BLS Handbook of Methods

QCEW_Handbook_of_Methods.pdf

Annual Refiling Survey

BLS Handbook of Methods

OMB: 1220-0032

⚠️ Notice: This form may be outdated. More recent filings and information on OMB 1220-0032 can be found here:

2024-03-14 - Extension without change of a currently approved collection

Document [pdf]

Download: pdf | pdf

U.S. BUREAU OF LABOR STATISTICS

Quarterly Census of Employment
and Wages
The Quarterly Census of Employment and Wages (QCEW) is a quarterly count
of employment and wages reported by employers. The QCEW covers more than
95 percent of U.S. jobs available at the county, Metropolitan Statistical Area
(MSA), state, and national level, by detailed industry. The primary source for the
QCEW is administrative data from state unemployment insurance (UI) programs.
These data are supplemented by data from two U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics
(BLS) surveys: the Annual Refiling Survey (ARS) and the Multiple Worksite
Report (MWR). Before publication, BLS and state workforce agencies review
and enhance the QCEW data, correcting errors, and confirming and annotating
unusual movements.
Quick Facts: Quarterly Census of Employment and Wages
Subject areas

Key measures

How the data are obtained
Classification system
Periodicity of data availability
Geographic detail
Scope

Key products

Program webpage

Employment, Pay
County employment
County wages
Employment
Number of establishments

Administrative records
Industry
Annual, Monthly, Quarterly
County, Metro area, National, State
Government, Private sector, State and local
government
• County Employment and Wages news
release
• Employment and Wages Online Annual
Averages
• Employment and Wages Archives
• QCEW Open Data Access

• www.bls.gov/cew

Table of Contents
CONCEPTS ......................2
DATA SOURCES.............10
DESIGN...........................14
CALCULATION................22
PRESENTATION .............26
HISTORY.........................34
MORE INFORMATION....41

HANDBOOK OF METHODS

U.S. BUREAU OF LABOR STATISTICS

Concepts
The Quarterly Census of Employment and Wages (QCEW) consists of a monthly count of employment, quarterly
counts of wage levels and business establishments, and a count of workers’ average weekly wages at multiple
levels of geographic and industrial detail for use by academic researchers, local governments and other federal
agencies, and the public in general. An establishment is commonly understood as a single economic unit, such as
a farm, a mine, a factory, or a store, that produces goods or services. Establishments are typically at one physical
location and engaged in one, or predominantly one, type of economic activity for which a single industrial
classification may be applied. An establishment is in contrast to a firm, or a company, which is a business and may
consist of one or more establishments, where each establishment may participate in a different predominant
economic activity. The QCEW provides an employment benchmark and sample frames for other Bureau of Labor
Statistics (BLS) programs, as well as a basis of estimation of the wage and salary component for the Bureau of
Economic Analysis Personal Income statistic. Standard sources used by the QCEW program are the North
American Industry Classification System (NAICS, which replaced the Standard Industrial Classification system in
the fall of 2002 and was first used in the publication of 2001 QCEW data), for industry detail; Federal Information
Processing Standards, for geographic area codes; and the Office of Management and Budget, for size classes.
The QCEW makes use of a number of key variables:
• Establishment count. Aggregation of establishments in a given geographic area, in a given industry, with a
given ownership status (that is, private or public), or any combination of the three.
• Employment. Counts only filled jobs, whether full or part time, and temporary or permanent, by place of
work. The quarterly reports include the establishment's monthly employment levels for the pay periods that
include the 12th of the month.
• Wages. Total compensation paid, including bonuses, stock options, severance pay, profit distributions, the
cash value of meals and lodging, tips and other gratuities, and, in some states, employer contributions to
certain deferred compensation plans (such as 401(k) plans), during the calendar quarter, regardless of when
the services were performed.
• Establishment size. Classification of an establishment on the basis of the number of employees reported.
• Industry. Classification applied to each establishment on the basis of its primary economic activity.
• County. The primary local geographic designation for an establishment. It is assigned based on physical
location.
• Township. A secondary local geographic designation, used primarily in the New England states and New
Jersey.
• Geocode. A set of longitudinal and latitudinal coordinates identifying the location of the establishment.
Establishments are asked to provide physical addresses for their business activities. The addresses are then
converted into geocodes by the BLS Office of Technology and Survey Processing and are provided to the states to
add to the data. The geocodes are entered into Geographic Information Software to create detailed maps of the
locations of establishments and their economic and administrative attributes.

HANDBOOK OF METHODS

U.S. BUREAU OF LABOR STATISTICS

Scope and exclusions
Private-industry employment. QCEW monthly employment data represent the number of covered workers who
worked during, or received pay for, the pay period that included the 12th day of the month. Covered privateindustry employees include most corporate officials, all executives, all supervisory personnel, all professionals, all
clerical workers, many farmworkers, all wage earners, all piece workers, and all part-time workers. Workers on
paid sick leave, paid holiday, paid vacation, and the like are also covered. Workers on the payroll of more than one
firm during the period are counted by each employer that is subject to Unemployment Insurance (UI), as long as
those workers satisfy the preceding definition of employment. Workers are counted even though their wages may
not be subject to UI tax in the latter months of the year. In this regard, the federal UI taxable wage base is the first
$7,000 paid in wages to each employee during a calendar year. Thus, at whatever point in the year an employee
reaches that accumulation of wages, he or she is no longer taxed in the months remaining.
Government employment. Employment at all federal agencies for any given month is based on the number of
people who worked during, or received pay for, the pay period that included the 12th of the month. Employment
data reported for federal civilian employees are a byproduct of the operations of state workforce agencies in
administering the provisions of Title XV of the Social Security Act of the Unemployment Compensation Federal
Employees (UCFE) program. Federal employment data are based on reports of monthly employment and reports
of quarterly wages, both submitted quarterly to state agencies. Reports are submitted for all federal installations
with employees covered by the act, except for certain national security agencies, which are excluded for security
reasons.
Besides excluding the aforementioned national security agencies, QCEW excludes proprietors, the unincorporated
self-employed, unpaid family members, certain farm and domestic workers from having to report employment data,
and railroad workers covered by the railroad unemployment insurance system. Excluded as well are workers who
earned no wages during the entire applicable pay period because of work stoppages, temporary layoffs, illness, or
unpaid vacations. Excluded from QCEW federal government employment are elected officials in the executive or
legislative branch, members of the armed forces or the Commissioned Corps of the National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration, individuals serving on a temporary basis in case of fire, storm, earthquake, or other
similar emergency, and individuals employed under a Federal relief program to relieve them from unemployment.
For a complete list of federal government exclusions, see appendix A of the UCFE Instructions for Federal
Agencies. Excluded from QCEW state and local government employment are elected officials, members of a
legislative body or members of the judiciary, members of the state National Guard or Air National Guard, and
employees serving on a temporary basis in case of fire, storm, snow, earthquake, flood or similar declared
emergency. For a complete list of state and local governments excluded services, see the coverage section of the
most recent Comparison of State UI Laws.
Wages. In most states, covered employers report total compensation paid during the calendar quarter, regardless
of when the services were performed. A few state laws, however, specify that wages be reported for or be based
on the period during which services are performed rather than the period during which compensation is paid.
Under most state laws or regulations, wages include bonuses, stock options, severance pay, the cash value of

HANDBOOK OF METHODS

U.S. BUREAU OF LABOR STATISTICS

meals and lodging, tips and other gratuities. In some states, wages also include employer contributions to certain
deferred compensation plans, such as 401(k) plans.
Covered employers’ contributions to old-age, survivors, and disability insurance; health insurance; UI; workers’
compensation; and private pension and welfare funds are not reported as wages. Employee contributions for the
same purposes, however, as well as money withheld for income taxes, union dues, and so forth, are reported,
even though they are deducted from the worker’s gross pay.

Comparisons of related data series
For any given quarter, BLS publishes three different establishment-based employment measures. Each of the
three measures—the QCEW, Business Employment Dynamics (BED), and Current Employment Statistics (CES)
—is based on QCEW establishment reports, which are an enhanced and corrected version of quarterly
unemployment insurance (UI) employment reports. Each measure has a somewhat different universe of coverage,
estimation procedure, and publication product.
Differences in coverage and estimation methods can result in somewhat different measures of employment
change over time. It is important to understand program differences and the intended uses of the program
products. Exhibit 1 presents important differences among the three BLS employment measures.
Exhibit 1. Characteristics of Quarterly Census of Employment and Wages (QCEW), Business Employment
Dynamics (BED), and Current Employment Statistics (CES) employment measures
Characteristic
Source
Coverage

QCEW

BED

CES

• Count of UI administrative records
submitted by 10.2 million
establishments in 2019

• Count of longitudinally linked UI
administrative records submitted by 8.2
million private sector employers in 2019

• Sample survey: 697,000
establishments

• Coverage for UI and Unemployment
Compensation for Federal Employees
(UCFE); coverage is required of all
employers subject to state and federal
UI laws

• UI coverage, excluding government,
private households, and establishments
with zero employment

Nonfarm wage and salary jobs:
• Jobs covered by UI; excluded
are agricultural jobs, jobs in
private households, and jobs
held by self-employed workers
• Jobs not covered by UI,
including railroad jobs, jobs in
religious organizations, and
other non-UI-covered jobs
• Jobs covered by UI; excluded
are agricultural jobs, jobs in
private households, and jobs
held by self-employed workers

Publication
frequency

Use of UI
file

• Quarterly, within five months after the • Quarterly, seven months after the end
end of each quarter
of each quarter

• Monthly, usually the 3rd Friday
after the end of the week
including the 12th of the month

• Directly summarizes and publishes
each new quarter of UI data

• Uses UI file as a sampling
frame and to annually realign
sample-based estimates to
population counts
(benchmarking)

• Links each new UI quarter to
longitudinal database and directly
summarizes gross job gains and losses

See footnotes at end of table.

HANDBOOK OF METHODS

U.S. BUREAU OF LABOR STATISTICS

Exhibit 1. Characteristics of Quarterly Census of Employment and Wages (QCEW), Business Employment
Dynamics (BED), and Current Employment Statistics (CES) employment measures
Characteristic
Principal
product

QCEW

BED

CES

• A quarterly and annual universe
count of establishments, employment,
and wages at the county, MSA, state,
and national level, by detailed industry

• Quarterly employer dynamics data on
establishment openings, closings,
expansions, and contractions, at the
national level by NAICS supersector
and size of firm, and at the state private
sector total level

• Current monthly estimates of
employment, hours, and
earnings at the MSA, state, and
national level, by industry

• Future expansions to include data with
greater industry detail and data at the
county and MSA level
Principal
uses

• Detailed locality data
• Periodic universe counts for
benchmarking sample survey
estimates

• Provides business cycle analysis:
Analysis of employer dynamics
underlying economic expansions and
contractions

• Is a Principal Federal
Economic Indicator

• Analysis of employment expansion
and contraction by size of firm

• Serves as an official time
series for employment change

• A sample frame for BLS
establishment surveys
Program
websites

• www.bls.gov/cew/

• Provides input into other
major economic indicators
• www.bls.gov/bdm/

• www.bls.gov/ces/

Source: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics.

Comparisons with other data programs
BLS publishes three different establishment-based employment measures for any given quarter. Each of these
measures—the QCEW, BED, and CES—makes use of the quarterly UI employment reports in producing data.
Each measure, however, has a somewhat different universe of coverage and estimation procedure, and each
produces a different publication. Other data series are briefly covered here.

Current Population Survey
Current Population Survey (CPS) is published monthly by BLS. CPS employment data are estimated from a
survey of about 60,000 U.S. households, while QCEW employment data are summarized from quarterly reports
submitted by 10.0 million U.S. establishments. CPS counts employed people, whereas the QCEW program counts
covered workers who earned wages during the pay period that includes the 12th of the month. Consequently, the
CPS includes people “with a job but not at work” who earn no wages, for example, workers on extended unpaid
leaves of absence. QCEW data, by contrast, exclude unpaid workers. QCEW data count separately each job held
by multiple jobholders. While the CPS counts such workers once, in the job at which they worked the most hours, it
does have some multiple jobholder data. The CPS counts employed persons at their place of residence; the
QCEW program counts jobs at the place of work. CPS also differs from the QCEW program, in that it includes selfemployed people; unpaid family workers employed 15 or more hours during the survey period; and a greater
proportion of agricultural and domestic workers. CPS data exclude people under age 16, while the QCEW program
counts all covered workers, regardless of age.

