tips usually received (at the main job, in the case
of multiple jobholders). Earnings reported on a basis other
than weekly (for example, annual, monthly, hourly) are converted to weekly. The term “usual” is as perceived by the
respondent. If the respondent asks for a definition of usual,
interviewers are instructed to define the term as more than
half the weeks worked during the past 4 or 5 months. Data
refer to wage and salary workers (excluding all self-employed
persons regardless of whether their businesses were incorporated) who usually work full time on their sole or primary job.

Usual full- or part-time status. Data on persons “at work”
exclude persons who were temporarily absent from a job and
therefore classified in the zero-hours-worked category, “with
a job but not at work.” These are persons who were absent
from their jobs for the entire week for such reasons as bad
weather, vacation, illness, or involvement in a labor dispute.
In order to differentiate a person’s normal schedule from his
or her activity during the reference week, persons also are
classified according to their usual full- or part-time status. In
this context, full-time workers are those who usually worked
35 hours or more (at all jobs combined). This group will
include some individuals who worked less than 35 hours in
the reference week for either economic or noneconomic reasons and those who are temporarily absent from work. Similarly, part-time workers are those who usually work less than
35 hours per week (at all jobs), regardless of the number of
hours worked in the reference week. This may include some
individuals who actually worked more than 34 hours in the
reference week, as well as those who are temporarily absent
from work. The full-time labor force includes all employed
persons who usually work full time and unemployed persons who are either looking for full-time work or are on layoff from full-time jobs. The part-time labor force consists of
employed persons who usually work part time and unemployed persons who are seeking or are on layoff from parttime jobs. Unemployment rates for full- and part-time workers are calculated using the concepts of the full- and parttime labor force.

Median earnings. These figures indicate the value that
divides the earnings distribution into two equal parts, one
part having values above the median and the other having
values below the median. The medians shown in this publication are calculated by linear interpolation of the $50 centered interval within which each median falls. Data expressed
in constant dollars are deflated by the Consumer Price
Index for All Urban Consumers (CPI-U).
Never married; married, spouse present; and other marital
status. These are the terms used to define the marital status of
individuals at the time of interview. Married, spouse present,
applies to husband and wife if both were living in the same
household, even though one may be temporarily absent on
business, on vacation, on a visit, in a hospital, etc. Other marital
status applies to persons who are married, spouse absent; widowed; or divorced. Married, spouse absent relates to persons
who are separated due to marital problems, as well as to husbands and wives who are living apart because one or the other
was employed elsewhere or was on duty with the Armed Forces,
or for any other reasons.

White, black or African American, and Asian. These are
terms used to describe the race of persons. Persons in these
categories are those who selected that race group only.
Persons in the remaining race categories—American Indian
or Alaska Native, Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islanders,
and persons who selected more than one race category—are
included in the estimates of total employment and
unemployment but are not shown separately because the
number of survey respondents is too small to develop
estimates of sufficient quality for monthly publication. In
the enumeration process, race is determined by the
household respondent. (See the following section on
historical comparability for a discussion of changes
beginning in 2003 that affected how people are classified
by race.)

Household. A household consists of all persons—related family members and all unrelated persons—who occupy a housing unit and have no other usual address. A house, an apartment, a group of rooms, or a single room is regarded as a
housing unit when occupied or intended for occupancy as
separate living quarters. A householder is the person (or one
of the persons) in whose name the housing unit is owned or
rented. The term is never applied to either husbands or wives
in married-couple families but relates only to persons in
families maintained by either men or women without a spouse.
Family. A family is defined as a group of two or more persons
residing together who are related by birth, marriage, or adoption; all such persons are considered as members of one family. Families are classified either as married-couple families
or as families maintained by women or men without spouses.
A family maintained by a woman or a man is one in which the
householder is either single, widowed, divorced, or married,
spouse absent.

Hispanic or Latino ethnicity. This refers to persons who
identified themselves in the enumeration process as being
Spanish, Hispanic, or Latino. Persons whose ethnicity is
identified as Hispanic or Latino may be of any race. (See
the following section on historical comparability for a
discussion of changes beginning in 2003 that affected how
people are classified by Hispanic or Latino ethnicity.)

HISTORICAL COMPARABILITY
Changes in concepts and methods
While current survey concepts and methods are very similar
179

c) Persons “with a job but not at work” because of strikes,
bad weather, etc., who volunteered that they were looking
for work were shifted from unemployed status to employed.

to those introduced at the inception of the survey in 1940, a
number of changes have been made over the years to
improve the accuracy and usefulness of the data. Some of
the most important changes include:

d) The lower age limit for official statistics on employment, unemployment, and other labor force concepts was
raised from 14 to 16 years. Historical data for most major
series have been revised to provide consistent information
based on the new minimum age limit.

• In 1945, the questionnaire was radically changed with
the introduction of four basic employment questions. Prior
to that time, the survey did not contain specific question
wording, but, rather, relied on a complicated scheme of
activity prioritization.

e) New questions were added to obtain additional information on persons not in the labor force, including those
referred to as “discouraged workers,” defined as persons who
indicate that they want a job but are not currently looking
because they believe there are no jobs available or none for
which they would qualify.

• In 1953, the current 4-8-4 rotation system was adopted,
whereby households are interviewed for 4 consecutive
months, leave the sample for 8 months, and then return to the
sample for the same 4 months of the following year. Before
this system was introduced, households were interviewed
for 6 consecutive months and then replaced. The new system
provided some year-to-year overlap in the sample, thereby
improving measurement over time.

f) New “probing” questions were added to the questionnaire in order to increase the reliability of information on
hours of work, duration of unemployment, and self-employment.

• In 1955, the survey reference week was changed to the
calendar week including the 12th day of the month, for greater
consistency with the reference period used for other labor-related statistics. Previously, the calendar week containing the
8th day of the month had been used as the reference week.

• In 1994, major changes to the Current Population Survey (CPS) were introduced, which included a complete redesign of the questionnaire and the use of computer-assisted
interviewing for the entire survey. In addition, there were
revisions to some of the labor force concepts and definitions, including the implementation of some changes recommended in 1979 by the National Commission on Employment and Unemployment Statistics (NCEUS, also
known as the Levitan Commission). Some of the major
changes to the survey were:

• In 1957, the employment definition was modified slightly
as a result of a comprehensive interagency review of labor
force concepts and methods. Two relatively small groups of
persons classified as employed, under “with a job but not at
work,” were assigned to different classifications. Persons on
layoff with definite instructions to return to work within 30
days of the layoff date, and persons volunteering that they
were waiting to start a new wage and salary job within 30 days
of interview, were, for the most part, reassigned to the unemployed classification. The only exception was the small subgroup in school during the reference week but waiting to start
new jobs, which was transferred to not in the labor force.

a) The introduction of a redesigned and automated questionnaire. The CPS questionnaire was totally redesigned in
order to obtain more accurate, comprehensive, and relevant
information, and to take advantage of state-of-the-art computer interviewing techniques.
b) The addition of two, more objective, criteria to the
definition of discouraged workers. Prior to 1994, to be classified as a discouraged worker, a person must have wanted a
job and been reported as not currently looking because of a
belief that no jobs were available or that there were none for
which he or she would qualify. Beginning in 1994, persons
classified as discouraged must also have looked for a job
within the past year (or since their last job, if they worked
during the year), and must have been available for work
during the reference week (a direct question on availability
was added in 1994; prior to 1994, availability had been
inferred from responses to other questions). These changes
were made because the NCEUS and others felt that the previous definition of discouraged workers was too subjective,
relying mainly on an individual’s stated desire for a job and
not on prior testing of the labor market.

• In 1967, more substantive changes were made as a result of the recommendations of the President’s Committee
to Appraise Employment and Unemployment Statistics (the
Gordon Committee). The principal improvements were as
follows:
a) A 4-week job search period and specific questions on
jobseeking activity were introduced. Previously, the questionnaire was ambiguous as to the period for jobseeking,
and there were no specific questions concerning job search
methods.
b) An availability test was introduced whereby a person
must be currently available for work in order to be classified
as unemployed. Previously, there was no such requirement.
This revision to the concept mainly affected students, who,
for example, may begin to look for summer jobs in the spring
although they will not be available until June or July. Such
persons, until 1967, had been classified as unemployed but
since have been assigned to the “not in the labor force”
category.

c) Similarly, the identification of persons employed part
time for economic reasons (working less than 35 hours in the
reference week because of poor business conditions or because of an inability to find full-time work) was tightened
180

• In March 1973, a subsequent population adjustment based
on the 1970 census was introduced. This adjustment, which
affected the white and black-and-other groups but had little
effect on totals, resulted in the reduction of nearly 300,000
in the white population and an increase of the same magnitude
in the black-and-other population. Civilian labor force and
total employment figures were affected to a lesser degree; the
white labor force was reduced by 150,000, and the blackand-other labor force rose by about 210,000. Unemployment
levels and rates were not significantly affected.

by adding two new criteria for persons who usually work
part time: They must want and be available for full-time
work. Previously, such information was inferred. (Persons
who usually work full time but worked part time for an economic reason during the reference week are assumed to meet
these criteria.)
d) Specific questions were added about the expectation of
recall for persons who indicate that they are on layoff. To be
classified as “on temporary layoff,” persons must expect to be
recalled to their jobs. Previously, the questionnaire did not
include explicit questions about the expectation of recall.

