U.S. Census for Central Florida, 2000
Census--United States
Orange County (Fla.)
Marion County (Fla.)
Brevard County (Fla.)
St. Lucie County (Fla.)
Seminole County (Fla.)
Volusia County (Fla.)
Flagler County (Fla.)
Lake County (Fla.)
Osceola County (Fla.)
Population--United States
The Twenty-Second United States Census records for Brevard County, Flagler County, Lake County, Marion County, Orange County, Osceola County, Seminole County, and Volusia County, Florida, for 2000. The census divides the population by gender, race ("white alone," "black," "American Indian and Alaska Native," "Asian," Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander," "other race," "two or moreraces," "Hispanic," "Mexican," "Puerto Rican," "Cuban," "Dominican," "Central American," "Costa Rican," "Guatemalan," "Honduran," "Nicaraguan," "Panamanian," "Salvadoran," "Other Central American," "South American," "Argentinean," "Bolivian," "Chilean," "Columbian," "Ecuadorian," "Paraguayan," "Peruvian," "Uruguayan," "Venezuelan," "Other South American," "Spaniard," "Asian Indian," "Bangladeshi," "Cambodian," "Chinese," "Filipino," "Hmong," "Indonesian," "Japanese," "Korean," "Laotian," "Malaysian," "Pakistani,""Sri Lankan," "Taiwanese," "Vietnamese," and "other Asian"), and native-born vs. foreign-born. Those who are foreign born are further divided by country of origin. The census then lists the population categorized by marital status, type of residence, military service, primary and secondary school attendance, and college attendance. The census also collected information on labor, on unemployment, on energy usage, and on transportation.<br /><br />For the Census of 2000, the short form consisted of only seven questions, while the long form consisted of 52 questions and was used for a 17-percent sample of the population. For the first time, race questions were not limited to a single category; rather, respondents were able to check multiple boxes. A new question related to grandparents as caregivers was also mandated by legislation passed in 1996. Disability questions were expanded to including hearing and vision impairments, as well as learning, memory, and concentration disabilities. The 2000 Census also eliminated questions related to children born, water sources, sewage disposal, and condominium status. In addition, the 2000 Census was the first in which the Internet was used as the principal medium for the dissemination of census information. Summary Files were available for download immediately upon release and individual tables could be viewed via American FactFinder, the Census Bureau's online database. Files were also available for purchase on CD-Rom and DVD.<br /><br />Due to declining questionnaire mail-back rates, the U.S. Census Bureau marketed a $167 million national and local print, television, and public advertising campaign in 17 different languages. The campaign successfully brought the mail-back rate up to 67 percent. Additionally, respondents receiving the short form were given the option of responding via the Internet. Telephone questionnaire assistance centers available in six languages also took responses via the phone. Statistical sampling techniques were utilized in two ways: first, to alter the traditional 100-percent personal visit of non-responding households during the non-response follow-up (NRFU) process instead by following up on a smaller sample basis; second, the sampling of 750,000 housing units matched to housing unit questionnaires obtained from mail and telephone responses, as well as from personal visits. The goal of the latter was to develop adjustment factors for individuals estimated to have been missed or duplicated and to correct the census counts to produce one set of numbers. This "one-number census" would correct for net coverage errors called Integrated Coverage Measurement (ICM). Both of these measures were taken in an attempt to avoid repetition of the litigation costs generated by the 1980 Census and the 1990 Census.<br /><br />Despite these efforts, two lawsuits—one filed by the U.S. House of Representatives—were filed in February 1998 challenging the constitutionality and legality of the planned uses of sampling to produce apportionment counts. Both cases were decided in favor of the plaintiffs in federal district courts, but the U.S. Department of Commerce made appeals to the U.S. Supreme Court. Known as the <em>U.S. Department of Commerce v. the U.S. House of Representatives</em>, the Court ruled that the Census Bureau's plans to use statistical sampling for purposes of congressional apportionments violated the Census Act. The bureau revised its plan, stating that it would produce statistically adjusted data for non-apportionment uses of census data information, such as redistricting. However, in March of 2001, the Census Bureau recommended against the use of adjusted census data for redistricting due to accuracy concerns; the Secretary of Commerce determined that the unadjusted data would be released as the bureau's official redistricting data. The Director of the Census Bureau also rejected to the use of adjusted data for non-redistricting purposes in October of that same year.
<a href="http://www.census.gov/" target="_blank">U.S. Census Bureau</a>
Original census data collected by the <a href="http://www.census.gov/" target="_blank">U.S. Census Bureau</a>, 2000.
<a href="http://www.commerce.gov/" target="_blank">U.S. Department of Commerce</a>
Gibson, Ella
image/jpg
eng
Dataset
Brevard County, Florida
Flagler County, Florida
Lake County, Florida
Marion County, Florida
Orange County, Florida
Osceola County, Florida
Seminole County, Florida
Volusia County, Florida
U.S. Census for Central Florida, 1990
Census--United States
Orange County (Fla.)