HANDBOOK OF METHODS

U.S. BUREAU OF LABOR STATISTICS

Local Area Unemployment Statistics
The Local Area Unemployment Statistics (LAUS) program is a hierarchy of nonsurvey methodologies, designed to
replicate the household-based concepts from the Current Population Survey (CPS) in order to produce monthly
unemployment rate estimates by state and local areas. For each of the roughly 7,000 unique subnational areas,
the LAUS program independently estimates employed people and unemployed people. These estimates are
summed to derive civilian labor force, and then the unemployment rate is calculated as the percent unemployed of
the civilian labor force.
The LAUS employment measure pertains to employed people by their place of residence. Employed people, in
accordance with the CPS concept, are those who did any work at all for pay or profit during the survey reference
week, including work in their own unincorporated business or on a farm. This is distinct from the QCEW
employment measure, which pertains to counts of jobs subject to unemployment insurance laws by place of
employment.
Another way to understand the scope difference between the LAUS and QCEW programs is through the
framework of supply and demand. LAUS estimates relative slack in the supply of labor at the local level, and doing
so requires measures of how many people are working, versus not employed but actively seeking work. QCEW
provides counts of the met demand for workers by establishments subject to unemployment insurance laws. For a
given area, only if all working residents had one job at an establishment operating within that same area, with no
workers at any of the establishments operating within that area commuting from outside of that area, would the
LAUS and QCEW employment levels match. This would preclude self-employment, most agricultural work,
multiple jobholding, telecommuting, and cross-border commutation.

Bureau of Economic Analysis
The Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA) Regional Income Division produces local personal income and
employment estimates (along with regional GDP and other data) for counties, metropolitan statistical areas, and
other local area aggregates. These data are available to search at https://apps.bea.gov/itable/iTable.cfm?
ReqID=70&step=1. BEA regional data are based primarily on QCEW data, with other outside inputs for non-QCEW
concepts used for a few industries. Regional data are produced using selected NAICS industries from 2001–
forward, with selected Standard Industry Classification (SIC) industries used for data from 1969–2000. QCEW
establishment counts, employment, and wages are produced for all NAICS industries at the national, state, county,
and Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA)-level detail back to 1990, with SIC industry data available from
1975–-2000.
While BEA local area estimates include QCEW (data) for a large portion of their employment and compensation
inputs, with reconciliation against QCEW data prior to publication, these BEA products include resources outside of
QCEW, and are therefore not directly comparable to QCEW. More information about BEA regional data can be
found at https://www.bea.gov/system/files/methodologies/LAPI2018.pdf.

HANDBOOK OF METHODS

U.S. BUREAU OF LABOR STATISTICS

Office of Personnel Management
The U.S. Office of Personnel Management (OPM) publishes a statistical series on Federal employment and
payrolls with information on employing agencies, types of positions and appointments, and characteristics of
employees. Data on Federal employment covered by the UCFE series provide industry, local area, and monthly
employment detail not available in the OPM series.
Both UCFE and OPM data exclude active duty members of the Armed Forces, temporary emergency workers
employed to cope with catastrophes, and officers and crew members of some U.S. vessels. UCFE and OPM data
differ in coverage of workers. For example, UCFE, but not OPM, includes Department of Defense workers paid
from nonappropriated funds and employees of county agricultural stabilization and conservation committees, State
and area marketing committees, and the Agricultural Extension Service. OPM, but not UCFE, includes workers
who are not U.S. citizens and who are employed outside the United States and its territories; workers paid on a
contract or fee basis; paid patients or inmates of Federal homes, hospitals, or institutions; and student employees
of Federal hospitals, clinics, or laboratories.
The UCFE and OPM programs also differ in the payroll reference period. UCFE employment data relate to the
payroll period that includes the 12th day of the month. OPM data, however, relate to persons employed on the last
workday of the month, or the last pay period before the end of the month, plus all intermittent employees.
OPM federal data and information can be accessed from the OPM Policy Federal Employment Reports page.
Questions about OPM federal employment data can be directed to [email protected] or by calling 202-606-1789.

Quarterly Workforce Indicators
The Quarterly Workforce Indicators (QWI), which uses QCEW and UI data as a major input (see Longitudinal
Employer-Household Dynamics), provides local labor market statistics by industry, worker demographics,
employer age and size. Unlike statistics tabulated from firm or person-level data, the QWI source data are unique
job-level data that link workers to their employers. Because of this link, labor market data in the QWI is available by
worker age, sex, educational attainment, and race and ethnicity. This allows for analysis by demographics of a
particular local labor market or industry—for instance, identifying industries with aging workforces. Links between
workers and firms also allow the QWI to identify worker flows—hires, separations, and turnover—as well as net
employment growth. More information about QWI is available at https://lehd.ces.census.gov/doc/QWI_101.pdf.

HANDBOOK OF METHODS

U.S. BUREAU OF LABOR STATISTICS

County Business Patterns (CBP)
County Business Patterns (CBP) is an annual series provided by the US Census Bureau that provides subnational
economic data by industry. This series includes the number of establishments, employment during the week of
March 12, first quarter payroll, and annual payroll.
Table B. Quarterly Census of Earnings and Wages (QCEW) and County Business Program (CBP)
comparison
Concept
Data sources

QCEW

CBP

The administrative dataset produced by state
unemployment insurance (UI) programs is the
major data source for QCEW. This
administrative dataset is improved and
expanded in a number of ways.

CBP data items are extracted from the Business Register (BR),
a database of all known single and multi-establishment
employer companies maintained and updated by the U.S.
Census Bureau.

The administrative data comes from Quarterly
Contributions Reports (QCR) from all private
sector, state and local government employers,
as well as Federal employers via the Report of
Federal Employment and Wages (RFEW).

The BR includes the Company Organization Survey, which
provides data for multi-establishment companies, as well as
data for single-establishment companies, obtained from
various Census Bureau programs, such as the Economic
Census, Annual Survey of Manufactures and Current Business
Surveys, as well as from administrative record sources. Since
1991, industry classifications for some businesses have also
been obtained and improved through periodic comparisons
with classifications of the Bureau of Labor Statistics.

QCEW data is then improved and expanded
using data from the Multiple Worksite Report
(MWR) and Annual Refiling Survey (ARS),
which provide accurate physical location
(address) and economic activity (industry)
details for all worksites involved in UI coverage
programs.

For more information on CBP data, see the CBP About this
Program page.

After collection, the dataset is improved by
editing conducted by staff in state agencies and
by staff working at BLS.
For more information on QCEW data sources,
see the QCEW Overview Data Sources.
Coverage
and
methodology

QCEW includes employment and wages from
more than 10.0 million establishments in every
NAICS industry. Exclusions include national
security and active-duty military, proprietors, the
unincorporated self-employed, unpaid family
members, certain farm and domestic workers
from having to report employment data, and
railroad workers covered by the railroad
unemployment insurance system.
More information about these concepts is
available from the Scope and exclusions
section of the QCEW Handbook of Methods.

Industry
classification

Frequency

CBP covers more than 6 million single-unit establishments and
1.8 million multi-unit establishments in most NAICS industries,
excluding self-employed individuals; crop and animal
production; rail transportation; Postal Service; pension, health,
welfare, and vacation funds; trusts, estates, and agency
accounts; private households; and public administration. CBP
also excludes most establishments reporting government
employees.
More information about County Business Patterns data is
available from the CBP Methodology page.

Beginning in 2017, data are classified under
the NAICS 2017 system. For more information
about the industrial classification system for a
given reference period in QCEW, see the
Industry Classification Systems Used By QCEW
page.

Data from 2012 to 2016 are classified under the NAICS 2012
system. For more information about the industrial classification
system for a given reference period in CBP, see the
Comparability with Other data section.

Quarterly, first released within 5 months after
the end of each reference quarter.

No quarterly data available.

Annually, first released within 6 months after the Annually, available approximately 16 months after the end of
end of each reference year.
each reference year.

HANDBOOK OF METHODS

U.S. BUREAU OF LABOR STATISTICS

Table B. Quarterly Census of Earnings and Wages (QCEW) and County Business Program (CBP)
comparison
Concept
Historical
data

Data
available

QCEW

CBP

Data from 1975 to present are available online
in several formats from our QCEW Databases.

Data from 1986 to present are available online in several
formats from CBP Datasets.

Data from 1938 through 1974 are available in
paper copy versions through the Federal
Depository Libraries.

Data prior to 1986 are available through The National Archives.

Establishment, employment and wage data,
along with related location quotients and overthe-year changes, are available for all the
counties in the United States, Puerto Rico and
the U.S. Virgin Islands, as well as every
Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA), every state,
and the nation. For every area listed above,
data is available for all NAICS industry levels,
as well as BLS supersector and domain levels
of industry.

Information is available on the number of establishments,
employment during the week of March 12, first quarter payroll,
and annual payroll at the U.S. level and by state, county,
metropolitan area, ZIP Code, and Congressional District
Levels. Data for Puerto Rico and the Island Areas are available
at the state and county equivalent levels.

Additionally, QCEW produces data and maps
for Hurricane Flood Zones on the Gulf and
Atlantic Coasts, as well as recently
updated Nonprofit Research Data for the
National and State area levels.

Data for establishments are presented down to the 6-digit
NAICS industry, legal form of organization (U.S. and state
only), and employment size class.

For QCEW data access, see the QCEW
Databases page.

For CBP data access, see the CBP data page.

Last Modified Date: May 07, 2020

HANDBOOK OF METHODS

U.S. BUREAU OF LABOR STATISTICS

Data Sources
QCEW microdata. For each state, the microdata of the Quarterly Census of Employment and Wages (QCEW) are
the basis for the QCEW report and are fundamentally a byproduct of the unemployment insurance (UI) accounting
system in that state.1 The states receive a Quarterly Contributions Report (QCR) from all private sector employers,
as well as from state and local governments covered under the UI program. Along with these accounting reports,
employers provide funds for their contributions payable, which finance the UI benefits system in each state.
Federal government employers provide statistical reports via the Report of Federal Employment and Wages; these
reports contain only employment and wages data, for each employer’s installations within each state. Normally,
private sector employers submit one contribution report covering all of their economic activities conducted in a
given state. For employers having only a single physical location or worksite in a state, and thus operating under a
single assigned industry and geographic code, the data from the accounting file are sufficient for statistical
purposes.
However, such data are inadequate for statistical purposes for employers with multiple establishments in a given
state or for employers engaged in different industrial activities within a state. In these cases, the employer’s QCR
reflects only statewide employment and wages, so it is not disaggregated by establishment or worksite. Although
this level of data is sufficient for many purposes of the UI program, more detailed information is required to create
a sampling frame and to meet the needs of several ongoing federal–state statistical programs. The QCEW report
contains employer name and address information and serves as a sampling frame for BLS establishment-based
surveys.
Surveys. The QCEW conducts two surveys in addition to collecting administrative data. Approximately one-third of
all private sector businesses with more than three employees are contacted annually by the Annual Refiling Survey
(ARS), and establishments with multiple locations are given the Multiple Worksite Report (MWR). The ARS verifies
and collects geographic and industry information about businesses, and the MWR collects employment and wage
data about businesses in order to make geographic and industry estimates. Both surveys collect data via paper
forms and electronically. Data collection via paper forms uses the services of a private contractor to handle various
administrative aspects of the process. Electronic data collection is done through MWRWeb, ARSWeb (for singleestablishment employers), NVMWeb (for multiple-establishment employers), and the Electronic Data Interchange
(EDI) Center (for exceptionally large employers). There are three ARS forms: BLS 3023-NVS (for singleestablishment employers), BLS 3023-NVM (for multiple-establishment employers), and BLS 3023-NCA (for
employers with unclassified industry establishments—that is, establishments which are not assigned any NAICS
Industry code). The ARS is designed to collect specific information concerning the employer's industrial activity,
geographic location, business mailing address, and physical address. The information is used to ensure that each
establishment is assigned to the correct industry and that each address geocodes the correct geographic location
of the establishment. The ARS also asks employers to identify the locations of new worksites they have
established in the state. If these employers meet QCEW program reporting criteria, then an MWR requesting
information on employment and wages for each worksite each quarter is mailed to the employer. Thus, the ARS is
also used to identify new potential MWR-eligible employers.