• Beginning in January 1974, the method used to prepare independent estimates of the civilian noninstitutional
population was modified to an “inflation-deflation” approach. This change in the derivation of the estimates had
its greatest impact on estimates of 20- to 24-year-old men—
particularly those in the black-and-other population—but
had little effect on estimates of the total population 16 years
and over. Additional information on the adjustment procedure appears in “CPS Population Controls Derived from Inflation-Deflation Method of Estimation,” in the February
1974 issue of this publication.

e) Persons volunteering that they were waiting to start a
new job within 30 days must have looked for work in the 4
weeks prior to the survey in order to be classified as unemployed. Previously, such persons did not have to meet the
job search requirement in order to be included among the
unemployed.
For additional information on changes in CPS concepts
and methods, see “The Current Population Survey: Design
and Methodology,” Technical Paper 63RV (Washington, U.S.
Census Bureau and Bureau of Labor Statistics, March 2002),
available on the Internet at www.bls.census.gov/cps/tp/
tp63.htm; “Overhauling the Current Population Survey—
Why is it Necessary to Change?,” “Redesigning the Questionnaire,” and “Evaluating Changes in the Estimates,”
Monthly Labor Review, September 1993; and “Revisions in
the Current Population Survey Effective January 1994,” in
the February 1994 issue of this publication.

• Effective in July 1975, as a result of the large inflow of
Vietnamese refugees to the United States, the total and blackand-other independent population controls for persons 16
years and over were adjusted upward by 76,000—30,000
men and 46,000 women. The addition of the refugees increased the black-and-other population by less than 1 percent in any age-sex group, with all of the changes being
confined to the “other” component of the population.

Noncomparability of labor force levels
In addition to the refinements in concepts, definitions, and
methods made over the years, other changes also have affected the comparability of the labor force data.

• Beginning in January 1978, the introduction of an
expansion in the sample and revisions in the estimation
procedures resulted in an increase of about 250,000 in the
civilian labor force and employment totals; unemployment
levels and rates were essentially unchanged. An explanation
of the procedural changes and an indication of the differences
appear in “Revisions in the Current Population Survey in
January 1978” in the February 1978 issue of this publication.

• Beginning in 1953, as a result of introducing data from
the 1950 census into the estimating procedures, population levels were raised by about 600,000; labor force,
total employment, and agricultural employment were
increased by about 350,000, primarily affecting the figures for
totals and for men; other categories were relatively
unaffected.

• Beginning in 1962, the introduction of data from the
1960 census reduced the population by about 50,000 and
labor force and employment by about 200,000; unemployment totals were virtually unchanged.

• Beginning in October 1978, the race of the individual
was determined by the household respondent for the
incoming rotation group households, rather than by the
interviewer as before. The purpose of this change was to
provide more accurate estimates of characteristics by race.
Thus, in October 1978, one-eighth of the sample households
had race determined by the household respondent and seveneighths of the sample households had race determined by
interviewer observation. It was not until January 1980 that
the entire sample had race determined by the household
respondent. The new procedure had no significant effect on
the estimates.

• Beginning in 1972, information from the 1970 census
was introduced into the estimation procedures, increasing
the population by about 800,000; labor force and employment totals were raised by a little more than 300,000;
unemployment levels and rates were essentially unchanged.

• Beginning in January 1979, the first-stage ratio adjustment method was changed in the CPS estimation procedure.
Differences between the old and new procedures existed only
for metropolitan and nonmetropolitan area estimates, not
for the total United States. The reasoning behind the change

• Beginning in 1960, the inclusion of Alaska and Hawaii
resulted in increases of about 500,000 in the population
and about 300,000 in the labor force. Four-fifths of the
labor force increase was in nonagricultural employment;
other labor force categories were not appreciably affected.

181

and an indication of the differences appear in “Revisions in
the Current Population Survey in January 1979” in the February 1979 issue of this publication.

and Hispanic employment was increased by 270,000. Overall
and subgroup unemployment levels and rates were not significantly affected. Because of the magnitude of the adjustments
for Hispanics, data were revised back to January 1980 to the
extent possible. An explanation of the changes and an indication of their effect on estimates of labor force characteristics
appear in “Changes in the Estimation Procedure in the Current
Population Survey Beginning in January 1986” in the February 1986 issue of this publication.

• Beginning in January 1982, the second-stage ratio adjustment method was changed. The rationale for the change
and an indication of its effect on national estimates of labor
force characteristics appear in “Revisions in the Current Population Survey Beginning in January 1982” in the February
1982 issue of this publication. In addition, current population estimates used in the second-stage estimation procedure were derived from information obtained from the 1980
census, rather than the 1970 census. This change caused
substantial increases in the total population and in the estimates of persons in all labor force categories. Rates for labor
force characteristics, however, remained virtually unchanged.
Some 30,000 labor force series were adjusted back to 1970
to avoid major breaks in series. The adjustment procedure
used also is described in the February 1982
article cited above. The revisions did not, however, smooth
out the breaks in series occurring between 1972 and 1979
(described above), and data users should consider them when
comparing estimates from different periods.

• Beginning in August 1989, the second-stage ratio estimation procedures were changed slightly to decrease the
chance of very small cells occurring and to be more consistent with published age, sex, race cells. This change had
virtually no effect on national estimates.
• Beginning in January 1994, 1990 census-based population controls, adjusted for the estimated undercount, were
introduced into the second-stage estimation procedure. This
change resulted in substantial increases in total population
and in all major labor force categories. Effective February
1996, these controls were introduced into the estimates for
1990-93. Under the new population controls, the civilian
noninstitutional population for 1990 increased by about 1.1
million, employment by about 880,000, and unemployment
by approximately 175,000. The overall unemployment rate
rose by about 0.1 percentage point. For further information,
see “Revisions in the Current Population Survey Effective
January 1994,” and “Revisions in Household Survey Data
Effective February 1996” in the February 1994 and March
1996 issues, respectively, of this publication.
Additionally, for the period January through May 1994,
the composite estimation procedure was suspended for technical and logistical reasons.

• Beginning in January 1983, the first-stage ratio adjustment method was updated to incorporate data from the 1980
census. The rationale for the change and an indication of its
effect on national estimates for labor force characteristics
appear in “Revisions in the Current Population Survey
Beginning in January 1983” in the February 1983 issue of
this publication. There were only slight differences between
the old and new procedures in estimates of levels for the
various labor force characteristics and virtually no differences in estimates of participation rates.
• Beginning in January 1985, most of the steps of the
CPS estimation procedure—the noninterview adjustment,
the first- and second-stage ratio adjustments, and the composite estimator—were revised. These procedures are described in the Estimating Methods section. A description of
the changes and an indication of their effect on national
estimates of labor force characteristics appear in “Changes
in the Estimation Procedure in the Current Population Survey Beginning in January 1985” in the February 1985 issue
of this publication. Overall, the revisions had only a slight
effect on most estimates. The greatest impact was on estimates of persons of Hispanic origin. Major estimates were
revised back to January 1980.

• Beginning in January 1997, the population controls
used in the second-stage ratio adjustment method were revised to reflect updated information on the demographic characteristics of immigrants to, and emigrants from, the United
States. As a result, the civilian noninstitutional population
16 years and over was raised by about 470,000. The labor
force and employment levels were increased by about
320,000 and 290,000, respectively. The Hispanic-origin
population and labor force estimates were raised by about
450,000 and 250,000, respectively, and Hispanic employment was increased by 325,000. Overall and subgroup unemployment rates and other percentages of labor market participation were not affected. An explanation of the changes
and an indication of their effect on national labor force estimates appear in “Revisions in the Current Population Survey Effective January 1997” in the February 1997 issue of
this publication.

• Beginning in January 1986, the population controls used
in the second-stage ratio adjustment method were revised to
reflect an explicit estimate of the number of undocumented
immigrants (largely Hispanic) since 1980 and an improved
estimate of the number of emigrants among legal foreign-born
residents for the same period. As a result, the total civilian
population and labor force estimates were raised by nearly
400,000; civilian employment was increased by about
350,000. The Hispanic-origin population and labor force estimates were raised by about 425,000 and 305,000, respectively,

• Beginning in January 1998, new composite estimation
procedures and minor revisions in the population controls
were introduced into the household survey. The new composite estimation procedures simplify processing of the
monthly labor force data at BLS, allow users of the survey
182

microdata to more easily replicate the official estimates
released by BLS, and increase the reliability of the employment and labor force estimates. The new procedures also produce somewhat lower estimates of the civilian labor force
and employment and slightly higher estimates of unemployment. For example, based on 1997 annual average data, the
differences resulting from the use of old and new composite
weights were as follows: Civilian labor force (-229,000), total
employed (-256,000), and total unemployed (+27,000).
Unemployment rates were not significantly affected.
Also beginning in January 1998, the population controls
used in the survey were revised to reflect new estimates of legal
immigration to the United States and a change in the method
for projecting the emigration of foreign-born legal residents.
As a result, the Hispanic-origin population was raised by about
57,000; however, the total civilian noninstitutional population 16 years and over was essentially unchanged. More detailed information on these changes and their effect on the
estimates of labor force change and composition appear in
“Revisions in the Current Population Survey Effective January 1998,” in the February 1998 issue of this publication.

