Attitude of the Federal German population and census critics to the census on 31. May 1987.

Summary of three data sets archived and described under ZA Study Nos. 1588 to 1590.

Topics: 1. From the first wave of 1987: political interest; satisfaction with democracy in the Federal Republic; feeling of political effectiveness and degree of representation by politicians and parties; orientation of government policies on special interests or public welfare; attitude to the census; intent of members of household and respondent to participate; willingness to participate after notice of threat of fine; filling out the survey form oneself or by another person in household; conversations about the census in social surroundings and time of last conversation; attitude to the census in circle of friends and acquaintances as well as their willingness to participate; importance of political attitudes in social surroundings and visibility of one´s own views; knowledge about contents of the census survey (scale); assumed difficulty in filling out survey form; preference for filling out the form in the presence of the canvasser or alone; misgivings about canvasser in residence; difficulties in carrying out official matters; frequency of contact and ability to establish contacts; trust in institutions and organizations; self-assessment on a left-right continuum; assumed position of the majority of the population on a left-right continuum; postmaterialism; sympathy scale for political parties; frequency of use of television news broadcasts as well as the local part and political part of a daily newspaper; time of last noticed media reports about the census and content tendency of these programs; assumed attitude of the population to the census; living together with a partner and his attitude to the census; assumed participation of partner in the census; response or boycott conduct in the census survey; attitude to government statistics; attitude to punishment of census boycotters and preferred governmental behavior regarding refusal; personal fears regarding misuse of personal census data; trust in observance of data protection; sympathies regarding social movements as well as personal membership; party preference; perceived fears and their causes; attitude to technology; attitude to computers and scientific innovations; attitude to government dealing with data; assessment of census refusers as system opponents; attitude to storage of personal data; importance of data protection and trust in observance of the data protection regulation; judgement on quality of data protection; earlier participation in a survey and type of survey; attitude to selected infringements and crimes as well as other illegal actions (scale); religiousness; union membership; self-assessment of social class; possession of a telephone; willingness to participate in a re-interview.

The following additional questions were posed to persons with strong or very strong political interest: demographic information on circle of close friends (ego-centered network); agreement with respondent regarding party preference and attitude to the census; willingness of friends to participate in the census; familiarity of friends among each other; personal willingness to participate in selected political forms of protest (scale); personal fears regarding misuse of personal data by selected institutions and public offices.

Demography: month of birth; year of birth; sex; marital status; number of children; ages of children (classified); frequency of church attendance; school education; vocational training; occupation; occupational position; employment; monthly net income of respondent and household altogether; number of persons contributing to household income; size of household; position of respondent in household; characteristics of head of household; number of persons eligible to vote in household; persons in household who do not have German citizenship; self-assessment of social class; union membership of respondent and other members of household; possession of a telephone.

Interviewer rating: presence of third persons during interview and person desiring this presence; intervention of others in interview and person introducing the intervention; attitude to the census of persons additionally present during interview; presence of further persons in other rooms; willingness to cooperate and reliability of respondent.

Also encoded was: length of interview; date of interview; identification of interviewer; sex of interviewer; age of interviewer.

1. From the second wave of 1987: political interest; attitude to the census; conversations about the census in social surroundings and topics discussed; attitude to the census in circle of friends and acquaintances; perceived attitude of the population to the census; time of personal decision making on the census; changes in attitude to the census; personally knowing the canvasser; manner of receipt of questionnaire;...

This dataset contains model-based census tract-level estimates for the PLACES 2022 release. PLACES covers the entire United States—50 states and the District of Columbia (DC)—at county, place, census tract, and ZIP Code Tabulation Area levels. It provides information uniformly on this large scale for local areas at 4 geographic levels. Estimates were provided by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), Division of Population Health, Epidemiology and Surveillance Branch. PLACES was funded by the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation in conjunction with the CDC Foundation. The dataset includes estimates for 29 measures: 13 for health outcomes, 9 for preventive services use, 4 for chronic disease-related health risk behaviors, and 3 for health status. These estimates can be used to identify emerging health problems and to help develop and carry out effective, targeted public health prevention activities. Because the small area model cannot detect effects due to local interventions, users are cautioned against using these estimates for program or policy evaluations. Data sources used to generate these model-based estimates include Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS) 2020 or 2019 data, Census Bureau 2010 population data, and American Community Survey 2015–2019 estimates. The 2022 release uses 2020 BRFSS data for 25 measures and 2019 BRFSS data for 4 measures (high blood pressure, taking high blood pressure medication, high cholesterol, and cholesterol screening) that the survey collects data on every other year. More information about the methodology can be found at www.cdc.gov/places.