HANDBOOK OF METHODS

U.S. BUREAU OF LABOR STATISTICS

The MWR is collected on a quarterly basis from all eligible (that is, multiple-establishment) employers for data from
the previous quarter. The ARS is conducted on a 3-year cycle, with approximately one-third of all business
establishments sampled each year. During this cycle, BLS identifies which establishments have changed from one
type of business to another and reclassifies them under a different NAICS code. For example, brew pub
establishments can change from a pub establishment to an eating and drinking establishment, and because of this
change, they are placed on a 3-year cycle. Establishments that are classified into certain NAICS industries and
that traditionally do not change industries very often are put on a 6-year cycle. Cemeteries are an example of such
establishments. Still other establishments are assigned NAICS code 999999 (unclassified). These establishment
are unclassified because the state does not have enough data to categorize them definitively into a particular
NAICS code. There are a number of reasons for having insufficient data. For one, when originally setting up the
business, the establishment could have left out relevant details. Another possibility is that the state deemed the
NAICS code assigned to be incorrect and tried to contact the establishment but did not receive a response. To
reduce the number of unclassified establishments, the state surveys them annually.
Readers may find forms and information as follows:
•
•
•
•
•

MWR forms at https://www.bls.gov/respondents/mwr/forms/mwr-forms.htm
General information on MWR at https://www.bls.gov/respondents/mwr/home.htm
Information on reporting MWR data via the Web at https://www.bls.gov/respondents/mwr/web-reporting.htm
ARS forms at https://www.bls.gov/respondents/ars/forms.htm
Electronic Data Interchange (EDI) reporting at https://www.bls.gov/respondents/mwr/electronic-datareporting.htm

Confidentiality. The Confidential Information Protection and Statistical Efficiency Act of 2002 (CIPSEA) safeguards
the confidentiality of individually identifiable information acquired under a pledge of confidentiality for exclusively
statistical purposes. CIPSEA limits access of such information to authorized individuals with a need to know and
levies fines and penalties for any knowing and willful disclosure of individually identifiable information by any BLS
officer, employee, or agent. BLS policy on the confidential nature of respondent identifiable information (RII) states,
“RII acquired or maintained by the BLS for exclusively statistical purposes and under a pledge of confidentiality
shall be treated in a manner that ensures the information will be used only for statistical purposes and will be
accessible only to authorized individuals with a need-to-know.” This policy remains in effect; however, the extent of
confidentiality maintained within each state varies in accordance with the laws of that state. Accordingly, the
statement on the ARS and MWR forms make no promise of confidentiality. However, once the QCEW data are
furnished to BLS and are in its possession, the data are considered confidential and are covered by CIPSEA. BLS
considers the maintenance of the confidentiality of data collected under a pledge of confidentiality to be critical to
QCEW program integrity.
Authorization and participation. The ARS and the MWR are authorized by federal law 29 U.S.C. 2. Although
employer cooperation is not required by federal law, 28 states have laws that mandate the completion of the ARS.2
And, 30 states have laws that mandate the completion of the MWR.3 To encourage respondents to report their
information, states offering them a number of ways to submit their data. By thus allowing respondents several
reporting options, states are able to relieve some of the burden from the respondents.

HANDBOOK OF METHODS

U.S. BUREAU OF LABOR STATISTICS

States are required to attain a 70-percent response rate to the ARS for the establishments they survey or an 80percent response rate among employees in those establishments. The ARS website email “blast” prior to the first
(hardcopy) mailing (to 2012 ARS Web respondents), an ARS one-page letter prior to the first mailing, follow-up
mailings of the ARS and MWR forms and cover letters to non-respondents to the first mailing, and ARSWeb and
MWRWeb email solicitations to any non-respondents whose email address is on file, as well as telephone contact
of key non-respondents, are used to increase response rates. State agencies use specific techniques for
converting nonparticipants to participants and for partial collection. Another technique is to assign codes to
establishments that fail to respond after extensive follow-up efforts. The codes assigned are NAICS codes based
on (1) their distribution across other establishments with the same NAICS codes and (2) other characteristics.
States may review system-assigned NAICS codes and may overlay them with codes they have assigned.
Quality control and validation. As data are collected through the ARS and MWR surveys, quality control procedures
ensure that the information collected is accurate. These procedures include follow-up of all non-respondents and
validation of all edit failures, which are incorporated into the design of the QCEW. Edit failures occur when State
systems kick back any discrepancy in the data and state staff must resolve or bypass the discrepancy manually
before the data can be saved. The states and the BLS regional offices also receive both training in industry coding
and procedural assistance in conducting the survey. Regional offices conduct yearly quality assurance reviews in
each state that is under their jurisdiction. States and regional offices receive training specifically in areas of
industry coding and survey procedures in order to promote consistency within the states. Consistency ensures that
all states code industries in a similar manner. The procedural assistance that states and regional offices receive is
in the area of how to administer the survey. Included are protocols for suggestions on how to increase response
rates (for example, certain telephone guidelines may be issued regarding the most effective way to turn a refusal
into compliance) and how to maintain quality assurance (how to deal with edit failures and why edit failures occur).
There is an auto check for respondents who complete the MWR online. If wages are too high or too low, or if
employment has changed drastically from the previous month or quarter, then the system asks the respondents, in
real time, the reason for the change. Other, similar auto checks are in place in the state systems when the
respondent enters data. MWR respondents are unable to save the data unless the checks are overridden or
amended.
Industries that are hard to measure or reach have specific protocols in place as well. Guidelines are given to states
for the most effective ways to reach companies in such industries and, once contact is made, how to ask them for
their information most effectively. For example, when companies are unable to be reached, looking at what they do
on their website helps. However, when what the website says is unclear, another idea is to look at which positions
the companies are recruiting for. This method usually helps with companies in scientific and engineering industries,
because the position descriptions listed reveal what type of specific work the company does. There are many more
ways of canvassing companies for information as well.

NOTES
1

Included in the QCEW microdata are data for U.S. territories and the District of Columbia. For simplicity, they are referred to

as states in this document.

HANDBOOK OF METHODS

U.S. BUREAU OF LABOR STATISTICS

The Annual Refiling Survey (ARS) is mandatory for the following states: California, Colorado, Connecticut, Florida, Georgia,

Hawaii, Iowa, Kansas, Louisiana, Maine, Maryland, Nebraska, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Jersey, North Carolina, North
Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, Oregon, Puerto Rico, Rhode Island, South Carolina (mandatory only for employers with more than
21 employees), Utah, Vermont, Virginia, U.S. Virgin Islands, and West Virginia.
3

The Multiple Worksite Report (MWR) is mandatory for the following states: Alabama, California, Colorado, Connecticut,

Florida, Georgia, Iowa, Kansas, Louisiana, Maine, Maryland, Minnesota, Nebraska, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Jersey,
New York, North Carolina, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, Oregon, Puerto Rico, Rhode Island, South Carolina, Utah, Vermont,
Virginia, U.S. Virgin Islands, and West Virginia.
Last Modified Date: May 07, 2020

HANDBOOK OF METHODS

U.S. BUREAU OF LABOR STATISTICS

Design
This section is based largely on the 2017 Office of Management and Budget (OMB) clearance of the Quarterly
Census of Employment and Wages (QCEW) program. The program’s universe of business establishments
consists of those establishments which are respondents to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) in partnership
with the 50 states, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, and the U.S. Virgin Islands (a total of 53 entities). The
original source of data is the Quarterly Contribution Reports (QCRs) submitted to State Workforce Agencies
(SWAs) by employers subject to state and federal unemployment insurance (UI) laws. The QCEW data, which are
compiled for each calendar quarter, provide a comprehensive business name-and-address file with employment
and wage information by industry at the six-digit North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) level and
at the national, state, Metropolitan Statistical Area, and county levels for employers subject to state UI laws. Similar
data for federal government employees covered by the Unemployment Compensation for Federal Employees
(UCFE) program also are included. The QCEW data serve as the sample frame for establishment surveys
conducted by BLS and selected states. In addition, the QCEW has served as a sample frame for other U.S.
government surveys. The BLS role in the QCEW program is to establish and enforce uniform methods and
processes that yield consistent data quality for the multifaceted uses of the QCEW data. In this role, BLS takes in
raw UI administrative data, seeks to understand the error components involved, and uses methods and processes
to reduce error and yield a high-quality economic dataset and sample frame.

The sampling frame
The QCEW is a virtual census of nonagricultural establishments’ employees and their wages. It also includes
about 52 percent of the workers in agricultural industries. The BLS process for enhancing the quality of the data
collected is completed by the state’s workforce agency staff. The process includes, but is not limited to, training
staff; collecting data efficiently from large multiple-establishment employers, achieved through Electronic Data
Interchange (EDI); applying statistically valid procedures for editing data, estimating missing reports and data
elements (imputation), addressing standardization, and linking records; and using standardized processing
systems for quality control procedures for data review. (See “Calculation” section for details about estimation
procedures and reliability of the data.)
After the data have been extensively reviewed at the state, regional, and national levels, BLS uses the resulting file
as a business establishment sample frame. The data also are summarized to produce counts of establishments,
employment, and wages for all counties; all Metropolitan Statistical Areas; each of the 50 states, the District of
Columbia, Puerto Rico, and the U.S. Virgin Islands; and the nation, for all levels of industrial aggregation.
As shown in table 1, the number of private business establishments (worksites) covered by the QCEW in 2014
was about 9.07 million and the covered employment was about 115.6 million. In addition, about 61,000 federal
government, 68,000 state government, and 165,000 local government establishments are covered; private
households are excluded, as is all agriculture except forestry. The total number of covered establishments was
about 9.36 million and covered employment about 136.61 million. The QCEW series has broad economic
significance in measuring labor trends and major industry developments, in time series analyses and industry

HANDBOOK OF METHODS

U.S. BUREAU OF LABOR STATISTICS

comparisons, and in special studies such as analyses of establishments, employment, and wages by size of
establishment.
Sampling weight. The QCEW is a census of establishments, or worksites; hence, every unit is in the sample and
represents itself only. That is, each unit has a sampling weight of 1.00 (absolute certainty).

Reliability
The QCEW is designed in such a way that it can identify industries by geographical location and link
establishments by multiple worksites in order to produce firm-level data. The QCEW has a longitudinal database in
which it can link data over time and capture business mergers and acquisitions. It can also link establishments by
UI number.
An inherent strength of the QCEW is its basis in mandatory UI reporting and the built-in potency of that system.
For example, each initial claim for UI benefits includes a check ensuring that the employer exists and is
contributing to the UI compensation fund. Based on a weekly survey of over 270,000 initial claims and more than
14 million claims in total, the system ensures complete coverage.
The QCEW data are censuses of establishments and therefore are not subject to sampling error. However, some
other types of errors can occur, such as invalid county, industry, or ownership codes; data entry mistakes; and
over- or underreporting of employment and wages. To control for these errors, BLS has put in place extensive
quality control procedures. Among these procedures are (1) improving data collection methods, including EDI and
especially for large multiple-establishment employers; (2) standardizing data-processing systems so that they
include edits, imputation, record linkages (with standardization of addresses), and industrial classification coding;
and (3) standardizing training of staff at state, regional, and national levels in reviewing data according to the
guidelines provided by the QCEW program office and stated in official memorandums.1 Any reports that are
identified as suspect after completing these procedures are individually reviewed. Contact with respondents is
frequently used to validate significant movements or to correct the data.
The two most important initiatives undertaken by BLS to enhance the quality of QCEW data are the establishment
of the Multiple Worksites Report (MWR) and the establishment of the Annual Refiling Survey (ARS). Two separate
OMB clearances are obtained for these surveys. The MWR is sent quarterly to multiple-establishment employers
for the purpose of asking them to break out their consolidated reports to the establishment level. For example, the
UI system requires some employers to provide data for all of their operations within a state; the MWR asks the
employer to provide information on each establishment so that all records on the file can be at the establishment
level, which is generally the sampling unit for most BLS surveys. The information improves the quality of local
economic data by reporting the location and type of economic activity more accurately.
The ARS is conducted annually on about one-third of the establishments in the sampling frame, for the purpose of
updating businesses’ industrial classification, name, and reporting and physical location addresses. The
establishments surveyed are selected randomly. State and regional staff are trained extensively in industrial
classification coding. In addition, standardized systems are provided to the states and regions to process the data.

HANDBOOK OF METHODS

U.S. BUREAU OF LABOR STATISTICS

Methods for maximizing response rates
Because employers are required to file Quarterly Contributions Reports (QCRs) under state and federal UI laws,
response rates for these documents are generally very high. Response rates are about 95 percent for employment
(table 2) and about 96 percent (table 3) for wages (like filing of QCRs, reporting of wages is required by UI law).
Response rates for total covered employment are about 97 percent (table 3), because nonresponse is mostly from
small establishments.
The growth of EDI—the direct transfer of data from the firm to BLS—also provides a high level of response and
stability. BLS currently collects more than 432,000 reports from nearly 250 large firms with about 12.2 million
employees via EDI. Virtually all of these firms provide data that make up the final estimates.

BLS initiatives
BLS has undertaken several research initiatives in the control and measurement of nonsampling error. The 1991
Current Employment Statistics (CES) survey’s benchmark employment estimate transmitted to the QCEW
revealed a substantial nonsampling error problem caused by payroll-processing firms. The American Statistical
Association formed a committee to review BLS procedures and issued a report in January 1994.2 BLS adopted
most of the report’s recommendations. BLS conducted a Response Analysis Survey (RAS) of payroll-processing
firms.3 The purpose of the survey was twofold: to identify practices that can affect the data collected by the CES
survey and the QCEW (the benchmark source data) and to educate payroll processors on proper reporting
procedures. In addition, BLS conducted a RAS of CES and QCEW covered employment reporting.4 The survey
identified factors that affected both CES and QCEW reporting within the same firm. On the basis of these RAS
studies, BLS undertook an extensive education program with CES respondents. The program included highlighting
correct reporting of problematic items on the CES report form and including special notices on correct reporting in
the monthly advance notice fax message. Another RAS was conducted in 2008; a report details findings of the
survey.5
Table 1. Quarterly Census of Employment and Wages (QCEW) summary data for 50 states, the District of
Columbia, Puerto Rico, and the U.S. Virgin Islands, 2016 4th quarter (in thousands)
Number of
establishments

Description

Employment
October, 2016

Employment
November, 2016

Employment
December, 2016

Total

9,778

144,336

144,832

144,702

Total private
Agriculture, forestry, fishing, and
hunting
Mining

9,478

122,300

122,664

122,598

105

1,342

1,238

1,151

600

602

Utilities

551

550

Construction

773

6,926

6,853

6,702

Manufacturing

343

12,348

12,352

12,374

Wholesale trade

614

5,903

5,912

5,928

Retail trade

1,044

16,023

16,488

16,596

Transportation and warehousing

239

4,854

4,957

5,081

Information

157

2,807

2,827

2,826

Finance and insurance

481

5,880

5,895

5,918

See footnotes at end of table.