2002, the civilian population and labor force were 3.8 and
2.5 million, respectively, higher than originally estimated.
In addition to these revisions, the U.S. Census Bureau
introduced another large upward adjustment to the
population controls as part of its annual update of population estimates for 2003. The entire amount of this adjustment was added to the labor force data in January 2003
resulting in increases of 941,000 to the civilian
noninstitutional population and 614,000 to the civilian
labor force. The unemployment rate and other ratios were
not substantially affected by either of these population
control adjustments.
b) The modification of the questions on race and Hispanic
origin to comply with new standards for maintaining,
collecting, and presenting Federal data on race and ethnicity
for Federal statistical agencies. In accordance with the new
standards, the following changes were made to the CPS
questions: 1) Individuals were now asked whether they are
of Hispanic ethnicity before being asked about their race.
Prior to 2003, individuals were asked their ethnic origin
after they were asked about their race. 2) Individuals were
now asked directly if they are Spanish, Hispanic, or Latino.
Previously, individuals were identified as Hispanic based
on their, or their ancestors’, country of origin. 3) With respect
to race, the response category of Asian and Pacific Islanders
was split into two categories: a) Asian and b) Native Hawaiian
or Other Pacific Islanders. 4) Individuals were allowed to
choose more than one race category. Prior to 2003,
individuals who considered themselves to belong to more
than one race were required to select a single primary race.
5) 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. These changes had no impact
on the overall civilian noninstitutional population and
civilian labor force but did reduce the population and labor
force levels of whites, blacks or African Americans, and
Asians beginning in January 2003. For whites and blacks,
the differences resulted from the exclusion of individuals
who reported more than one race from those groups. For
Asians, the difference resulted from the same restriction as
well as the split of the old Asian and Pacific Islander category
into two separate categories. Analysis of data from a special
CPS supplement conducted in May 2002 indicated that these
changes reduced the population and labor force levels for
whites by about 950,000 and 730,000, respectively, and for
blacks and African Americans by about 320,000 and 240,000,
respectively, while having little or no impact on their
unemployment rates. For Asians, the changes had the effect
of reducing the their population by about 1.1 million and
their labor force by about 720,000, but did not have a
statistically significant effect on their unemployment rate.
The changes did not affect the size of the Hispanic or Latino
population and had no significant impact on the size of
their labor force, but did cause an increase of about half a
percentage point in their unemployment rate.

• Beginning in January 1999, the population controls used
in the survey were revised to reflect newly updated information
on immigration. As a result, the civilian noninstitutional
population 16 years and over was raised by about 310,000.
The impact of the changes varied for different
demographic groups. The civilian noninstitutional population
for men 16 years and over was lowered by about 185,000, while
that for women was increased by about 490,000. The Hispanicorigin population was lowered by about 165,000 while that of
persons of non-Hispanic origin was raised by about 470,000.
Overall labor force and employment levels were increased by
about 60,000 each, while the Hispanic labor force and
employment estimates were reduced by about 225,000 and
215,000, respectively. The changes had only a small impact on
overall and subgroup unemployment rates and other
percentages of labor market participation. An explanation of
the changes and an indication of their effect on national labor
force estimates appear in “Revisions in the Current Population
Survey Effective January 1999” in the February 1999 issue of
this publication.
• Beginning in January 2003, several major changes were
introduced into the CPS. These changes included:
a) Population controls that reflected the results of Census
2000 were introduced into the monthly CPS estimation
process. These new population controls substantially
increased the size of the civilian noninstitutional population
and the civilian labor force. Data from January 2000 through
December 2002 were revised to reflect the higher population
estimates from Census 2000 and the 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 and the civilian labor
force by 2.6 and 1.6 million, respectively. By December
183

c) Improvements were introduced to both the secondstage and composite weighting procedures. These changes
adapted the weighting procedures to the new race/ethnic
classification system and enhanced the stability over time
of national and State/substate labor force estimates for
demographic groups.
More detailed information on these changes and an
indication of their effect on national labor force estimates
appear in “Revisions to the Current Population Survey
Effective in January 2003” in the February 2003 issue of
this publication available on the Internet at
www.bls.gov/cps/rvcps03.pdf.

no effect on overall and subgroup unemployment rates and
measures of labor market participation such as the labor force
participation rate and the employment-population ratio. More
detailed information on the effect of the updated controls on
national labor estimates appears in “Adjustments to
Household Survey Population Estimates in January 2006” in
the February 2006 issue of this publication available on the
Internet at www.bls.gov/cps/cps06adj.pdf.
Changes in the occupational and industrial
classification systems
Beginning in 1971, the comparability of occupational
employment data was affected as a result of changes in the
occupational classification system for the 1970 census that
were introduced into the CPS. Comparability was further
affected in December 1971, when a question relating to
major activity or duties was added to the monthly CPS questionnaire in order to more precisely determine the occupational
classification of individuals. As a result of these changes, meaningful comparisons of occupational employment levels could
not be made between 1971-72 and prior years nor between
those 2 years. Unemployment rates were not significantly
affected. For a further explanation of the changes in the occupational classification system, see“Revisions in Occupational
Classifications for 1971” and “Revisions in the Current Population Survey” in the February 1971 and February 1972 issues,
respectively, of this publication.
Beginning in January 1983, the occupational and industrial
classification systems used in the 1980 census were introduced
into the CPS. The 1980 census occupational classification
system evolved from the Standard Occupational Classification
(SOC) system and was so radically different in concepts and
nomenclature from the 1970 system that comparisons of
historical data are not possible without major adjustments. For
example, the 1980 major group “sales occupations” is
substantially larger than the 1970 category “sales workers.”
Major additions include “cashiers” from “clerical workers” and
some self-employed proprietors in retail trade establishments
from “managers and administrators, except farm.”
The industrial classification system used in the 1980 census was based on the 1972 Standard Industrial Classification
(SIC) system, as modified in 1977. The adoption of the new
system had much less of an adverse effect on historical comparability than did the new occupational system. The most
notable changes from the 1970 system were the transfer of
farm equipment stores from “retail” to “wholesale” trade and
of postal service from “public administration” to “transportation,” and some interchange between “professional and
related services” and “public administration.” Additional information on the 1980 census occupational and industrial
classification systems appears in “Revisions in the Current
Population Survey Beginning in January 1983” in the February 1983 issue of this publication.
Beginning in January 1992, the occupational and industrial classification systems used in the 1990 census were introduced into the CPS. (These systems were based largely on the

• Beginning in January 2004, the population controls
used in the survey were updated to reflect revised estimates
of net international migration for 2000 through 2003. The
updated controls resulted in a decrease of 560,000 in the
estimated size of the civilian noninstitutional population
16 years of age and over for December 2003. The civilian
labor force and employment levels decreased by 437,000
and 409,000, respectively. The Hispanic or Latino population and labor force estimates declined by 583,000 and
446,000, respectively and Hispanic or Latino employment
was lowered by 421,000. The updated controls had little or
no effect on overall and subgroup unemployment rates and
measures of labor market participation. More detailed
information on the effect of the updated controls on
national labor force estimates appears in “Adjustments to
Household Survey Population Estimates in January 2004”
in the February 2004 issue of this publication available on
the Internet at www.bls.gov/cps/cps04adj.pdf.
• Beginning in January 2005, the population controls used
in the survey were adjusted to reflect revised estimates of
net international migration and updated vital statistics
information. The updated controls resulted in a decrease of
8,000 in the estimated size of the civilian noninstitutional
population 16 years of age and over for December 2004. The
civilian labor force and employment levels decreased by
49,000 and 45,000, respectively. The updated controls had
no effect on overall and subgroup unemployment rates and
measures of labor market participation such as the labor force
participation rate and the employment-population ratio. More
detailed information on the effect of the updated controls on
national labor estimates appears in “Adjustments to
Household Survey Population Estimates in January 2005” in
the February 2005 issue of this publication available on the
Internet at www.bls.gov/cps/cps05adj.pdf.
• Beginning in January 2006, the population controls used
in the survey were adjusted to reflect revised estimates of
net international migration and updated vital statistics
information. The updated controls resulted in a decrease of
67,000 in the estimated size of the civilian noninstitutional
population 16 years of age and over for December 2005. The
civilian labor force and employment levels decreased by
130,000 and 123,000, respectively. The updated controls had
184

1980 Standard Occupational Classification (SOC) and 1987
Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) systems, respectively.)
There were a few breaks in comparability between the 1980
and 1990 census-based systems, particularly within the “technical, sales, and administrative support” categories. The most
notable changes in industry classification were the shift of
several industries from “business services” to “professional
services” and the splitting of some industries into smaller, more
detailed categories. A number of industry titles were changed
as well, with no change in content.
Beginning in January 2003, the 2002 Census Bureau
occupational and industrial classification systems were
introduced into the CPS. These systems were derived from
the 2000 Standard Occupational Classification (SOC) and
the 2002 North American Industry Classification System
(NAICS). The composition of detailed occupational and industrial classifications in the new classification systems was
substantially changed from the previous systems in use as
was the structure for aggregating them into broad groups.
Consequently, the use of the new classification systems
created breaks in existing data series at all levels of
aggregation. Additional information on the 2002 Census
Bureau occupational and industrial classification systems
appears in “Revisions to the Current Population Survey
Effective in January 2003” in the February 2003 issue
of this publication available on the Internet at
www.bls.gov/cps/rvcps03.pdf.