Marion County (Fla.)
Brevard County (Fla.)
St. Lucie County (Fla.)
Seminole County (Fla.)
Volusia County (Fla.)
Flagler County (Fla.)
Lake County (Fla.)
Osceola County (Fla.)
Population--United States
The Twenty-First United States Census records for Brevard County, Flagler County, Lake County, Marion County, Orange County, Osceola County, Seminole County, and Volusia County, Florida, for 1990. The census divides the population by gender, race ("white," "black," "American Indian, Eskimo, or Aleut," "Asian or Pacific Islander," "other," "Hispanic," "Mexican," "Puerto Rican," "Cuban," "Other Hispanic," "Dominican," "Central American Hispanic," "Guatemalan," "Honduran," "Nicaraguan," "Panamanian," "Salvadorian," "Other Central American Hispanic," "South American Hispanic," "Columbian," "Ecuadorian," "Peruvian," "Other South American Hispanic," "Chinese," "Japanese," "Filipino," "Korean," "Asian Indian," "Vietnamese," "Cambodian," "Laotian," "Thai," and "Other Asian"), and native-born vs. foreign-born. Those who are foreign born are further divided by country of origin. The census then lists the population categorized by marital status and military service. The census also collected information on labor, on unemployment, on energy usage, and on transportation.<br /><br />For the 1990 Census, the U.S. Census Bureau utilized extensive user consultation prior to enumeration in order to refine both long and short form census questionnaires. The short form consisted of 13 questions and was given to the entire population. The long form asked 45 questions and was given to a 20-percent sample. The long form included topics related to marital history, carpooling, residence, residential elevators, and energy usage. Unlike the 1980 Census, the new census eliminated questions regarding air conditioning, the number of bathrooms in a residence, and the type of heating equipment used. A vast advertising campaign was marketed to increase public awareness of the census via public television, radio, and print media. Like the previous census, the Census of 1990 made a special effort to enumerate groups that have historically been undercounted in previous censuses called "S-Night": individuals in homeless shelters, soup kitchens, bus and railway stations, and dormitories (enumerated separately in the 1980 Census on "M-Night"); and permanent residents in hotels and motels (enumerated separately in the 1980 Census on "T-Night"). Following legal issues filed in response to the 1980 Census regarding statistical readjustment of undercounted areas, the Census Bureau initiated a post-enumeration survey (PES), in which a contemporaneous survey of households would be conducted and compared to the census results from the official census. In a partial resolution of a 1989 lawsuit filed by New York plaintiffs, the U.S. Department of Commerce agreed to use the PES to produce population data that had been adjusted for the projected undercount and that said data would be judged against the unadjusted data by the Secretary of Commerce's Special Advisory Panel (SAP).<br /><br />The Census of 1990 also introduced the U.S. to the Topologically Integrated Geographic Encoding and Referencing System (TIGER), which was developed by the U.S. Geological Survey and the Census Bureau. TIGER used computerized representations of various map features to geographically code addresses into appropriate census geographic areas. It also produced different maps required for census data collection and tabulation. Five years earlier, the Census Bureau became the first government agency to publish information on CD-ROM. For the 1990 Census, the bureau made detailed census data, which had previously been only available to organizations with large mainframe computers, accessible to any individual with a personal computer. Census data was also available in print, on computer tape, and on microfiche. Using two online service vendors, DIALOG and CompuServe, the Census Bureau also published select census data online.<br /><br />As with previous censuses, the 1990 Census undercounted the national population, and again, the African-American population had an estimated net undercount rate that was significantly higher than the rate for other races. In July of 1991, the Secretary of Commerce announced that he did not find evidence in favor of using adjusted counts compelling—despite SAP's split vote on the issue—and chose to use unadjusted totals for the official census results. In response, the New York plaintiffs resumed the lawsuit against the U.S. Department of Commerce. A federal district court ruleded in favor of the DOC in April of 1993. The U.S. Court of Appeals, however, rejected the previous court ruling and ordered that the case be reheard by the federal district court. In March of 1996, the U.S. Supreme Court finally ruled in favor of the Secretary of Commerce's decision to use the unadjusted census date, but did not rule on the legality or constitutionality of the use of statistical adjustment in producing apportionment counts.
<a href="http://www.census.gov/" target="_blank">U.S. Census Bureau</a>
Original census data collected by the <a href="http://www.census.gov/" target="_blank">U.S. Census Bureau</a>, 1990.
<a href="http://www.commerce.gov/" target="_blank">U.S. Department of Commerce</a>
Gibson, Ella
image/jpg
eng
Dataset
Brevard County, Florida
Flagler County, Florida
Lake County, Florida
Marion County, Florida
Orange County, Florida
Osceola County, Florida
Seminole County, Florida
Volusia County, Florida