HANDBOOK OF METHODS

U.S. BUREAU OF LABOR STATISTICS

Table 1. Quarterly Census of Employment and Wages (QCEW) summary data for 50 states, the District of
Columbia, Puerto Rico, and the U.S. Virgin Islands, 2016 4th quarter (in thousands)
Number of
establishments

Description
Real estate and rental and
leasing
Professional, scientific,
and technical services
Management of companies and
enterprises
Administrative and support and
waste management services
Educational services

Employment
October, 2016

Employment
November, 2016

Employment
December, 2016

378

2,160

2,153

2,160

1,170

8,921

8,963

8,973

2,246

2,254

2,262

526

9,266

9,249

9,148

114

2,891

2,903

2,863

Healthcare and social assistance
Arts, entertainment, and
recreation
Accommodation and food
services
Other services, except public
administration
Unclassified

1,509

19,141

19,198

19,254

138

2,229

2,122

2,115

683

13,446

13,386

13,337

829

4,427

4,417

4,402

251

329

338

346

Federal government

2,814

2,819

2,849

State government

4,782

4,788

4,772

Local government

169

14,439

14,559

14,481

Note: Industries are categorized by North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) code.
Source: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics.

Table 2. Percentage of imputed establishments, total private, January 2001–December 2016
Year

Jan

Feb

Mar

Apr

May

Jun

Jul

Aug

Sept

Oct

Nov

Dec

2001

5.96

5.99

5.72

5.73

5.81

5.04

5.06

5.08

5.02

5.04

5.09

2002

5.57

5.58

5.57

5.12

5.19

4.98

4.99

5.04

4.75

4.78

4.82

2003

6.25

6.26

5.65

5.62

5.7

5.27

5.29

5.49

5.51

5.57

2004

5.98

5.97

5.98

5.83

5.8

5.93

5.5

5.62

5.33

5.35

5.45

2005

5.66

5.68

5.74

5.13

5.11

5.28

5.23

5.25

5.26

4.65

4.71

4.8

2006

5.96

5.98

6.01

4.96

4.91

5.01

4.89

4.97

5.01

4.46

4.55

4.6

2007

5.14

5.28

5.31

4.59

4.7

4.78

4.37

4.4

4.45

4.15

4.18

4.25

2008

5.29

5.27

5.33

4.19

4.18

4.31

4.19

4.17

4.24

3.83

3.88

3.99

2009

4.88

4.9

4.99

4.12

4.09

4.21

3.71

3.72

3.79

3.64

3.66

3.81

2010

4.85

4.87

4.89

4.22

4.42

4.33

4.34

4.56

3.83

3.87

4.02

2011

4.76

4.8

4.88

5.02

5.21

3.44

3.46

3.59

2.93

3.00

3.12

2012

3.73

3.79

3.71

3.7

3.84

3.38

3.52

4.00

4.03

4.14

2013

4.28

4.19

4.27

3.43

3.58

3.01

2.95

3.06

2.95

2.9

3.04

2014

4.11

4.04

4.11

2.89

2.81

2.95

2.74

2.87

2.65

2.68

2.77

2015

3.38

3.41

2.78

2.74

2.84

3.36

3.49

2.52

2.56

2.68

2016

4.46

4.54

3.16

3.33

2.77

2.78

2.87

3.16

3.2

3.31

See footnotes at end of table.

HANDBOOK OF METHODS

U.S. BUREAU OF LABOR STATISTICS

Note: Data include total private establishments (excluding households) in 50 states and the District of Columbia. Data do not include Puerto Rico and U.S.
Virgin Islands.
Source: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics.

Table 3. Percentage of imputed employment, total private, January 2001–December 2016
Year

Jan

Feb

Mar

Apr

May

Jun

Jul

Aug

Sept

Oct

Nov

Dec

2001

5.14

5.09

5.1

4.76

4.7

4.74

4.41

4.38

4.47

4.68

4.74

2002

4.41

4.42

4.38

4.16

4.13

4.24

4.49

4.44

4.47

4.26

4.2

4.23

2003

4.92

4.93

4.82

4.36

4.29

4.39

4.62

4.54

4.58

4.62

4.61

4.57

2004

4.52

4.42

4.35

4.7

4.59

4.77

5.07

5.01

5.24

4.54

4.48

4.49

2005

4.1

4.09

4.12

3.8

3.74

4.09

3.96

3.95

3.83

3.82

3.78

3.79

2006

3.78

3.74

3.75

3.14

3.04

3.06

3.29

3.31

3.28

3.23

3.28

3.27

2007

3.28

3.24

2.95

2.89

2.94

3.08

3.1

2.86

2.82

2.87

2008

3.07

2.97

3.00

2.6

2.53

2.68

2.69

2.58

2.68

2.49

2.44

2.56

2009

2.84

2.75

3.26

2.35

2.29

2.36

2.34

2.3

2.51

2.34

2.26

2.34

2010

2.85

2.81

2.79

2.32

2.25

2.43

2.7

2.67

3.09

2.42

2.44

2.57

2011

2.8

2.79

2.89

3.04

2.99

3.25

2.32

2.33

2.41

2.22

2.23

2.27

2012

2.49

2.41

2.45

2.37

2.3

2.45

2.31

2.18

2.29

2.71

2.53

2.64

2013

2.72

2.54

2.62

2.17

2.13

2.28

2.34

2.14

2.26

2.21

1.97

2.13

2014

2.46

2.31

2.37

1.88

1.8

1.92

1.91

1.84

1.96

2.13

2.09

2.19

2015

2.07

2.03

2.07

1.78

1.71

1.83

1.96

1.89

2.05

1.73

1.87

2016

2.17

2.14

2.23

1.56

1.87

1.72

1.67

1.84

1.94

1.9

2.00

Table 4. Percentage of imputed wages in the Quarterly Census of Employment and Wages (QCEW), by
quarter and year, first quarter 2001–fourth quarter 2016
Quarter and year

Total establishment count

Percentage imputed

First quarter 2001

7,743,963

4.26

Second quarter 2001

7,752,694

4.24

Third quarter 2001

7,803,541

3.18

Fourth quarter 2001

7,839,471

3.11

First quarter 2002

7,891,412

3.94

Second quarter 2002

7,901,173

3.4

Third quarter 2002

7,935,862

3.31

Fourth quarter 2002

7,973,775

3.28

First quarter 2003

8,013,297

4.78

Second quarter 2003

8,002,961

3.76

Third quarter 2003

8,060,296

3.46

Fourth quarter 2003

8,081,182

3.5

First quarter 2004

8,129,247

4.31

Second quarter 2004

8,133,737

4.07

Third quarter 2004

8,192,688

3.71

Fourth quarter 2004

8,259,088

3.7

First quarter 2005

8,314,712

4.15

Second quarter 2005

8,335,131

3.62

See footnotes at end of table.

HANDBOOK OF METHODS

U.S. BUREAU OF LABOR STATISTICS

Table 4. Percentage of imputed wages in the Quarterly Census of Employment and Wages (QCEW), by
quarter and year, first quarter 2001–fourth quarter 2016
Quarter and year

Total establishment count

Percentage imputed

Third quarter 2005

8,407,905

3.65

Fourth quarter 2005

8,464,375

3.13

First quarter 2006

8,542,371

4.39

Second quarter 2006

8,550,053

3.61

Third quarter 2006

8,617,164

3.52

Fourth quarter 2006

8,703,001

3.06

First quarter 2007

8,718,045

3.94

Second quarter 2007

8,720,237

3.49

Third quarter 2007

8,785,200

3.2

Fourth quarter 2007

8,836,877

2.96

First quarter 2008

8,875,359

4.04

Second quarter 2008

8,876,227

3.34

Third quarter 2008

8,918,706

3.24

Fourth quarter 2008

8,943,568

2.99

First quarter 2009

8,878,407

4.1

Second quarter 2009

8,819,252

3.27

Third quarter 2009

8,826,095

3.08

Fourth quarter 2009

8,845,544

2.93

First quarter 2010

8,802,125

3.99

Second quarter 2010

8,769,242

3.53

Third quarter 2010

8,802,038

3.3

Fourth quarter 2010

8,842,899

2.94

First quarter 2011

8,820,545

4.32

Second quarter 2011

8,828,478

4.08

Third quarter 2011

8,876,724

2.59

Fourth quarter 2011

8,921,357

1.95

First quarter 2012

8,951,937

2.89

Second quarter 2012

8,968,693

2.84

Third quarter 2012

8,918,033

2.59

Fourth quarter 2012

8,958,625

3.25

First quarter 2013

8,946,733

3.33

Second quarter 2013

9,003,016

2.68

Third quarter 2013

9,047,292

2.29

Fourth quarter 2013

9,050,707

2.46

First quarter 2014

9,045,619

3.45

Second quarter 2014

9,041,974

2.14

Third quarter 2014

9,092,059

2.17

Fourth quarter 2014

9,149,628

1.96

First quarter 2015

9,178,990

2.69

Second quarter 2015

9,221,367

2.21

Third quarter 2015

9,266,222

2.86

Fourth quarter 2015

9,319,488

1.85

First quarter 2016

9,320,160

3.88

Second quarter 2016

9,371,351

2.72

See footnotes at end of table.

HANDBOOK OF METHODS

U.S. BUREAU OF LABOR STATISTICS

Table 4. Percentage of imputed wages in the Quarterly Census of Employment and Wages (QCEW), by
quarter and year, first quarter 2001–fourth quarter 2016
Quarter and year

Total establishment count

Percentage imputed

Third quarter 2016

9,432,306

2.35

Fourth quarter 2016

9,489,189

2.76

Source: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics.

Table 5. Revisions in published Quarterly Census of Employment and Wages (QCEW) data for March 2015,
U.S. total, September 2015–September 2016
March 2015
(September
2015 release)

March 2015 March 2015
(December (March 2016
2015 release)
release)

March 2015
(June 2016
release)

Total
March 2015
revision
First
Second Third Fourth
(September
since
revision revision revision revision
2016 release)
September
2015

137,412,381

137,409,835

137,393,814

137,392,429

137,387,791

-2,546

-16,021

-1,385

June 2015
(December
2015
Release)

June 2015
(March 2016
Release)

June
2015(June
2016
Release)

June 2015
(September
2016
Release)

-4,638

-24,590

First
revision

Second
revision

Third
revision

Revision
since
December
2015

140,594,927

140,621,882

140,617,064

140,616,268

26,955

-4,818

-796

21,341

September
2015 (March
2016
release)

September
2015 (June
2016
release)

September
2015
(September
2016
release)

First
revision

Second
revision

Revision
since
March
2016

140,442,224

140,505,653

140,495,791

63,429

-9,862

53,567

December
2015 (June
2016
release)

December
2015
(September
2016
release)

First
revision

141,924,459

141,976,263

51,804

Source: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics.

Table 6. Percentage of revisions in published Quarterly Census of Employment and Wages (QCEW) data
for March 2015, from original to next publication, December 2015–September 2016
Preliminary publication

March 2015 (December
2015 Release)

Percentage of revision
from preliminary
published data

-0.001853

June 2015 (March
2016 Release)
0.0191721

See footnotes at end of table.

September 2015 (June
December 2015
2016 Release)
(September 2016 Release)
0.045164

0.036501

HANDBOOK OF METHODS

U.S. BUREAU OF LABOR STATISTICS

Note: Percentage for March 13 (December 2013 release) is negative because the revised value of the data was lower than the original published value; thus,
the net change was negative.
Source: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics.

Table 7. Percentage of revision from original to final publication
Preliminary publication
Percentage of revision
from preliminary
published data

March 2015
(September 2015
release)
-0.0179

June 2015 (September
September 2015
December 2015
2016 release)
(September 2016 release) (September 2016 release)

0.01518

0.03814

0.0365

Source: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics.