information. A sample reduction of about 4,000 households
was implemented in April 1988; the households were reinstated during the 8-month period, April-November 1989. A
redesigned CPS sample based on the 1990 decennial census
was selected for use during the 1990s. Households from this
new sample were phased into the CPS between April 1994
and July 1995. The July 1995 sample was the first monthly
sample based entirely on the 1990 census. For further information on the 1990 sample redesign, see “Redesign of the
Sample for the Current Population Survey” in the May 1994
issue of this publication.
In 1996, the original sample design reliability criteria
were modified to reduce costs. In July 2001, the CPS sample
was expanded to support the State Children’s Health Insurance Program. A redesigned CPS sample based on Census
2000, the 2000 decennial census, was selected for use during the 2000s. Households from the new sample were phased
into the CPS from April 2004 to July 2005. The July 2005
sample was the first monthly sample based entirely on Census 2000. For further information on the 2000 sample redesign, see “Redesign of the Sample for the Current Population Survey” in the December 2004 issue of this publication.
The current criteria, given below, are based on the coefficient of variation (CV) of the unemployment level, where
the CV is defined as the standard error of the estimate divided by the estimate, expressed as a percentage. These CV
controls assume a 6-percent unemployment rate to establish
a consistent specification of sampling error.
The current sample design includes about 72,000 “assigned” housing units from 824 sample areas. Sufficient
sample is allocated to maintain, at most, a 1.9-percent CV
on national monthly estimates of unemployment level, assuming a 6-percent unemployment rate. This translates into
a change of 0.2 percentage point in the unemployment rate
being significant at a 90-percent confidence level. For each
of the 50 States and for the District of Columbia, the design
maintains a CV of at most 8 percent on the annual average
estimate of unemployment level, assuming a 6-percent unemployment rate. About 60,000 housing units are required
in order to meet the national and State reliability criteria.
Due to the national reliability criterion, estimates for several large States are substantially more reliable than the
State design criterion requires. Annual average unemployment estimates for California, Florida, New York, and Texas,
for example, carry a CV of less than 4 percent. In support of
the State Children’s Health Insurance Program, about 12,000
additional housing units are allocated to the District of Columbia and 26 States. (These are generally the States with
the smallest samples after the 60,000 housing units are allocated to satisfy the national and State reliability criteria.)
In the first stage of sampling, the 824 sample areas are
chosen. In the second stage, ultimate sampling units are
selected. Each month, about 72,000 housing units are assigned for data collection, of which about 60,000 are occupied and thus eligible for interview. The remainder are units

Sampling
Since the inception of the survey, there have been various
changes in the design of the CPS sample. The sample traditionally is redesigned and a new sample selected after each
decennial census. Also, the number of sample areas and the
number of sample persons are changed occasionally. Most
of these changes are made to improve the efficiency of the
sample design, increase the reliability of the sample estimates, or control cost.
Changes in this regard since 1960 are as follows: When
Alaska and Hawaii received statehood in 1959 and 1960,
respectively, three sample areas were added to the existing
sample to account for the population of these States. In January 1978, a supplemental sample of 9,000 housing units,
selected in 24 States and the District of Columbia, was designed to provide more reliable annual average estimates for
States. In October 1978, a coverage improvement sample of
approximately 450 sample household units representing
237,000 occupied mobile homes and 600,000 new construction housing units was added. In January 1980, another
supplemental sample of 9,000 households selected in 32
States and the District of Columbia was added. A sample
reduction of about 6,000 units was implemented in May 1981.
In January 1982, the sample was expanded by 100 households to provide additional coverage in counties added to
the Standard Metropolitan Statistical Areas (SMSAs), which
were redefined in 1973. In January 1985, a new State-based
CPS sample was selected based on 1980 census
185

found to be destroyed, vacant, converted to nonresidential
use, containing persons whose usual place of residence is
elsewhere, or ineligible for other reasons. Of the 60,000
housing units, about 7.5 percent are not interviewed in a
given month due to temporary absence (vacation, etc.), other
failures to make contact after repeated attempts, inability of
persons contacted to respond, unavailability for other reasons, and refusals to cooperate (about half of the
noninterviews). Information is obtained each month for about
112,000 persons 16 years of age or older.

3,000, a within-PSU sampling ratio of 1 in 300 achieves the
desired ratio of 1 in 3,000 for the stratum.
The 2000 within-PSU sample design was developed using
block-level data from Census 2000. Normally, census blocks
are bounded by streets and other prominent physical features such as rivers or railroad tracks. County, minor civil
division, and census place limits also serve as block boundaries. In cities, blocks can be bounded by four streets and be
quite small in land area. In rural areas, blocks can be several
square miles in size.
For the purpose of sample selection, census blocks were
grouped into three strata: Unit, group quarters, and area.
(Occasionally, units within a block were split between the
unit and group-quarters strata.) The unit stratum contained
regular housing units with addresses that were easy to locate
(for example, most single-family homes, townhouses, condominiums, apartment units, and mobile homes). The groupquarters stratum contained housing units in which residents
shared common facilities or received formal or authorized
care or custody. Unit and group-quarters blocks exist primarily in urban areas. The area stratum contains blocks with
addresses that are more difficult to locate. Area blocks exist
primarily in rural areas.
To reduce the variability of the survey estimates and to ensure that the within-PSU sample would reflect the demographic
and socioeconomic characteristics of the PSU, blocks within
the unit, group-quarters, and area strata were sorted using geographic and block-level data from the census. Examples of the
census variables used for sorting include proportion of minority renter-occupied housing units, proportion of housing units
with female householders, and proportion of owner-occupied
housing units. The specific sorting variables used differed by
type of PSU (urban or rural) and stratum.
Within each block, housing units were sorted geographically. A systematic sample of these units was then selected
independently from each stratum using the appropriate withinPSU sampling ratio. The geographic sorting of the sample units
reduces field representative travel costs. Prior to interviewing,
special listing procedures are used to locate the particular
sample addresses in the group-quarters and area blocks.
Units in the three strata described above all existed at the
time of Census 2000. Through a series of additional procedures, a sample of building permits is included in the CPS to
represent housing units built after the decennial census.
Adding these newly built units keeps the sample up to date
and representative of the population. It also helps to keep
the sample size stable: Over the life of the sample, the addition of newly built housing units compensates for the loss of
“old” units that may be abandoned, demolished, or converted to nonresidential use.

Selection of sample areas. The entire area of the United
States, consisting of 3,142 counties and independent cities,
is divided into 2,025 sample units (PSUs). A PSU consists of
a county or a number of contiguous counties.
Metropolitan areas within a State are used as a basis for
forming PSUs. Outside of metropolitan areas, counties normally are combined except when the geographic area of an
individual county is too large. Combining counties to form
PSUs provides greater heterogeneity; a typical PSU includes
urban and rural residents of both high and low economic
levels and encompasses, to the extent feasible, diverse occupations and industries. Another important consideration
is that the PSU be sufficiently compact so that, with a small
sample spread throughout, it can be efficiently canvassed
without undue travel cost.
The 2,025 PSUs are grouped into strata within each State.
Then, one PSU is selected from each stratum with the probability of selection proportional to the population of the
PSU. Nationally, there are a total of 446 PSUs in strata by
themselves. These strata are self-representing and are generally the most populous PSUs in each State. The 378 remaining strata are formed by combining PSUs that are similar in
such characteristics as unemployment, proportion of housing units with three or more persons, number of persons
employed in various industries, and average monthly wages
for various industries. The single PSU randomly selected
from each of these strata is nonself-representing because it
represents not only itself but the entire stratum. The probability of selecting a particular PSU in a nonself-representing stratum is proportional to its 2000 population. For
example, within a stratum, the chance that a PSU with a
population of 50,000 would be selected for the sample is
twice that for a PSU having a population of 25,000.
Selection of sample households. Because the sample design is
State based, the sampling ratio differs by State and depends on
State population size as well as both national and State reliability requirements. The State sampling ratios range roughly
from 1 in every 100 households to 1 in every 3,000 households. The sampling ratio occasionally is modified slightly to
hold the size of the sample relatively constant given the overall growth of the population. The sampling ratio used within a
sample PSU depends on the probability of selection of the PSU
and the sampling ratio for the State. In a sample PSU with a
probability of selection of 1 in 10 and a State sampling ratio of

Rotation of sample. Part of the sample is changed each
month. Each monthly sample is divided into eight representative subsamples or rotation groups. A given rotation group
is interviewed for a total of 8 months, divided into two equal
periods. It is in the sample for 4 consecutive months, leaves
the sample during the following 8 months, and then returns
186

Table 1-A. Characteristics of the CPS sample, 1947 to present
Period

Number of sample
areas

Aug. 1947 to Jan. 1954 ...............................
Feb. 1954 to Apr. 1956 ...............................
May 1956 to Dec.1959 ...............................
Jan. 1960 to Feb. 1963 ...............................
Mar. 1963 to Dec.1966 ...............................
Jan. 1967 to July 1971 ...............................
Aug. 1971 to July 1972 ...............................
Aug. 1972 to Dec.1977 ...............................
Jan. 1978 to Dec.1979 ...............................
Jan. 1980 to Apr. 1981 ...............................
May 1981 to Dec.1984 ...............................
Jan. 1985 to Mar. 1988 ...............................
Apr. 1988 to Mar. 1989 ...............................
Apr. 1989 to Oct. 1994 3 ..............................
Nov. 1994 to Aug. 1995 4 ............................
Sept. 1995 to Dec. 1995 ................................
Jan. 1996 to June 2001 ..................................
July 2001 to July 2004 5 ................................
Aug. 2004 to present 5 ....................................

68
230
1330
2333
357
449
449
461
614
629
629
729
729
729
792
792
754
754
824

Households eligible
Interviewed
21,000
21,000
33,500
33,500
33,500
48,000
45,000
45,000
53,500
62,200
57,800
57,000
53,200
57,400
54,500
52,900
46,250
55,500
55,500

Not interviewed
500-1,000
500-1,000
1,500
1,500
1,500
2,000
2,000
2,000
2,500
2,800
2,500
2,500
2,600
2,600
3,500
3,400
3,750
4,500
4,500

Households visited
but not eligible
3,000-3,500
3,000-3,500
6,000
6,000
6,000
8,500
8,000
8,000
10,000
12,000
11,000
11,000
11,500
11,800
10,000
9,700
10,000
12,000
12,000

1 Beginning in May 1956, these areas were chosen to provide coverage in
each State and the District of Columbia.
2 Three sample areas were added in 1960 to represent Alaska and Hawaii
after statehood.
3 The sample was increased incrementally during the 8-month period, AprilNovember 1989.

4 Includes 2,000 additional assigned housing units from Georgia and Virginia
that were gradually phased in during the 10-month period, October 1994August 1995.
5 Includes 12,000 assigned housing units in support of the State Children’s
Health Insurance Program.

for another 4 consecutive months. In each monthly sample,
one of the eight rotation groups is in the first month of enumeration, another rotation group is in the second month, and
so on. Under this system, 75 percent of the sample is common from month to month, and 50 percent is common from
year to year for the same month. This procedure provides a
substantial amount of month-to-month and year-to-year overlap in the sample, thus providing better estimates of change
and reducing discontinuities in the data series without burdening any specific group of households with an unduly
long period of inquiry.

sents. Since 1985, most sample persons within the same State
have had the same probability of selection. Some selection
probabilities may differ within a State due to the sample
design or for operational reasons. Field subsampling, for example, which is carried out when areas selected for the sample
are found to contain many more households than expected,
may cause probabilities of selection to differ for some sample
areas within a State. Through a series of estimation steps
(outlined below), the selection probabilities are adjusted for
noninterviews and survey undercoverage; data from previous months are incorporated into the estimates through the
composite estimation procedure.

CPS sample, 1947 to present. Table 1-A provides a
description of some aspects of the CPS sample designs in use
since 1947. A more detailed account of the history of the
CPS sample design appears in chapter 2 of “The Current
Population Survey: Design and Methodology,” Technical
Paper 63RV, (Washington, U.S. Census Bureau and Bureau
of Labor Statistics, March 2002), available on the Internet at
www.bls.census.gov/cps/tp/tp63.htm. A description of the
Census 2000-based sample design appears in “Redesign of
the Sample for the Current Population Survey,” in the
December 2004 issue of this publication.

1. Noninterview adjustment. The weights for all interviewed
households are adjusted to account for occupied sample
households for which no information was obtained because
of absence, impassable roads, refusals, or unavailability of
the respondents for other reasons. This noninterview adjustment is made separately for clusters of similar sample areas
that are usually, but not necessarily, contained within a State.
Similarity of sample areas is based on Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA) status and size. Within each cluster, there is
a further breakdown by residence. Each MSA cluster is split
by “central city” and “balance of the MSA.” Each non-MSA
cluster is split by “urban” and “rural” residence categories.
The proportion of sample households not interviewed varies
from 7 to 8 percent, depending on weather, vacation, etc.

ESTIMATING METHODS
Under the estimating methods used in the CPS, all of the
results for a given month become available simultaneously
and are based on returns from the entire panel of respondents. The estimation procedure involves weighting the data
from each sample person by the inverse of the probability of
the person being in the sample. This gives a rough measure
of the number of actual persons that the sample person repre-

2. Ratio estimates. The distribution of the population selected for the sample may differ somewhat, by chance, from
that of the population as a whole in such characteristics as
age, race, sex, and State of residence. Because these characteristics are closely correlated with labor force participation
187

and other principal measurements made from the sample, the
survey estimates can be substantially improved when
weighted appropriately by the known distribution of these
population characteristics. This is accomplished through
two stages of ratio adjustment, as follows:

personnel and institutionalized persons reduce the resident
population to the civilian noninstitutional population. Prior
to January 2003, the projections were based on earlier
censuses. See “Revisions to the Current Population Survey
Effective in January 2003,” in the February 2003 issue of
this publication for a detailed discussion of changes to the
second-stage weighting and composite estimating procedures that were introduced in January 2003.

a. First-stage ratio estimation. The purpose of the firststage ratio adjustment is to reduce the contribution to variance that results from selecting a sample of PSUs rather than
drawing sample households from every PSU in the Nation.
This adjustment is made to the CPS weights in two race cells:
Black and nonblack; it is applied only to PSUs that are not
self-representing and for those States that have a substantial
number of black households. The procedure corrects for differences that existed in each State cell at the time of Census
2000 between 1) the race distribution of the population in
sample PSUs and 2) the race distribution of all PSUs. (Both 1
and 2 exclude self-representing PSUs.)

3. Composite estimation procedure. The last step in the
preparation of most CPS estimates makes use of a composite
estimation procedure. The composite estimate consists of a
weighted average of two factors: The two-stage ratio estimate based on the entire sample from the current month and
the composite estimate for the previous month, plus an estimate of the month-to-month change based on the six rotation groups common to both months. In addition, a bias
adjustment term is added to the weighted average to
account for relative bias associated with month-in-sample
estimates. This month-in-sample bias is exhibited by
unemployment estimates for persons in their first and fifth
months in the CPS being generally higher than estimates
obtained for the other months.
The composite estimate results in a reduction in the sampling error beyond that which is achieved after the two stages
of ratio adjustment. For some items, the reduction is substantial. The resultant gains in reliability are greatest in estimates
of month-to-month change, although gains usually are also
obtained for estimates of level in a given month, change from
year to year, and change over other intervals of time.

b. National coverage adjustment. The purpose of this
step is to improve the adjustment for subpopulations most
prone to undercoverage. It adjusts CPS sample weights to
independent population estimates for 34 white nonHispanic, 26 black non-Hispanic, 18 Asian non-Hispanic,
18 residual race non-Hispanic, 26 white Hispanic, and 4
non-white Hispanic age-sex cells.
c. State coverage adjustment. This step adjusts CPS
sample weights to independent state population estimates.
The number of age-sex cells for each state varies, depending
on the black and nonblack population.
d. Second-stage ratio estimation. This procedure substantially reduces the variability of estimates and corrects,
to some extent, for CPS undercoverage. A national-coverage
step and a State-coverage step make preliminary corrections
for undercoverage. The CPS sample weights are then adjusted to ensure that sample-based estimates of population
match independent population controls. Three sets of controls are used in different steps of the procedure:

Rounding of estimates
The sums of individual items may not always equal the totals shown in the same tables because of independent rounding of totals and components to the nearest thousand. Similarly, sums of percent distributions may not always equal
100 percent because of rounding. Differences, however, are
insignificant.

1) State step: Civilian noninstitutional population
controls for 6 age-sex 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 other 48 States,
and the District of Columbia.

Reliability of the estimates
An estimate based on a sample survey has two types of error
sampling error and nonsampling error. The estimated standard
errors provided in this publication are approximations of the
true sampling errors. They incorporate the effect of some
nonsampling errors in response and enumeration, but do not
account for any systematic biases in the data.

2) Ethnicity step: National civilian noninstitutional
population controls for 26 Hispanic and 26 non-Hispanic
age-sex cells.