NOTES
1

Official memorandums to the states and regional staff about the QCEW program (U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, various

dates), available upon request by contacting QCEW, https://www.bls.gov/cew/contact.htm.
2 American Statistical Association Panel for the Bureau of Labor Statistics’ Current Employment Statistics Survey, “A research

agenda to guide and improve the Current Employment Statistics survey” (Alexandria, VA: American Statistical Association,
January 1994), available upon request.
3 Karen L. Goldenberg, Susan E. Moore, and Richard J. Rosen, “Commercial payroll software and the quality of employment

data," Proceedings of the Survey Research Methods Section, American Statistical Association, August 13–18, 1994 (Toronto:
American Statistical Association, 1994), https://www.asasrms.org/Proceedings/papers/1994_178.pdf.
4 George S. Werking, Richard L. Clayton, and Richard J. Rosen, “Studying the causes of employment count differences

reported in two BLS programs,” Proceedings of the Survey Research Methods Section, American Statistical Association,
August 13–17, 1995 (Orlando, FL: American Statistical Association, 1995), https://www.asasrms.org/Proceedings/papers/
1995_137.pdf.
5

Sally Anderson, Margaret Applebaum, Michele Eickman, Greg Erkens, Kristin Fairman, Jeffrey Groen, Steve Kroll, Chris

Manning, and Polly Phipps, “Differences in seasonality between the CES and QCEW programs: results from the 2008
Response Analysis Survey” (U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, August 21, 2009), https://www.asasrms.org/Proceedings/y2009/
Files/304445.pdf.
Last Modified Date: May 07, 2020

HANDBOOK OF METHODS

U.S. BUREAU OF LABOR STATISTICS

Calculation
Data from the Quarterly Census of Employment and Wages (QCEW) are aggregations of various kinds of
business establishment data, including geographical, industry, ownership, and establishment size data. QCEW
data are not estimates. On occasion, when business establishment data are of poor quality or missing entirely,
they may be imputed. (See “Design” section for more information on imputation in QCEW data.) Proration is used
to handle multiple-establishment employers for whom the top employment and wage levels are known but
distribution at the establishment level is unknown.

Editing and validating data
QCEW data are validated at the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) during a pre-established data review period
after the completion of data collection and editing conducted by state workforce agency staff. Edits reduce
approximately 10.0 million records to a manageable level. Establishments with no change or a statistically
insignificant change to their economic data are ignored. Economic data types include employment, wages,
industry, and county. QCEW criteria for reviewing individual establishment records are based on over-the-year
changes to employment or wage levels for the establishment relative to the total employment level of the county it
is located in. Data are validated to keep the number of establishment records that require review at a reasonable
level while ensuring that detailed, county-level aggregations remain accurate. Program analysts review only
employment and wage changes that exceed the criteria. Any large-scale changes that the analysts find in
economic data need to be verified or corrected by working with state workforce agency staff. One of several
methods used to validate significant changes is to seek corroboration with total wage-record counts. Wage
records, provided directly by the employer, can be used to confirm both current levels and year-ago levels. The
availability of wage record counts varies from state to state. As necessary, state staff contact respondents to obtain
corrected data.

Calculation procedure
The aggregated totals of employment and wages for each subdomain (e.g., industry, geography, and size) of the
QCEW are simply the sum of the establishments belonging to that subdomain. Averages and other statistics for
each subdomain are derived by performing the appropriate arithmetic functions.
As mentioned, the BLS role is to impose quality on the raw data. One of the processes for doing so involves
editing the data and conducting validation checks. The basic monthly employment edit consists of a six-step
statistical test that includes the use of multiple t-tests for month-to-month changes, over-the-year changes, and a
12-month variation in data; some tests are conducted on levels while others are conducted on rates of change.1

Imputation
Although BLS receives QCEW files from all 53 entities in a timely manner, the files contain estimates for late and
missing respondents. Therefore, one step in the data process is to estimate the number of late respondents, the
number of missing respondents (i.e., unit nonresponse) and of the number of missing data elements (i.e., item

HANDBOOK OF METHODS

U.S. BUREAU OF LABOR STATISTICS

nonresponse). As shown in table 2 of the “Design” section, as of June 2014 about 4 percent of establishments
failed to respond to the QCEW in a timely manner and thus required imputation; the corresponding percentage for
employment in that same month and year was about 2 percent, as shown in table 3 of the “Design” section. The
nonresponse rate for wages was about 4 percent in the first quarter, 2014, as shown in table 4 of the “Design”
section.
The current method of imputation applies, to the missing establishment, the change from a year earlier to the
previous month’s employment or quarterly wages in order to estimate the current month’s employment or quarterly
wages. That is, the current month’s employment for a missing establishment is equal to the previous month’s
employment multiplied by its change from a year earlier; a similar procedure is applied to estimate total quarterly
wages. A drawback to this procedure is that it uses the trend from a year earlier rather than the current trend.2
BLS has conducted extensive research on alternative imputation methods for both employment and wages. The
findings of the research indicate that current trends exhibited by the reported data from similar cells should be
applied to nonrespondents. BLS defines the procedure for doing so as the ratio method. According to this method,
the ratio for a particular estimation cell is computed as the sum of a current month’s reported employment divided
by the sum of the previous month’s reported employment. To impute the current month’s employment for a
nonrespondent, the ratio is then multiplied by the nonrespondent’s previous month’s employment. A similar
procedure is applied to impute average quarterly wages. The ratio method of imputation will be implemented in the
new QCEW processing system.3
Another data-processing step is to link the QCEW data across quarters for various purposes, including (1) editing
and imputation; (2) separating establishments into new establishments (openings or births), continuous
establishments (existing businesses), and out-of-business establishments (closings or deaths); and (3) performing
longitudinal research.4

Changes in employment levels
While collecting data, analysts may see large increases or declines in employment levels within an establishment.
These changes may be verified by identifying a predecessor or successor establishment, respectively. Any such
change may be due to a number of factors, including a merger between companies, the acquisition of one
company by another, improved reporting by a multiple-establishment employer, and a physical relocation of
employees. Often, states contact the employer in question to verify the shifts in the data and get an explanation as
to why they occurred.
QCEW program analysts may also seek to validate data by asking questions of the State Workforce Agency staff.
The questions usually are about an unexpected or large change in the economic or administrative data of a
specific establishment or group of establishments. The agency provides the analysts with edited unemployment
insurance (UI) data and often has firsthand knowledge of the changes to the data.

HANDBOOK OF METHODS

U.S. BUREAU OF LABOR STATISTICS

Other changes in economic activity
Breaks in published data—sudden shifts in employment or wage levels at the macrolevel—can occur for a number
of reasons. One major reason is a change in coding, due to either a physical relocation of an establishment, a
change in primary economic activity, a change in industry definition, or the correction of a reporting error. Another
reason is a change in the reporting status of an establishment. Some businesses with multiple establishments
incorrectly identify themselves as a single unit. Eventually, if they are able to provide a breakout of economic and
administrative detail for all of their subunits, it turns out that many of these units are in different counties and may
require different industry codes.

Adjustments and related changes
Both adjusted over-the-year growth rates for the third month of the quarter and average weekly wages are
published in the QCEW County Employment and Wages quarterly news release. These growth rates are not
published anywhere else. The over-the-year changes in employment and wages are adjusted to account for most
of the administrative corrections made to the underlying establishment reports. Adjustments are made by
modifying the previous-year levels used to calculate the over-the-year changes. Over-the-year percent changes
are calculated with the use of an adjusted version of the final, unpublished quarterly data of the previous year as
the base data. The unpublished previous-year levels do not match the unadjusted data maintained on the BLS
website. Over-the-year changes based on data from the website or from data published in previous BLS news
releases may differ substantially from the over-the-year changes presented in the QCEW news release.

Other administrative changes
The adjusted data used to calculate the over-the-year changes presented in the news release account for most of
the administrative changes: those occurring when employers update the industry, location, or ownership
information of their establishments. The most common administrative adjustments are the result of updated
information about which particular county a given establishment is located in. Included in these adjustments are
administrative changes involving the classification of establishments whose county was previously reported as
unknown or simply “statewide” or whose industry was reported as unknown. The classification “statewide” is used
primarily for multiple-establishment employers with locations in multiple counties. It appears on the accounts
master record that aggregates all establishment data. The classification is sometimes used by establishments
whose economic activity has no primary location. The classification “unknown” is used by a state that is unable to
identify the physical location of an establishment. Beginning with the first quarter of 2008, adjusted data account
for administrative changes caused by multiple-establishment employers that submit reports for each of their
establishments rather than reporting as a single entity. Beginning with the second quarter of 2011, adjusted data
account for selected large administrative changes in employment and wages. These new adjustments allow the
QCEW to include county employment and wage growth rates in the news release that would otherwise not meet
publication standards.
The adjusted data used to calculate the over-the-year changes presented in any County Employment and Wages
news release are valid for comparisons between the starting and ending points (a 12-month period) used in that

HANDBOOK OF METHODS

U.S. BUREAU OF LABOR STATISTICS

particular release. Comparisons may not be valid for any period other than the one featured in a release even if the
changes were calculated by using adjusted data.

Confidentiality
Finally, in accordance with BLS policy, data reported under a promise of confidentiality are published in a way so
as to protect the identifiable information of respondents. BLS withholds the publication of UI-covered employment
and wage data for any industry level when necessary to protect the identity of employers. Totals at the industry
level for the states and the nation include the undisclosed data suppressed within the detailed tables without
revealing those data. QCEW confidentiality concepts and practices are largely based on the “Statistical Policy
Working Paper 22”(PDF) developed by the Federal Committee on Statistical Methods.
For more information about Confidentiality concepts, as it relates to QCEW data disclosure, see this document
about Confidentiality and Data Disclosure.

NOTES
1

The wage edit includes the use of an interquartile test developed by David Hoaglin, Boris Iglewicz, and John Tukey,

“Performance of some resistant rules for outlier labeling,” Journal of the American Statistical Association, December 1986, pp.
991–999, https://www.jstor.org/stable/2289073?seq=1#metadata_info_tab_contents. The edit conditions and formulas are
described in “Appendix-F: Edit conditions and formulas,” QCEW Operating Manual (U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2007),
www.reginfo.gov/public/do/DownloadDocument?objectID=48010401.
2 The imputation formulas used by BLS are described in chapter 8, “Imputation of Missing and Delinquent Data,” and Appendix

J of the QCEW Operating Manual (U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2007). www.reginfo.gov/public/do/DownloadDocument?
objectID=48010401.
3

For details of the method, including various exceptions, see ICR documents (Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs,

Office of Management and Budget, Executive Office of the President), http://www.reginfo.gov/public/do/PRAViewDocument?
ref_nbr=201406-1220-001.
4 Details of the methodology are given in Ivan P. Fellegi and Alan B. Sunter, “A theory for record linkage,” Journal

of the

American Statistical Association, 1969, vol. 64, no. 328, pp. 1183–1210; and Kenneth Robertson, Larry Huff, Gordon
Mikkelson, Timothy Pivetz, and Alice Winkler, “Improvement in record linkage processes for the Bureau of Labor Statistics’
Business Establishment List,” in Wendy Alvey and Bettye Jamerson, eds., Record linkage techniques—1997: Proceedings of
an International Workshop and Exposition, March 20–21, 1997, Arlington, VA. Washington, DC: Federal Committee on
Statistical Methodology, Office of Management and Budget, 1997. (For more information on establishment linkage, births, and
deaths, see “Business Employment Dynamics,” Handbook of Methods (U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics), https://www.bls.gov/
opub/hom/bdm/home.htm.
Last Modified Date: May 07, 2020

HANDBOOK OF METHODS

U.S. BUREAU OF LABOR STATISTICS

Presentation
This section provides some information on the ways Quarterly Census of Employment and Wages (QCEW) data
are presented. It also provides more information on the users and uses of these data. Because the QCEW is a
census, there are confidentiality protection requirements that are different from those which apply to BLS survey
products. All QCEW products are evaluated for the presence of data that may provide sensitive information
regarding employment and wages reported by a particular employer. BLS withholds QCEW data to the extent
needed to protect the confidentiality of sensitive data. Details regarding the methods used to protect the data are
not shared so that the protection will maintain its strength.