Nonsampling error. The full extent of nonsampling error is
unknown, but special studies have been conducted to quantify some sources of nonsampling error in the CPS. The
effect of nonsampling error is small on estimates of relative
change, such as month-to-month change; estimates of
monthly levels tend to be affected to a greater degree.
Nonsampling errors in surveys can be attributed to many
sources, for example, the inability to obtain information about
all persons in the sample; differences in the interpretation of
questions; inability or unwillingness of respondents to pro-

3) Race step: National civilian noninstitutional
population controls for 34 white, 26 black, and 26 Asianplus-residual-race age-sex cells.
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
188

Sampling error. When a sample, rather than the entire population, is surveyed, estimates differ from the true population values that they represent. This difference, or sampling error, occurs by chance, and its variability is measured by the standard
error of the estimate. Sample estimates from a given survey
design are unbiased when an average of the estimates from all
possible samples would yield, hypothetically, the true population value. In this case, the sample estimate and its standard
error can be used to construct approximate confidence intervals, or ranges of values that include the true population value
with known probabilities. If the process of selecting a sample
from the population were repeated many times, an estimate
made from each sample, and a suitable estimate of its standard
error calculated for each sample, then:

vide correct information; inability of respondents to recall
information; errors made in collecting and processing the
data; errors made in estimating values for missing data; and
failure to represent all sample households and all persons
within sample households (undercoverage).
Nonsampling errors occurring in the interview phase of
the survey are studied by means of a reinterview program.
This program is used to estimate various sources of error, as
well as to evaluate and control the work of the interviewers.
A random sample of each interviewer’s work is inspected
through reinterview at regular intervals. The results
indicate, among other things, that the data published
from the CPS are subject to moderate systematic biases.
A description of the CPS reinterview program may be
found in Appendix G, “Reinterview: Design and Methodology,” of “The Current Population Survey: Design and
Methodology,” Technical Paper 63RV (Washington,
U.S. Census Bureau and Bureau of Labor Statistics, March
2002), available on the Internet at www.bls.census.gov/cps/
tp/tp63.htm.
The effects of some components of nonsampling error in
the CPS data can be examined as a result of the rotation plan
used for the sample, because the level of the estimates varies
by rotation group. A description appears in Barbara A. Bailar,
“The Effects of Rotation Group Bias on Estimates from Panel
Surveys,” Journal of the American Statistical Association,
March 1975, pp. 23-30.
Undercoverage in the CPS results from missed housing
units and missed persons within sample households. The
CPS covers about 92 percent of the decennial census population (adjusted for census undercount). It is known that the
CPS undercoverage varies with age, sex, race, and Hispanic
origin. Generally, undercoverage is larger for men than for
women and is larger for blacks, Hispanics, and other races
than for whites. Ratio adjustment to independent age-sexrace-origin population controls, as described previously,
partially corrects for the biases due to survey undercoverage.
However, biases exist in the estimates to the extent that missed
persons in missed households or missed persons in interviewed households have characteristics different from
those of interviewed persons in the same age-sex-race-origin
group.
Additional information on nonsampling error in the CPS
appears in Camilla Brooks and Barbara Bailar, “An Error
Profile: Employment as Measured by the Current Population
Survey,” Statistical Policy Working Paper 3 (Washington,
U.S. Department of Commerce, Office of Federal Statistical
Policy and Standards, September 1978); Marvin Thompson
and Gary Shapiro, “The Current Population Survey: An
Overview,” Annals of Economic and Social Measurement,
Vol. 2, April 1973; and “The Current Population Survey:
Design and Methodology,” Technical Paper 63RV referenced
above. The last document includes a comprehensive
discussion of various sources of errors and describes attempts
to measure them in the CPS.

1. Approximately 68 percent of the intervals from one
standard error below the estimate to one standard error above
the estimate would include the true population value.
2. Approximately 90 percent of the intervals from 1.645
standard errors below the estimate to 1.645 standard errors
above the estimate would include the true population value.
3. Approximately 95 percent of the intervals from 1.96
standard errors below the estimate to 1.96 standard errors
above the estimate would include the true population value.
These confidence interval statements are approximately
true for the CPS. Although the estimating methods used in
the CPS do not produce unbiased estimates, biases for most
estimates are believed to be small. Methods for estimating
standard errors reflect not only sampling errors but also some
kinds of nonsampling error. Although both the estimates
and the estimated standard errors depart from the theoretical
ideal, the departures are minor and have little impact
on the confidence interval statements. When clarity is
needed, an estimated confidence interval is specified to be
“approximate,” as is the estimated standard error used in the
computation.
Tables 1-B through 1-D are provided so that approximate
standard errors of estimates can be easily obtained. Tables
1-B and 1-C give approximate standard errors for estimated
monthly levels and rates for selected employment status
characteristics; the tables also provide approximate
standarderrors for consecutive month-to-month changes in
the estimates. It is impractical to show approximate standard
errors for all CPS estimates in this publication, so table 1-D
provides parameters and factors that allow the user to
calculate approximate standard errors for a wide range of
estimated levels, rates, and percentages, and also changes
over time. The parameters and factors are used in formulas
that are commonly called generalized variance functions.
The approximate standard errors provided in this publication are based on the sample design and estimation procedures as of 1996, and reflect the population levels and sample
size as of that year. Standard errors for years prior to 1996
may be roughly approximated by applying these adjustments
to the standard errors presented here. (More accurate stan-

189

Table 1-B. Approximate standard errors for major employment status categories
(In thousands)
Consecutive
Monthly
Characteristic
month-tolevel
month change

unemployment rates and consecutive month-to-month
changes in unemployment rates for some demographic,
occupational, and industrial categories. For characteristics
not given in tables 1-B and 1-C, refer to table 1-D.
Illustration. Suppose that, for a given month, the number
of women age 20 years and over in the civilian labor force is
estimated to be 65,000,000. For this characteristic, the approximate standard error of 207,000 is given in table
1-B in the row “Women, 20 years and over; Civilian labor
force.” To calculate an approximate 90-percent confidence
interval, multiply the standard error of 207,000 by the factor 1.645 to obtain 341,000. This number is subtracted
from and then added to 65,000,000 to obtain an approximate 90-percent confidence interval: 64,659,000 to
65,341,000. Concluding that the true civilian labor force
level lies within an interval calculated in this way would be
correct for roughly 90 percent of all possible samples that
could have been selected for the CPS.

Total
Total, 16 years and over:
Civilian labor force ....................
Employed ..................................
Unemployed .............................

300
323
155

246
265
172

Men, 20 years and over:
Civilian labor force ....................
Employed ..................................
Unemployed .............................

162
185
104

133
152
115

Women, 20 years and over:
Civilian labor force ....................
Employed ..................................
Unemployed .............................

207
217
92

170
178
102

Both sexes, 16 to 19 years:
Civilian labor force ....................
Employed ..................................
Unemployed .............................

145
132
61

142
130
75

Total, 16 years and over:
Civilian labor force ....................
Employed ..................................
Unemployed .............................

125
134
74

102
110
82

Men, 20 years and over:
Civilian labor force ....................
Employed ..................................
Unemployed .............................

76
83
48

63
68
53

Women, 20 years and over:
Civilian labor force ....................
Employed ..................................
Unemployed .............................

79
85
46

65
70
52

Both sexes, 16 to 19 years:
Civilian labor force ....................
Employed ..................................
Unemployed .............................

41
37
27

40
36
34

80
82
29

66
67
33

119
129
66

97
105
73

Black or African American

Use of table 1-D. This table gives a and b parameters that can
be used with formulas to calculate approximate monthly standard errors for a wide range of estimated levels, proportions,
and rates. Factors are provided to convert monthly measures
into approximate standard errors of estimates for other periods
(quarterly and yearly averages) and approximate standard errors for changes over time (consecutive monthly changes,
changes in consecutive quarterly and yearly averages, and
changes in monthly estimates 1 year apart).
The standard errors for estimated changes in level from
one month to the next, one year to the next, etc., depend
more on the monthly levels for characteristics than on the
size of the changes. Likewise, the standard errors for changes
in rates (or percentages) depend more on the monthly rates
(or percentages) than on the size of the changes. Accordingly, the factors presented in table 1-D are applied to the
monthly standard error approximations for levels, percentages, or rates; the magnitudes of the changes do not come
into play. Factors are not given for estimated changes between nonconsecutive months (except for changes of monthly
estimates 1 year apart); however, the standard errors may be

Asian
Total, 16 years and over:
Civilian labor force ....................
Employed ..................................
Unemployed .............................
Hispanic or Latino ethnicity
Total, 16 years and over:
Civilian labor force ....................
Employed ..................................
Unemployed .............................

Table 1-C. Approximate standard errors for unemployment
rates by major characteristics

dard error estimates for historical CPS data may be found in
previous issues of this publication.)

(In percent)

1. For the years 1967 through 1995, multiply the standard errors by 0.96.

Characteristic

2. For the years 1956 through 1966, multiply the standard errors by 1.17.

Total ............................................................
Men .........................................................
Men, 20 years and over .........................
Women ....................................................
Women, 20 years and over ...................
Both sexes, 16 to 19 years ....................
White ...........................................................
Black or African American .........................
Asian ...........................................................
Hispanic or Latino ethnicity ........................
Married men, spouse present ...................
Married women, spouse present ...............
Women who maintain families ....................

3. For years prior to 1956, multiply the standard errors by
1.44.
Use of tables 1-B and 1-C. These tables provide a quick
reference for standard errors of major characteristics. Table
1-B gives approximate standard errors for estimates of
monthly levels and consecutive month-to-month changes
in levels for major employment status categories. Table 1-C
gives approximate standard errors for estimates of monthly
190

Consecutive
Monthly month-torate month change
0.10
.14
.14
.14
.14
.78
.11
.44
.46
.34
.14
.16
.46

0.12
.16
.15
.16
.16
.97
.12
.49
.51
.38
.15
.18
.52

Step 3. Determine the standard error se (x, f) on the average level or on the change in level. Multiply the result from
step 2 by the appropriate factor f. The a and b parameters
used in step 2 and the factor f used in this step come from the
same line in table 1-D.

assumed to be higher than the standard errors for consecutive monthly changes.

se( x )

ax 2  bx

Standard errors of estimated levels using table 1-D. The
approximate standard error se(x) of x, an estimated monthly
level, can be obtained using the formula below, where a and
b are the parameters from table 1-D associated with a particular characteristic.

Illustration of a standard error computation for consecutive month change in level. Continuing the previous example, suppose that in the next month the estimated number
of unemployed men increases by 150,000, from 4,000,000
to 4,150,000.

Illustration. Assume that, in a given a month, there are an
estimated 4 million unemployed men. Obtain the appropriate a and b parameters from table 1-D (Total or white; Men;
Unemployed). Use the formula for se(x) to compute an approximate standard error on the estimate of x = 4,000,000.
a = -0.0000321
se( 4,000,000 )

Step 1. The average of the two monthly levels is x =
4,075,000.

b = 2970.55

– 0.0000321( 4,000,000) 2  2970.55( 4,000,000 ) | 107 ,000

Procedure for using table 1-D factors for levels. Table 1-D
gives factors that can be used to compute approximate standard errors of levels for other periods or for changes over
time. For each characteristic, factors f are given for:
Consecutive month-to-month changes
Changes in monthly estimates 1 year apart
Quarterly averages
Changes in consecutive quarterly averages
Yearly averages
Changes in consecutive yearly averages

a = -0.0000321

f * se( x)

b = 2970.55

 0 .0000321 ( 4,075 ,000 ) 2  2970 .55 ( 4,075 ,000 ) | 108 ,000

se ( 4,075 ,000 )

Step 3. Obtain f = 1.11 from the same row of table 1-D in
the column “Consecutive month-to-month change,” and multiply the factor by the result from step 2.
se(150,000 )

f * se ( 4,075,000 ) 1.11 *108,000 | 120,000

For an approximate 90-percent confidence interval, compute 1.645 * 120,000 ≈ 197,000. Subtract the number from
and add the number to 150,000 to obtain an interval
of -47,000 to 347,000. This is an approximate 90-percent
confidence interval for the true change, and since this interval includes zero, one cannot assert at this level of confidence that any real change has occurred in the unemployment level. The result also can be expressed by saying that
the apparent change of 150,000 is not significant at a 90percent confidence level.

For a given characteristic, the table 1-D factor is used in
the following formula, which also uses the a and b parameters from the same line of the table. A three-step procedure
for using the formula is given. The f in the formula is frequently called an adjustment factor, because it appears to
adjust a monthly standard error se(x). However, the x in the
formula is not a monthly level, but an average of several
monthly levels (see examples listed under Step 1, below).

se( x, f )

Step 2. Apply the a and b parameters from table 1-D
(Total or white; Men; Unemployed) to the average x, treating it like an estimate for a single month.

f * (ax 2  bx)

Illustration of a standard error computation for quarterly
average level. Suppose that an approximate standard error
is desired for a quarterly average of the black or African
American employment level. Suppose that the estimated
employment levels for the 3 months making up the quarter
are 14,900,000, 15,000,000, and 15,100,000.

where x is an average of monthly levels over a designated
period.
Step 1. Average monthly levels appropriately in order to
obtain x. Levels for 3 months are averaged for quarterly
averages, and those for 12 months are averaged for yearly
averages. For changes in consecutive averages, average over
the 2 months, 2 quarters, or 2 years involved. For changes in
monthly estimates 1 year apart, average the 2 months involved.

Step 1. The average of the three monthly levels is x =
15,000,000.
Step 2. Apply the a and b parameters from table 1-D
(Black; Total; Civilian labor force, employed, and not in
labor force) to the average x, treating it like an estimate for a
single month.

Step 2. Calculate an approximate standard error se(x),
treating the average x from step 1 as if it were an estimate of
level for a single month. Obtain parameters a and b from
table 1-D. (Note that, for some characteristics, an approximate standard error of level could instead be obtained from
table 1-B and used in place of se(x) in the formula.)

a = -0.0001514
se (15 ,000 .000 )

191

b = 3454.72

 0 .0001514 (15 ,000 ,000 ) 2  3454 .72 (15 ,000 ,000 ) | 133 ,000

Step 3. Obtain f = .87 from the same row of table 1-D in
the column “Quarterly averages,” and multiply the factor by
the result from step 2.

Illustration. For a given month, suppose y = 6,200,000
women 20 to 24 years of age are estimated to be employed.
Of this total, 2,000,000, or p = 32 percent, are classified as
part-time workers. Obtain the parameter b = 3095.55 from
the table 1-D row (Employment; Part-time workers) that is
relevant to the numerator of the percentage. Apply the formula to obtain:

se(15,000,000) .87 *133,000 | 116,000
Illustration of a standard error computation for change in
quarterly level. Continuing the example, suppose that, in
the next quarter, the estimated average employment level for
blacks is 15,400,000, based on monthly levels of 15,300,000,
15,400,000, and 15,500,000. This is an estimated increase
of 400,000 over the previous quarter.

se( p, y )

For an approximate 95-percent confidence interval, compute 1.96 * 1.0 percent, and round the result to 2 percent.
Subtract this from and add this to the estimate of p = 32
percent to obtain an interval of 30 percent to 34 percent.

Step 1. The average of the two quarterly levels is x =
15,200,000.
Step 2. Apply the a and b parameters from table 1-D
(Black; Total; Civilian labor force, employed, and not in
labor force) to the average x, treating it like an estimate for a
single month.
a = -0.0001514
se (15, 200 ,000 )

3095.55
(32)(100 – 32) | 1.0 percent
6,200,000

Procedure for using table 1-D factors for rates and percentages. Table 1-D factors can be used to compute approximate
standard errors on rates and percentages for other
periods or for changes over time. As for levels, there are three
steps in the procedure for using the formula.

b = 3454.72

 0 .0001514 (15, 200 ,000 ) 2  3454 .72 (15, 200 ,000 ) | 132 ,000

se( p, y, f )
Step 3. Obtain f = .82 from the same row of table 1-D in
the column “Change in consecutive quarterly averages,” and
multiply the factor by the result from step 2.

f * se( p, y )

f*

b
p (100  p )
y

where p and y are averages of monthly estimates over a designated period. Note that se (p, y, f) is in percent.

se(400,000) .82 * se(15,200,000) .82 *132,000 | 108,000

Step 1. Appropriately average estimates of monthly rates
or percentages to obtain p, and also average estimates of
monthly levels to obtain y. Rates for 3 months are averaged
for quarterly averages, and those for 12 months are averaged
for yearly averages. For changes in consecutive averages,
average over the 2 months, 2 quarters, or 2 years
involved. For changes in monthly estimates 1 year apart,
average the 2 months involved.

For an approximate 95-percent confidence interval, compute 1.96 * 108,000 ≈ 212,000. Subtract the number from
and add the number to 400,000 to obtain an interval of
188,000 to 612,000. The interval excludes zero. Another
way of stating this is to observe that the estimated change of
400,000 clearly exceeds 1.96 standard errors, or 212,000.
One can conclude from these data that the change in
quarterly averages is significant at a 95-percent confidence
level.

Step 2. Calculate an approximate standard error
se (p, y), treating the averages p and y from step 1 as if they
were estimates for a single month. Obtain the b parameter
from the table 1-D row that describes the numerator of the
rate or percentage. (Note that, for some characteristics, an
approximate standard error could instead be obtained from
table 1-C and used in place of se (p, y) in the formula.)

Standard errors of estimated rates and percentages using
table 1-D. As shown in the formula below, the approximate
standard error se(p,y) of an estimated rate or percentage
p depends, in part, upon the number of persons y in its
base or denominator. Generally, rates and percentages
are not published unless the monthly base is greater
than 75,000 persons, the quarterly average base is greater
than 60,000 persons, or the yearly average base is greater
than 35,000 persons. The b parameter is obtained from
table 1-D. When the base y and the numerator of p are
from different categories within the table, use the b parameter from table 1-D relevant to the numerator of the rate or
percentage.
b
se( p, y )
p (100  p )
y

Step 3. Determine the standard error se (p, y, f) on the
average level or on the change in level. Multiply the result
from step 2 by the appropriate factor f. The b parameter used
in step 2 and the factor f used in this step come from the same
line in table 1-D.
Illustration of a standard error computation for consecutive month change in percentage. Continuing the previous
example, suppose that, in the next month, 6,300,000 women
20 to 24 years of age are reported employed, and that
2,150,000, or 34 percent, are part-time workers.

Note that se(p,y) is in percent.
192

Step 1. The month-to-month change is 2 percent = 34
percent - 32 percent. The average of the two monthly percentages of 32 percent and 34 percent is needed (p = 33
percent), as is the average of the two bases of 6,200,000 and
6,300,000 (y = 6,250,000).

Step 3. Obtain f =1 .24 from the same row of table 1-D in
the column “Consecutive month-to-month change,” and multiply the factor by the result from step 2.

Step 2. Apply the b = 3095.55 parameter from table 1-D
(Employment; Part-time workers) to the averaged p and y,
treating the averages like estimates for a single month.