Publications
The QCEW is published quarterly, in two consecutive releases, and about 5 months after the reference period has
ended. The first release is the traditional County Employment and Wages news release, which presents adjusted
data that are never revised, and is available within 5 months after the end of the quarter. Then, about 2 weeks after
this news release has been published, the QCEW full data release occurs. Quarterly and annual data included in
the full data release are unadjusted and preliminary until finalized with the publication of the following reference
period first quarter of data. The full data are available from QCEW database resources at https://www.bls.gov/cew/
data.htm. More information about the schedule of these QCEW releases can be found at https://www.bls.gov/cew/
release-calendar.htm.
The County Employment and Wages news release focuses on large counties in the United States (counties with
an annual average employment level of 75,000 or greater) and their growth in employment and wages in the third
month of the quarter and in average weekly wages (AWW) for the quarter. Growth rates are calculated on an overthe-year basis and are adjusted to mute the effects of noneconomic changes. A variety of charts and tables in the
news release highlight the counties with the 10 highest and 5 lowest rates of growth in employment and AWW.
Another section of the release focuses on the 10 largest counties in the United States by annual average
employment level. The release also includes three tables, one showing adjusted employment and wage growth for
all counties with employment of 75,000 or greater, a second presenting adjusted employment and wage growth for

HANDBOOK OF METHODS

U.S. BUREAU OF LABOR STATISTICS

the 10 largest counties by level of employment, and a third displaying adjusted employment and wage growth for
every state.
The tables in the “Employment and Wages, Annual Averages” are published annually on the QCEW program’s
website on the same day as the first-quarter full data release is published for the next year. For example, the 2018
Employment and Wages, Annual Averages was published the same day as the 2019 first-quarter QCEW full data
release.
QCEW data are regularly updated after their initial release and are not considered final until the end of the first
quarter of the next reference year. Once data are final, they are not edited. If errors are found in publications after
particular data are released, a corrected version of the data is released along with a note on what was changed.
These notes can be found in the “QCEW Notices” section of the program web page.
QCEW program analysts have published a number of articles in BLS’ principal journal Monthly Labor Review.1
QCEW has also written interesting data stories for Beyond the Numbers.2 Also, QCEW data are often used in the
BLS Office of Publications daily graphics-oriented publication TED: The Economics Daily.3 State partners of the
QCEW use the data to write features on local areas, to research industry-specific trends, and to promote economic
activity happening in their state.
The QCEW has the benefit of a large, dataset in the form of 10.0 million employer reports. Users can easily
manipulate the dataset and create interesting, relevant, and useful data. This aspect, unique among BLS
programs, gives users the opportunity to create interesting, relevant, and useful new datasets:

Hurricane maps and tables
QCEW establishment data were matched with data from geographic files of potential flood zones due to
hurricanes. (See hurricane maps and tables.) Matching was done for every state along the Atlantic and Gulf of
Mexico coasts and for more than 150 counties within those states. Geographic information software flagged
individual establishments as either in or not in flood zones, for a scale of increasing storm intensity. The
establishments were then aggregated by flood zone, and maps and tables were created to illustrate which states
and counties were at great economic risk due to hurricanes.

Nonprofit data
In accordance with unemployment insurance (UI) laws, some establishments are not required to contribute to UI,
but rather reimburse the UI system when a claim is made. In most states, these “reimbursable” accounts are
restricted to 501(c) (3) nonprofit organizations. (See nonprofit data available.) The QCEW flags establishments
that are “reimbursables” on its records. These records were matched against Internal Revenue Service data for
verification, then compiled to create a new dataset for private sector establishments, employment, and wages for
the portion of the nonprofit sector made up of 501(c) (3) organizations.
To contact the QCEW program, visit the QCEW contact page.

HANDBOOK OF METHODS

U.S. BUREAU OF LABOR STATISTICS

Revisions
QCEW data for the first quarter of each year are published five times. The original data are first released in
September of that year and are followed by revisions in December of the same year and in March, June, and
September of the next year. For example, March 2013 data are first published in September 2013, and revisions of
the March data are published in December 2013 and then in March, June, and September of 2014. Secondquarter data are published four times, third-quarter data three times, and fourth-quarter data twice.
Table 5 in the Design section of this handbook shows the path of data for March 2013 from their initial publication
in September 2013 to their final publication in September 2014. The initial published value of March 2013
employment is 132,338,943 jobs as seen in the first column. In the same row, the four subsequent columns are the
revised values of March 2013 employment in each of the subsequent four quarters. In the next four columns, the
difference between the current published value and the value of the previous quarter’s published value is shown.
The final column shows the difference between the original published value and the final value published 1 year
later. As shown in table 6 in the Design section of this handbook, the largest revision generally occurs from initial
publication to the first revision, as missing reports, including reports of business deaths.4 Revisions occur due to
employers responding late.5 The magnitude of the revisions is relatively small, less than 0.05 percentage point.
Table 7 in the Design section of this handbook shows the percentage of revision from the original value to the final
publication value.

Data available
QCEW data are available online via Open Data Access or the BLS Database. Preliminary data are published each
quarter, with a lag of roughly 5 months after the third month of the publication quarter. All quarters are considered
open for updates until the publication of first-quarter data for the next year. Data are available at the county,
Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA), state, and national level by industry, down to the six-digit level of detail for
privately owned establishments as well as local, state, and federal government agencies.
Through its Open Data Access and QCEW Data Viewer feature, the QCEW program provides a collection of
comma-separated values (CSV) files, designed to allow third-party programmers, developers, and organizations to
retrieve published QCEW data in CSV format. The Open Data Access webpage provides links to QCEW CSV file
documentation, as well as to sample code in several languages. QCEW CSV files are organized by industry, by
area, and by establishment size class. An industry file contains all the records associated with the industry over a
single period. An area file contains all the records associated with the area over a single period. A size file contains
all records published within a specific size class for the first quarter of a specified year. All published QCEW data
are provided by each set of files. The files contain precalculated location quotients, which are values that quantify
how concentrated a particular industry is in a county or state, compared with how concentrated that industry is in
the nation.
QCEW's Data Viewer interface uses these same CSV files to build custom HTML tables based on selected criteria.

HANDBOOK OF METHODS

U.S. BUREAU OF LABOR STATISTICS

Users and uses of QCEW data
QCEW data are widely used by federal statistical agencies, BLS surveys, and other public and private
establishments as a basis for their statistics and research publications.

Bureau of Economic Analysis
The Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA) of the U.S. Department of Commerce uses QCEW data as a base for
developing the national, state, and local area wage and salary components of personal income. Personal income
is a major part of the National Income and Product Accounts and the Regional Economic Accounts. QCEW wages
accounted for 47.0 percent of total personal income and 94.2 percent of the wage and salary component of
personal income in 2018.
The BEA also revises annual estimates according to QCEW wage and salary disbursements data. QCEW wages,
which include irregular pay, such as bonuses and gains from the exercise of stock options, are more
comprehensive. Personal Income estimates for prior quarters are revised each release. The revised estimates
reflect the inclusion of newly available tabulations of prior quarter QCEW wage data.
QCEW also now collaborates with the BEA to enhance data available on Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) in the
United States. How is this possible? In the simplest terms, QCEW is "matching" two large datasets to deliver a
new meaningful data. This forthcoming research data will supplement existing BEA FDI data and allow data users
to analyze FDI at finer geographic and industrial levels.

Energy Information Administration
In 2017, BLS began providing QCEW microdata files, via a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU), to the Energy
Information Administration (EIA) so that its analysts could develop a statistical sample. EIA uses these QCEW
employer reports to update its sampling frame for the Manufacturing Energy Consumption Survey (MECS),
Petroleum Product Sales Identification Survey (PPSIS), and the Motor Gasoline Price Survey (MGPS).
• EIA uses BLS data to improve the quality of the MECS frame. MECS is a national sample survey that
collects information on the stock of U.S. manufacturing establishments, their energy-related building
characteristics, and their energy consumption and expenditures. This sample allows EIA to report separate
estimates of energy use for 21 3-digit industry subsectors, and 50 industry groups and industries according
to the North American Industry Classification System (NAICS).
• EIA uses BLS data to identify petroleum marketers for the re-opening of the PPSIS which is designed to
obtain information on the size, type, and geographic location of fuel oil-related business concerns. The data
are used as a frame by EIA to select samples for other refined petroleum product surveys that are part of
EIA's Petroleum Marketing Program, and to report to Congress and others when requested.
• EIA uses BLS data to update the sample frame of gas stations owners. The MGPS is a weekly mandatory
sample survey designed to collect data by telephone on the cash, pump price (including taxes) of self-serve,
unleaded gasoline, by grade of gasoline. The statistics are widely used to inform the public and
policymakers about current retail gasoline prices, and is one of EIA's most viewed products.

HANDBOOK OF METHODS

U.S. BUREAU OF LABOR STATISTICS

Social Security Administration
The Social Security Administration (SSA) uses QCEW data as a quality check against data provided by the
Internal Revenue Service (IRS). This allows SSA to improve its estimates of Old Age and Survivors and Disability
Insurance (OASDI) and Hospital Insurance (HI) covered and taxable wages and employment for the most recent
historical periods. This, in turn, allows the Treasury to make more accurate transfers from the general fund to the
OASDI and HI trust funds. For the annual Trustees Reports, this provides legislators and the general public with
more accurate estimates of the effects of present and proposed legislation on the future status of the OASDI and
HI trust funds.
SSA also uses QCEW data as a quality check against data provided by employers on Forms W-2. This allows
them to improve their estimates of the average U.S. wage for the latest prior historical year. Each October, the SSA
estimates the annual U.S. wage for the prior year to set the Average Wage Index (AWI) for that year. This, in turn,
is used to set automatic adjustments in the contribution and benefit base, bend points, earnings test exempt
amounts, and other wage-indexed amounts for the upcoming year.

Employment and Training Administration
The QCEW program provides data necessary to both the Employment and Training Administration (ETA) of the
U.S. Department of Labor and State workforce agencies for use in administering the workforce security program.
QCEW data accurately reflect the extent of coverage of state unemployment insurance (UI) laws. These data are
used to measure UI revenues; national, state, and local area employment; and total and UI-taxable wage trends.
The information is used as an input for actuarial studies, determination of employer UI tax experience ratings, and
UI maximum weekly benefit levels. ETA research using QCEW data helps measure the solvency of UI trust funds.
States also use monthly QCEW employment data in the calculation of insured unemployment rates (IUR) for
federal-state extended benefits (EB) triggers.

Census Bureau
The Census Bureau uses QCEW program industrial classification information to assign industry codes to some
employers in their Business Registry (BR). Since 1991, under a directive from the Office of Management and
Budget, the Census Bureau has requested assistance from BLS with industrial classification information from its
Business Establishment List (BEL). This project is conducted to maintain and strengthen industrial classifications
on the Census Bureau's BR, which is the sampling frame for their establishment surveys. The sharing of these
codes reduces costs and respondent burden. Also, increased consistency of industry codes leads to greater
uniformity in the resulting economic data flowing from the BLS and the Census Bureau at national, state, and
county levels. Consequently, the data produced from these agencies using input from BLS and Census Bureau are
of higher quality. For example, state and county personal income estimates from the Bureau of Economic Analysis
(BEA) will benefit from consistent coding.

Longitudinal Employer-Household Dynamics
The Longitudinal Employer-Household Dynamics (LEHD) program uses the QCEW data as a major input of their
Quarterly Workforce Indicators (QWI) data. LEHD uses QCEW data to produce employment, business dynamics,
and earnings data back to the 1990s for selected areas, with the most recent LEHD data available for the nation,

HANDBOOK OF METHODS

U.S. BUREAU OF LABOR STATISTICS

states, counties, MSAs, and workforce investment areas (WIAs). More information about LEHD's usage of QCEW
can be found in The LEHD Infrastructure Files and the Creation of the Quarterly Workforce Indicators.

Bureau of Labor Statistics
QCEW data are important for several other BLS programs. Here is some related information about these
programs, and how they use QCEW information for their products.
NATIONAL COMPENSATION SURVEY

The National Compensation Survey (NCS) is an establishment-based survey used to provide comprehensive
measures of
•
•
•
•

The Employment Cost Index (ECI),
Employer Costs for Employee Compensation (ECEC), including wages and salaries, and benefits,
Compensation trends, and
The incidence of employer-sponsored benefits among workers.