For an approximate 95-percent confidence interval,
compute 1.96 * 1.24 percent, and round the result to 2.4
percent. Subtract this from and add this to the 2-percent
estimate of change to obtain an interval of -0.4 percent to
4.4 percent. Because this interval includes zero, it can be
concluded at a 95-percent confidence level that the change
is not significant.

se( p, y )

se (2 percent) = 1.24 * 1.0 percent = 1.24 percent

3095.55
(33)(100 – 33) | 1.0 percent
6,250,000

193

Table 1-D. Parameters and factors for computation of approximate standard errors
Parameters

Factors

Characteristic

a

b

Consecutive Year-to-year
month-tochange
month
of monthly
change
estimates

Quarterly
averages

Change in
consecutive
quarterly
averages

Yearly
averages

Change in
consecutive
yearly
averages

Total or white
Total:
Civilian labor force and
employed ...........................
Unemployed ..........................
Not in labor force ..................

-0.0000167
-.0000164
-.0000087

3067.77
3095.55
1833.31

0.82
1.11
.82

1.19
1.35
1.16

0.87
.74
.87

0.82
.91
.80

0.66
.44
.66

0.79
.59
.79

Men:
Civilian labor force, employed,
and not in labor force .........
Unemployed ..........................
Women:
Civilian labor force, employed,
and not in labor force .........
Unemployed ..........................

-.0000321
-.0000321

2970.55
2970.55

.82
1.11

1.19
1.35

.87
.74

.82
.91

.66
.44

.79
.59

-.0000304
-.0000304

2782.44
2782.44

.82
1.11

1.19
1.35

.87
.74

.82
.91

.66
.44

.79
.59

Both sexes, 16 to 19 years:
Civilian labor force, employed,
and not in labor force .........
Unemployed ..........................

-.0000225
-.0000225

3095.55
3095.55

.98
1.24

1.31
1.39

.82
.68

.85
.88

.57
.39

.73
.52

Total:
Civilian labor force, employed,
and not in labor force .........
Unemployed ..........................

-.0001514
-.0001514

3454.72
3454.72

.82
1.11

1.19
1.35

.87
.74

.82
.91

.66
.44

.79
.59

Men:
Civilian labor force, employed,
and not in labor force .........
Unemployed ..........................

-.0003109
-.0003109

3356.66
3356.66

.82
1.11

1.17
1.35

.83
.74

.81
.91

.62
.44

.75
.59

Women:
Civilian labor force, employed,
and not in labor force .........
Unemployed ..........................

-.0002516
-.0002516

3061.85
3061.85

.82
1.11

1.18
1.35

.86
.74

.78
.91

.67
.44

.80
.59

Both sexes, 16 to 19 years:
Civilian labor force, employed,
and not in labor force .........
Unemployed ..........................

-.0016321
-.0016321

3454.72
3454.72

.98
1.24

1.31
1.39

.80
.68

.90
.88

.53
.39

.68
.52

Black or African American

Asian
Total:
Civilian labor force, employed,
and not in labor force .........
Unemployed ..........................
Men:
Civilian labor force, employed,
and not in labor force .........
Unemployed ..........................

-.0003462
-.0003462

3198.15
3198.15

.82
1.11

1.27
1.48

.85
.73

.89
.90

.58
.44

.74
.58

-.0007289
-.0007289

3198.15
3198.15

.82
1.11

1.28
1.42

.83
.73

.92
.92

.55
.43

.71
.56

Women:
Civilian labor force, employed,
and not in labor force .........
Unemployed ..........................

-.0006594
-.0006594

3198.15
3198.15

.82
1.11

1.31
1.49

.85
.73

.86
.89

.61
.43

.77
.59

Both sexes, 16 to 19 years:
Civilian labor force, employed,
and not in labor force .........
Unemployed ..........................

-.0041465
-.0041465

3198.15
3198.15

.98
1.24

1.31
1.38

.82
.69

.85
.85

.57
.44

.73
.56

Total:
Civilian labor force, employed,
and not in labor force .........
Unemployed ..........................

-.0001412
-.0001412

3454.72
3454.72

.82
1.11

1.19
1.35

.85
.73

.81
.91

.64
.44

.77
.59

Men:
Civilian labor force, employed,
and not in labor force .........
Unemployed ..........................

-.0002528
-.0002528

3356.66
3356.66

.82
1.11

1.19
1.35

.82
.74

.86
.91

.57
.44

.72
.59

Hispanic or Latino ethnicity

194

Table 1-D. Parameters and factors for computation of approximate standard errors—Continued
Parameters

Factors

Characteristic

a

b

Consecutive Year-to-year
month-tochange
month
of monthly
change
estimates

Quarterly
averages

Change in
consecutive
quarterly
averages

Yearly
averages

Change in
consecutive
yearly
averages

Hispanic or Latino
ethnicity—Continued
Women:
Civilian labor force, employed,
and not in labor force .........
Unemployed ..........................

-.0002664
-.0002664

3061.85
3061.85

.82
1.11

1.19
1.35

.85
.72

.80
.89

.67
.42

.80
.57

Both sexes, 16 to 19 years:
Civilian labor force, employed,
and not in labor force .........
Unemployed ..........................

-.0015280
-.0015280

3454.72
3454.72

.98
1.24

1.32
1.39

.79
.68

.88
.88

.50
.39

.68
.52

Educational attainment ...........

-0.0000164

3095.55

.82

1.19

.85

.92

.59

.73

Marital status, men .................
Marital status, women ............
Women who maintain families

-.0000321
-.0000304
-.0000304

2970.55
2782.44
2782.44

.82
.82
.82

1.21
1.06
1.16

.87
.88
.86

.88
.86
.91

.63
.65
.59

.77
.78
.73

Nonagricultural industries:
Total .........................................
Wage and salary workers ..
Self-employed workers .......
Unpaid family workers ........

-.0000164
-.0000164
-.0000164
-.0000164

3095.55
3095.55
3095.55
3095.55

.82
.82
.82
.98

1.16
1.26
1.14
1.30

.87
.87
.86
.79

.82
.87
.94
.94

.65
.62
.56
.46

.79
.77
.73
.65

Full-time workers ....................
Part-time workers ...................

-.0000164
-.0000164

3095.55
3095.55

1.11
1.24

1.35
1.42

.78
.67

.88
.88

.54
.40

.66
.50

Multiple jobholders ..................

-.0000164

3095.55

1.11

1.26

.81

.92

.52

.66

-.0000164
-.0000164
-.0000164
-.0000164
-.0000164
-.0000164
-.0000164

3095.55
3095.55
3095.55
3095.55
3095.55
3095.55
3095.55

.82
1.24
1.11
1.24
1.11
1.24
1.11

1.14
1.36
1.35
1.42
1.28
1.35
1.29

.86
.70
.74
.67
.78
.68
.74

.91
.89
.86
.88
.83
.87
.88

.60
.43
.47
.40
.55
.42
.47

.74
.54
.62
.50
.68
.51
.62

-.0000164

3095.55

1.21

1.38

.70

.87

.43

.55

-.0000164

3095.55

1.21

1.29

.75

.86

.50

.60

Educational attainment ...........

-.0000164

3095.55

1.11

1.30

.72

.83

.46

.59

Marital status, men .................
Marital status, women ............
Women who maintain families

-.0000321
-.0000304
-.0000304

2970.55
2782.44
2782.44

1.11
1.11
1.11

1.41
1.37
1.38

.76
.74
.75

.89
.91
.89

.45
.42
.45

.66
.59
.61

Employment

At work
Total and nonagricultural
industries:
Total .........................................
1 to 4 or 5 to 14 hours .......
15 to 29 hours ....................
30 to 34 or 35 to 39 hours .
1 to 34 or 40 hours .............
41 to 48 or 49 to 59 hours .
35+, 41+, or 60+ hours ......
Part time for economic
reasons .................................
Part time for noneconomic
reasons .................................
Unemployment

Industries and occupations ...

-.0000164

3095.55

1.11

1.37

.73

.89

.45

.60

Full-time workers ....................
Part-time workers ...................

-.0000164
-.0000164

3095.55
3095.55

1.11
1.24

1.33
1.43

.76
.67

.89
.87

.47
.38

.63
.51

Less than 5 weeks .................
5 to 14 weeks ..........................
15 to 26 weeks .......................
15+ or 27+ weeks ...................

-.0000164
-.0000164
-.0000164
-.0000164

3095.55
3095.55
3095.55
3095.55

1.11
1.24
1.24
1.11

1.30
1.45
1.45
1.33

.72
.68
.69
.77

.83
.91
.90
.92

.46
.36
.38
.46

.59
.49
.54
.63

All reasons for unemployment,
except temporary layoff ......
On temporary layoff ...............

-.0000164
-.0000164

3095.55
3095.55

1.11
1.11

1.30
1.30

.72
.68

.83
.85

.46
.44

.59
.55

-.0000087

1833.31

.82

1.11

.87

.78

.68

.79

-.0000164

3095.55

1.24

1.23

.65

.85

.38

.48

Not in the labor force
Total .........................................
Persons who currently want
a job and discouraged
workers ................................

195