The NCS also publishes estimates on the provisions of selected employer-sponsored benefit plans. The NCS uses
a sample of approximately 8,000 private industry and state and local government establishments, selected
primarily from the QCEW administrative records of UI-covered employers.
For more information about these concepts, contact NCS at https://data.bls.gov/forms/ncs.htm?/ncs/cwcconta.htm.
OCCUPATIONAL REQUIREMENTS SURVEY

The Occupational Requirements Survey (ORS) is an establishment-based survey and provides information on the
requirements of work based on collected data from approximately 26,500 private industry and state and local
government establishments. The sample is selected primarily from the QCEW administrative records of UI-covered
employers. The ORS program provides job-related information about the physical demands, environmental
conditions, education and training, and mental requirements of jobs in the U.S. economy.
For more information about these concepts, contact ORS at https://data.bls.gov/forms/ors.htm?/ncs/ors/home.htm.
CURRENT EMPLOYMENT STATISTICS

Current Employment Statistics (CES) estimates of employment, average weekly and hourly earnings, and average
weekly hours are derived from an employer survey of approximately 689,000 nonfarm establishments, selected
primarily from the QCEW administrative records of UI-covered employers. CES also uses QCEW employment to
benchmark their national and state employment estimates annually. Finally, CES uses information from Business
Employment Dynamics (BED), derived from QCEW, as an input in the CES Birth/Death Model, a statistical
modeling technique for handling business openings and closings while tracking current monthly employment.
For information on CES National concepts, contact information is available at https://data.bls.gov/forms/ces.htm?/
ces/contact.htm.
For information on CES State and Area concepts, please contact State and Area CES at https://data.bls.gov/forms/
sae.htm?/sae/790cont.htm.
31

HANDBOOK OF METHODS

U.S. BUREAU OF LABOR STATISTICS

INJURIES, ILLNESSES AND FATALITIES

The Injuries, Illnesses and Fatalities (IIF) program operates the Survey of Occupational Injuries and
Illnesses(SOII), which provides annual estimates on the rate and number of nonfatal work-related injuries and
illnesses and how these statistics vary by incident, industry, geography, occupation, and other characteristics.
Each year, the SOII selects approximately 230,000 private industry and public sector (state and local government)
establishments from a sampling frame primarily derived from QCEW administrative records of UI-covered
employers. The SOII also uses employment data derived primarily from the QCEW to benchmark national and
state industry-level estimates to current year employment levels.
For more information about these concepts, contact IIF at https://data.bls.gov/forms/iif.htm?/iif/oshcont1.htm.
JOB OPENINGS AND LABOR TURNOVER SURVEY

The Job Openings and Labor Turnover Survey (JOLTS) prepares monthly estimates for the nation, private sector,
government, and various industry breakouts based on NAICS sector. JOLTS estimates of job openings, hires,
quits, layoffs and discharges, other separations, and total separations are derived from an establishment-based
survey of approximately 16,000 nonfarm establishments, selected primarily from the QCEW administrative records
of UI-covered employers. JOLTS also collects employment data for use in monthly benchmarking to the CES
employment estimates. The CES employment estimates, and therefore the JOLTS estimates, are benchmarked
annually to the QCEW employment data.
For more information about these concepts, contact JOLTS at https://data.bls.gov/forms/iif.htm?/iif/oshcont1.htm.
OCCUPATIONAL EMPLOYMENT STATISTICS

The Occupational Employment Statistics (OES) program provides employment and wage estimates for workers in
nonfarm establishments, by occupation and industry nationally, and by occupation and area for more than 650
geographical areas. Workers are classified into more than 800 occupations according to the Standard
Occupational Classification (SOC) system. OES estimates are available for all 50 states, the District of Columbia,
Guam, Puerto Rico, the U.S. Virgin Islands, and 600 metropolitan and nonmetropolitan areas. Industry-specific
estimates are available for approximately 415 industry classifications at the national level. The OES data are
based on a sample of approximately 1.2 million business establishments drawn primarily from QCEW and
collected over a 3-year period. OES employment estimates are benchmarked to the average of QCEW
employment for the May reference date of the estimates and the previous November.
For more information about these concepts, contact OES at https://data.bls.gov/forms/oes.htm?/oes/oes_con.htm.
QCEW NONPROFIT RESEARCH DATA

QCEW Nonprofit Research Data, where QCEW was 'matched' to publicly available non-profit datasets from the
IRS, which allowed BLS to deliver data on establishments, employment, and wages of the non-profit sector. This
product was recently updated, in August 2018, with 2016 research data, as well as with finer geographic and
industrial detail-including annual average establishments and employment, and total annual wages at the county
level for the Educational Services sector, Health Care and Social Assistance sector, and Other Services sector.
Comments on these data and underlying methodology can be submitted to the Business Employment Dynamics
(BED) information line.

HANDBOOK OF METHODS

U.S. BUREAU OF LABOR STATISTICS

CONSUMER PRICE INDEX

Beginning in September 2019, the Consumer Price Index (CPI) plans to end the Telephone Point-of-Purchase
Survey (TPOPS) and to obtain its retail establishment frame from the same household survey used to obtain the
expenditure weights needed to calculate the index. The change to the Consumer Expenditure Surveys (CE)
information will eliminate redundancies and inefficiencies in survey operations, and will result in lower household
burden. CPI plans to refine the location and address data reported in the CE by comparing the household reported
data to establishments in the Quarterly Census of Employment and Wages (QCEW) business registry.

Additional uses
QCEW data are used by businesses and by public and private research organizations for economic forecasting,
transportation planning, industry and regional analysis, impact studies, and other tasks. In addition, many types of
media (newspapers, internet, etc.) use QCEW for fact-based content and reporting on local and national concepts.
Finally, educational institutions use QCEW data for understanding the labor market, economic research, and
career planning.

NOTES
1 See, for example, Jennifer Cruz, Peter W. Smith, and Sara Stanley, “The Marcellus Shale gas boom in Pennsylvania:

employment and wage trends,” Monthly Labor Review, U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, February 2014, https://www.bls.gov/
opub/mlr/2014/article/the-marcellus-shale-gas-boom-in-pennsylvania.htm.
2 See, for example, Paul Ferree and Peter W. Smith, “Employment and wage changes in oil-producing counties in the Bakken

Formation, 2007–2011,” April 2013, https://www.bls.gov/opub/btn/volume-2/employment-wages-bakken-shale-region.htm.
3 See, “Average weekly wages among largest counties, third quarter 2014 to third quarter 2015,” March 11, 2016, https://

www.bls.gov/opub/ted/2016/average-weekly-wages-among-largest-counties-third-quarter-2014-to-third-quarter-2015.htm;
“Sweets for the sweet: employment at gift-related retailers,” February 12, 2016, https://www.bls.gov/opub/ted/2016/sweets-forthe-sweet-establishments-and-employment-of-gift-retailers.htm; and “Hurricane Katrina: a look back at employment and
unemployment,” August 25, 2015, https://www.bls.gov/opub/ted/2015/hurricane-katrina-a-look-back-at-employment-andunemployment.htm.
4 For a definition of “business deaths,” see “Business Employment Dynamics: concepts,” Handbook

of Methods (U.S. Bureau

of Labor Statistics, December 24, 2015), https://www.bls.gov/opub/hom/bdm/concepts.htm.
5

Note that the percentage for the first release is negative because the revised value was lower than the previously published

value.
Last Modified Date: May 07, 2020

HANDBOOK OF METHODS

U.S. BUREAU OF LABOR STATISTICS

History
The Quarterly Census of Employment and Wages (QCEW) is an administrative dataset guided by unemployment
insurance (UI) coverage laws.1 These laws vary across states. They have evolved over time and continue to do so
from state to state and year to year. More information about UI coverage historically can be found at https://
www.bls.gov/cew/additional-resources/federal-unemployment-insurance-employment-coverage-timeline.htm. The
following timeline presents important events in the history of the QCEW program.

Year

Event

1935

Social Security Act is passed and establishes the basic framework of the Federal-State system of unemployment
insurance (UI).

1938

The Federal Unemployment Tax Act becomes effective and is administered by U.S. Department of Labor (DOL).

1938

The Railroad Retirement Unemployment Insurance Act was approved, providing coverage for railroad workers
separate from federal unemployment tax.

1945

The Federal Unemployment Tax Act is amended to exclude service performed for an international organization from
coverage.

1946

Extends UI coverage to maritime service. Provides that a state can cover the crew of an American vessel if the
operating office is within the state.

1948

The Federal Unemployment Tax Act is amended to exclude services performed by a news agent from coverage.

1948

Supreme Court rules to limit the term "employee" to an employee under the common law rule of "master–servant"
relationship, retroactive to 1939.

1950

Employment and Wages is first issued as a semiannual report by the Social Security Administration (SSA).

1950

Social Security Act Amendments of 1950 is passed, redefining exclusion for casual labor not related to the
employer’s usual course of business.

1953

The Federal Unemployment Tax Act is amended to permit states to cover services performed by general agents of
the Secretary of Commerce in connection with American vessels owned or chartered to the United States under
certain conditions.

1954

The Federal Unemployment Tax Act is amended to include organizations that test for public safety in the list of
nonprofit organizations for which services are excludable.

1954

Extended coverage to Federal civilian employees employed after December 31, 1954, subject to benefit provisions
of state laws, under Title XV of the Social Security Act, the Unemployment Compensation for Federal Employees
(UCFE) program.

1956

Effective January 1, 1956, UI coverage was extended to employers of 4 or more workers in 20 weeks in a calendar
year.

1958

Ex-servicemen's Unemployment Compensation Act of 1958 (UCX) establishes a permanent program to provide
benefits for veterans under the law of the state in which a claim is filed to coincide with the end of special coverage
for Korean veterans.

1960

Social Security Amendments of 1960 is passed that takes effect on January 1, 1961, coverage under the UCFE
program is extended to certain instrumentalities that were neither wholly nor partially covered by FUTA, such as
Federal Reserve banks, land banks, and credit unions.

1960

Puerto Rico is brought into the Federal-State system, as are American aircraft employment and certain nonprofit
institutions.

1961

Mutual Educational and Cultural Exchange Act of 1961 amends the Federal Unemployment Tax Act by providing an
exclusion for services performed by a nonresident alien while temporarily in the United States as a nonimmigrant.

1970

Employment Security Amendments of 1970 extends coverage, effective January 1, 1972, to several groups
previously uncovered. For details, see https://www.bls.gov/cew/additional-resources/federal-unemploymentinsurance-employment-coverage-timeline.htm#1961-70

1972

The Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) assumes responsibility for publication of the now quarterly Employment and
Wages. Employment and Wages was first issued as a semiannual report.

1975

Employment and Wages becomes an annual publication.

HANDBOOK OF METHODS

U.S. BUREAU OF LABOR STATISTICS

Year

Event

1976

The Unemployment Compensation Amendments of 1976 that becomes effective January 1, 1978, extends coverage
to: agricultural labor for employers with 10 or more workers in 20 weeks or who paid $20,000 or more in cash wages
in any calendar quarter; household workers of employers who paid $1,000 or more in any calendar quarter for such
services; State and local governments with certain minor exceptions; and employees of nonprofit elementary and
secondary schools.

1976

The Virgin Islands is permitted to become part of the Federal-State unemployment insurance system.

1981

Economic Recovery Tax Act of 1981 adds to exclusions from the Federal Unemployment Tax Act coverage services
excluded from Federal Insurance Contributions Act under section 3121(b)(2) of the Internal Revenue Code.

1982

Tax Equity and Fiscal Responsibility Act of 1982 excludes from the Federal Unemployment Tax Act (and Federal
Insurance Contributions Act) coverage of certain direct sellers and real estate sellers who are licensed direct sellers
of real estate or who execute an agreement with an employer in which substantially all remuneration is based on
sales or output (commission).

1986

Consolidated Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1985 creates permanent exemption for summer camp
counselors and certain fishing boat crew members, with conditions.

1986

Tax Reform Act of 1986 creates Indian Tribal Government exclusions for services performed: before, on, or after
date of enactment (October 22, 1986), but before January 1, 1988, and during a period in which the Indian tribal
government is not covered by a state UI program

1988–91

Business Establishment List Improvement project moves from data collection on a reporting unit basis to a worksite
basis.

1989

States begin providing data to the Quarterly Census of Employment and Wages (QCEW) at the business
establishment level.

1994–97

The Microdata/Macrodata (MIC/MAC) project creates a single file that combines both microdata and macrodata.

1995

The Electronic Data Interchange (EDI) Collection Center is established.

1996

Small Business Job Protection Act of 1996 passes and becomes effective January 1, 1996. Personal Responsibility
and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996 is passed and the amendments apply to remuneration paid after
December 31, 1984, and before January 1, 1995.

1997

Balanced Budget Act of 1997 amends the Federal Unemployment Tax Act to permit states to exclude from coverage
services performed by certain election officials for less than $1,000 and also persons committed to a penal
institution.

1997

The North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) is developed to replace the Standard Industrial
Classification (SIC) system.

2000

Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2001 amends the Federal Unemployment Tax Act to treat Indian tribes
(governmental entities and any subdivision, subsidiary, or business enterprise wholly owned by the tribe) similar to
state and local governments.

2002

QCEW program publishes data under NAICS 2002 codes and starts publishing data quarterly.

2003

The Business Employment Dynamics program publishes first quarterly release using QCEW establishment data.

2003

BLS begins releasing fully detailed industry data at the county, Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA), state, and
national levels.

2007

QCEW data are published under revised NAICS 2007 codes.

2010

Last printed edition of Employment and Wages, Annual Averages is published. Online versions of this publication
are available at https://www.bls.gov/cew/publications/employment-and-wages-annual-averages/home.htm.

2012

QCEW data are published under revised NAICS 2012 codes.

2014

QCEW data are made available publicly as an open data product. QCEW data are published under revised NAICS
2012 codes.

2017

QCEW data are published under revised NAICS 2017 codes.

2018

QCEW quarterly data are separated into two releases every quarter.

HANDBOOK OF METHODS

U.S. BUREAU OF LABOR STATISTICS

Year
2020

Event
California Assembly Bill No. 5 changes the state’s coverage of UI effective on January 1, 2020. This bill will include a
three part test to determine if a worker will be considered an independent contractor or an employee that will be
covered by unemployment insurance.

Program identification and data publication
The QCEW program was initially named Employment Security Report 202, after the form on which data were
collected. In 1998, to give some context to what the program produced, the name was changed to Covered
Employment and Wages (CEW). The program became known as the Quarterly Census of Employment and Wages
in 2002, to describe the mission more accurately.
The Standard Industrial Classification system (SIC) was used by the QCEW program to code establishments by
industry until the fall of 2002, when the North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) was utilized in the
publication of 2001 data.
In the late 1970s and early 1980s, special extracts and aggregations were provided to the public via mainframe
computer tape and, later, on floppy disks. Alternatively, special print tables were produced with the information, as
requested by customers. Data were subject to basic disclosure limitation procedures.
Following the early 1980s and into the late 1990s, the QCEW program followed a similar data pattern, but with
more sophisticated disclosure limitation procedures. Some data requests were filled via CD, while more
complicated requests required that BLS be reimbursed. During this timeframe, QCEW established subscription
agreements with some of the larger private data companies. These companies would get updated files when they
were available. Although data were scheduled to be released quarterly, they were actually released irregularly. On
occasion, there were delays that pushed back file creation until more than one added quarter of data could be
released at once.
From the late 1990s forward, requests that required reimbursement slowed and then ceased. More sophisticated
disclosure limitation procedures were used. Early online tools offered annual average data for 1997 forward. In the
early 2000s, a small number of downloadable files were posted on the BLS File Transfer Protocol site.
In 2014, QCEW data were made available as an open data product via comma-separated values (CSV) files on
the program's web page. Open data, as described in OMB memorandum M-13-13 (PDF), refers to publicly
available data structured in a way that enables the data to be fully discoverable and usable by end users. The CSV
files are designed to allow third-party programmers, developers, and organizations to retrieve published QCEW
data in CSV format. QCEW CSV files are organized by industry, by area, and by establishment size class.
Beginning with the publication of fourth quarter 2017 QCEW data, published in mid-2018, BLS accelerated the
news release 2 weeks ahead of the normal full QCEW data update. BLS has changed this release schedule for
two reasons. The first is to share QCEW data for all states faster. The second is to release the data before the
Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA) publishes quarterly gross domestic product (GDP) data, which uses the most
recent QCEW wage data. BEA personal income estimates are heavily based on QCEW wages. For their earliest
36

HANDBOOK OF METHODS

U.S. BUREAU OF LABOR STATISTICS

estimates, BEA uses Current Employment Statistics (CES) data to project wages. After BLS shares QCEW data
with BEA, the GDP estimates are updated, replacing the CES-based forecast with QCEW wage data.
After reviewing the QCEW program’s procedures, BLS decided to begin issuing the County Employment and
Wages news release earlier.
The first release will be a traditional news release, with a partial data update. This partial update will consist of the
most recent monthly and quarterly levels presented in the County Employment and Wages news release. (See
tables 1, 2, and 3.) The release of the full dataset will continue to follow the existing schedule.

Major projects
The QCEW program has undertaken several major projects in its brief history.

Business Establishment List (BEL) Improvement Project
BLS initiated the BEL Improvement Project to obtain information on multiple-establishment employers on a
quarterly basis. The project involved changing the collection of data on employment and wages for multipleestablishment employers from a reporting-unit (county or industry total) basis to an individual-worksite
(establishment) basis. As part of this change, the size criterion used to define multiple-establishment employers
was lowered to include employers of smaller establishments. As a result, both the number of establishments and
the number of multiple-establishment employers increased. The State Statistical Supplement forms that were
previously used to collect county and industry summary-level data on multiple-establishment employers were
replaced by the Multiple Worksite Report (MWR), a standardized form for use in all states.
The BEL project began in late 1988, using the Annual Refiling Survey (ARS). The survey obtained worksite
identification information for existing multiple-establishment employers and identified those multiple-establishment
employers which were previously categorized as single-unit employers. To capture ARS physical location address
information for single-unit employers, the SIC Refiling Control System (SRCS) was modified in mid-1988 and the
new version was provided to the states. The new, standardized MWR received OMB clearance and was mandated
for state use beginning with data for the first quarter of 1991. (Note that, although state use of the form was
mandatory, depending on state UI laws, it was not mandatory that all employers in the state use the form.) The
MWR was intended to collect quarterly information on employment and wages from multiple-establishment
employers.
The MWR was a major component of the BEL improvement project launched in 1989. The BEL moved the BLS
sampling frame from a reporting-unit to an establishment basis. The Longitudinal Data Base (LDB) was
established and later became part of the popular Business Employment Dynamics (BED) program. As mentioned
earlier, the MWR replaced State Statistical Supplement forms. Several states had already collected establishmentlevel data, and their forms served as a model for the MWR. The initial quarter during which MWR establishmentlevel data were collected was the first quarter of 1991. The MWR enabled the QCEW program to be the first in
BLS to develop a standardized magnetic-media reporting format. The MWR was implemented in September 1992.

HANDBOOK OF METHODS

U.S. BUREAU OF LABOR STATISTICS

Electronic Data Interchange (EDI) Collection Center
In 1995, BLS established the EDI Collection Center in Chicago, IL, to improve and to expedite the MWR collection
process. Employers who complete the MWR for multiple-location businesses submit information on employment
and wages via an electronic medium directly to the collection center, instead of submitting separate forms or files
to each individual state agency. The collection center then edits the employers' data and forwards the data to the
appropriate state agency. The EDI Collection Center is geared toward firms that meet certain size thresholds.
Electronic and web-based filing has reduced costs considerably for large and midsized employers. MWR web data
collection started with data for the first quarter of 2007. The MWR electronic-reporting format is now routinely
included in the products of prominent payroll- and tax-reporting software developers. Since 2012, BLS has
successfully worked with a contractor to print, mail, receive and scan returned MWR forms to state agencies,
substantially reducing their workloads.

First quarter 2019 (initial enhanced quarterly Unemployment Insurance file)

Number or percentage of employers

Percentage of employers filing the MWR

1.4

Percentage of national worksites

17.3

Percentage of national employment

41.05

It is useful to examine some recent statistics regarding overall MWR data collection. In that regard, the numbers in
the following tabulation, for the first quarter of 2019, exhibit a stable pattern that appears to be the usual pattern for
MWR statistics:
As the data above show, 1.4 percent of employers completed the MWR for about 17 percent of national worksites
and more than 41 percent of national employment. Moreover, 60 percent of all MWR employment came
electronically, from either the EDI Center or MWRweb. Of this 60 percent, the EDI Center collected 24 percent of
total MWR employment while MWRweb accounted for 36 percent.

Microdata/Macrodata (MIC/MAC) Project
Prior to 1989, states submitted only an enhanced file containing macrolevel employment and wage data. That
meant that the highest level of detail received by the QCEW program was aggregate data cells made up of a
combination of industry, county, and ownership codes.
In the first quarter of 1989, states began delivering a quarterly microdata file that included individual business
establishment data. At the time, states were submitting nine separate deliverables per year: four quarterly
microdata files, four quarterly macrodata files, and the annual Control File, providing Code Change Supplement
data.
Development of the MIC/MAC project began in 1994. Teams consisting of BLS staff from both the national office
and regional offices, as well as state staff members, were established to define the new processing requirements
and deliverable standards. State and BLS systems were updated to reflect these major operational changes. The
mission was to create a single quarterly file that would make possible the creation of macrolevel totals from the
microdata. The project would promote more efficiency by eliminating duplication of work in reviewing and
38

HANDBOOK OF METHODS

U.S. BUREAU OF LABOR STATISTICS

correcting the micro- and macrodata files. The project would also create uniformity in the micro- and macrolevel
totals, as well as in the editing standards for the states and BLS. The first MIC/MAC files were submitted to BLS in
the third quarter of 1997, providing for a more efficient work process and producing higher quality data.

SIC-to-NAICS conversion
The SIC system was established in the 1930s in order to classify establishments by their primary type of activity.
The system was updated multiple times in its history of being utilized by the QCEW (formerly, ES-202) program;
significant changes were made in 1967, 1972, and 1987. In July 1992, the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) established the Economic Classification Policy Committee, chaired by the Bureau of Economic Analysis
(BEA) of the U.S. Department of Commerce, with representatives from the U.S. Bureau of the Census (now the
U.S. Census Bureau) of the U.S. Department of Commerce and from BLS. The OMB charged the committee with
conducting a “fresh slate” examination of economic classifications for statistical purposes and determining the
desirability of developing a new industry classification system for the United States that would be based on a
single economic concept. In 1997, NAICS was introduced, the product of a cooperative effort on the part of the
official statistical agencies of the United States, Canada, and Mexico.
In the fall of 2002, the QCEW program published its 2001 data using NAICS 2002 classified industry data for the
first time. Over several years prior to that milestone, state agencies had worked to convert more than 8 million
establishments to NAICS. Along with the initial 1997 version of NAICS and the 2002 update, versions were
released in 2007, 2012, and 2017, to reflect changes to the economy.
One of the major changes to industry coding that was introduced by NAICS was the sector called information
(NAICS 51), which includes establishments producing and distributing information and cultural products,
establishments providing the means to transmit or distribute these products, and establishments providing data or
communications services, including data processing. Another new sector introduced by NAICS was management
of companies and enterprises (NAICS 55).
The BLS conversion to NAICS was notable for its detail. An example may be seen in the construction (NAICS 23)
sector. Within the specialty trade contractors (NAICS 238) subsector in the BLS implementation of NAICS, each
base group in specialty trade contractors—for example, masonry contractors (NAICS 23814) or roofing contractors
(NAICS 23816)—is further divided, on the basis of whether the establishment's predominant activity is in
residential construction or nonresidential construction.2

Early BEA finance data
BEA is responsible for producing quarterly estimates of gross domestic product (GDP) and personal income (PI). A
key component of the GDP and PI numbers is data on wages, from the QCEW program. Prior to 2008, BEA had
difficulty estimating wages in a number of industries. The most difficult industry was finance (NAICS 52), because
wage levels for that industry are greatly affected by irregular payments (for example, bonuses and stock options).
These irregular payments are usually made in either the fourth or first quarter. In 2008, at BEA's request, BLS
agreed to deliver first-quarter macrodata earlier than is customary, in order to enable BEA to adjust its estimates by
means of QCEW total wage levels.

HANDBOOK OF METHODS

U.S. BUREAU OF LABOR STATISTICS

In early July of 2008, the 10 states with the largest proportion of national aggregate wages in the finance industry
participated in a pilot test of accelerated macrodata delivery to BEA. The early-delivery pilot proved to be highly
successful with major national users, such as the U.S. Department of the Treasury and the Council of Economic
Advisers, which noted a decrease in revisions. On the basis of this success, BEA asked the QCEW program to
provide early macrodata as a deliverable each first quarter, beginning with the first quarter of 2009. The BEA wage
estimates that are being improved with QCEW data are national, not state, metro, or local, estimates.

Business Employment Dynamics
The Business Employment Dynamics (BED) program uses QCEW establishment data to produce a quarterly
series of gross job gains and gross job losses for the entire economy. The program published its first release in
2003. The data covered the period from 1992 through 2002, with subsequent quarterly updates published since
then. (For more on BED, visit the BLS website “Business Employment Dynamics' and the BLS Handbook of
Methods.

NOTES
1

For the most recent changes to federal and state UI legislation, see "Most recent comparison of state UI laws," (U.S.

Department of Labor, March 29, 2004), https://oui.doleta.gov/unemploy/statelaws.asp#Statelaw.
2

For more information on NAICS, see "North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) at BLS," (U.S. Bureau of Labor

Statistics, February 27, 2020), https://www.bls.gov/bls/naics.htm.
For QCEW's industry finder web application, visit https://data.bls.gov/cew/apps/bls_naics/v2/
bls_naics_app.htm#tab=hierarchy&naics=2017&hier=default; and David R. H. Hiles, "A first look at employment and wages
using NAICS," Monthly Labor Review, December 2001, pp. 22–31, https://www.bls.gov/opub/mlr/2001/12/art3full.pdf

Archives
• April 04, 1997
• April 14, 2017
Last Modified Date: May 07, 2020

HANDBOOK OF METHODS

U.S. BUREAU OF LABOR STATISTICS

More Information
Additional information on the QCEW can be found online at https://
www.bls.gov/cew
For questions by Email, fill out the request for information using the Information and Help form.
For questions by telephone, call (202) 691-6567.

For BLS QCEW Survey Respondents
Multiple Worksite Report (MWR): [email protected]
Industry Verification Form (ARS): contact your respective state office.
For more information on data collection forms, follow “QCEW Reporting” on the QCEW homepage.

For researchers of QCEW data
On-site Visiting Researcher program

For programs outside QCEW using QCEW data
• State-published data
The cooperating State Workforce Agencies (SWAs) have labor market information offices that publish and
disseminate QCEW data for their states.
• Federally-published data
CES technical note
OES survey methods and reliability statement
LAUS estimation methodology
SOII calculation-benchmark factors
BEA wages and salary disbursements
BEA Local Personal Income and Employment methodology
Census Quarterly Workforce Indicators (QWI) 101

HANDBOOK OF METHODS

U.S. BUREAU OF LABOR STATISTICS

Last Modified Date: May 07, 2020

File Type	application/pdf
File Modified	2020-10-30
File Created	2020-10-30