This dataset contains model-based Census tract level estimates for the PLACES project by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), Division of Population Health, Epidemiology and Surveillance Branch. It represents a first-of-its kind effort to release information uniformly on this large scale. Data sources used to generate these model-based estimates include Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS) 2019 or 2018 data, Census Bureau 2010 population estimates, and American Community Survey (ACS) 2015–2019 or 2014–2018 estimates. The 2021 release uses 2019 BRFSS data for 22 measures and 2018 BRFSS data for 7 measures (all teeth lost, dental visits, mammograms, cervical cancer screening, colorectal cancer screening, core preventive services among older adults, and sleeping less than 7 hours a night). Seven measures are based on the 2018 BRFSS data because the relevant questions are only asked every other year in the BRFSS. This data only covers the health of adults (people 18 and over) in East Baton Rouge Parish. All estimates lie within a 95% confidence interval.

The Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment has developed community-level estimates for adults in a set of 14 important health condition and risk behavior indicators. The dataset includes indicators on adult asthma prevalence, cigarette smoking prevalence, coronary heart disease prevalence, percent of adults who delayed medical care due to cost, diabetes prevalence, binge drinking and heavy alcohol consumption, percent of adults with fair or poor health status, mental distress, percent of adults with no routine medical checkup in the past 12 month, obesity and overweight prevalence, percent of adults that did not report doing physical activity or exercise, and percent of adults with frequent physical distress. These four-year estimates (2013-2016) have been produced for each census tract in the State of Colorado based on modeled survey data collected in the Colorado Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS) and incorporating population, race, gender, and age estimates for each census tract from the American Community Survey. CDPHE's Community Level Estimates are output from statistical models used to generate health condition and risk behavior estimates for smaller geographies than traditional surveillance systems report. The estimates are produced using a multilevel model that incorporates individual Colorado Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS) survey responses in addition to socio-demographic and contextual information about each census tract from the U.S. Census (American Community Survey). The individual survey responses related to a health condition or risk behavior from the Colorado BRFSS are nested within geographic boundaries (counties) where both individual characteristics (demographic) as well as sociodemographic characteristics can be used to model the probability of having a health condition or risk behavior at the census tract geography.

Attitude of the German population and of census critics to the census before census day, 31 May 1987. Political attitudes.

Topics: political interest; satisfaction with democracy in the Federal Republic; feeling of political effectiveness and degree of representation by politicians and parties; orientation of government policies on personal interest or public welfare; attitude to the census; intent to participate of members of household and respondent; willingness to participate after reference to threat of fine; filling out the survey questionnaire oneself or by another person in household; conversations about the census in social surroundings and time of last conversation; attitude to the census in circle of friends and acquaintances as well as their willingness to participate; importance of political attitudes in social surroundings and visibility of one´s own views; knowledge about contents of the census survey (scale); assumed difficulty of filling out the survey questionnaire; preference for filling it out in the presence of the canvasser or alone; misgivings about canvassers in residence; difficulties in taking care of official matters; frequency of contact and ability to establish contacts; trust in institutions and organizations; self-assessment on a left-right continuum; assumed position of the majority of the population on a left-right continuum; postmaterialism; sympathy scale for political parties; frequency of use of television news broadcasts as well as local news and political part of a daily newspaper; time of last noticed media reports about the census and tendency of content of these articles; assumed attitude of the population to the census; living together with a partner and his attitude to the census; assumed participation of partner in the census; response or boycott behavior during the census survey; attitude to government statistics; attitude to punishment of census boycotters and preferred government behavior regarding refusals; personal concerns regarding misuse of personal census data; trust in observance of data protection; sympathy regarding social movements as well as personal membership; party preference; perceived fears and their causes; attitude to technology; attitude to computers and to scientific innovations; attitude to government behavior with data; assessment of census refusers as system opponents; attitude to storing personal data; importance of data protection and trust in observance of the data protection regulation; judgement on the quality of data protection; earlier participation in a survey and type of survey; attitude to selected infringements of law and crimes as well as other illegal actions (scale); religiousness; union membership; self-assessment of social class; possession of a telephone; willingness to participate in a re-interview.

The following additional questions were posed to persons with strong or very strong political interest: demographic information on close circle of friends (ego-centered network); agreement with the respondent regarding party preference and attitude to the census; willingness of friends to participate in the census; familiarity of friends with each other; personal willingness to participate in selected political forms of protest (scale); personal concerns regarding misuse of personal data by selected institutions and government offices.

Demography: month of birth; year of birth; sex; marital status; number of children; ages of children (classified); religious denomination; frequency of church attendance; school education; vocational training; occupation; occupational position; employment; monthly gross income of respondent and household altogether; number of persons contributing to household income; size of household; position of respondent in household; characteristics of head of household; number of persons eligible to vote in household; persons in household who do not have German citizenship; self-assessment of social class; union membership of respondent and other members of household; possession of a telephone.

Interviewer rating: presence of third persons during interview and person desiring this presence; intervention of others in interview and person introducing this intervention; attitude to the census of additional persons present during interview; presence of further persons in other rooms; willingness to cooperate and reliability of respondent.

Also encoded was: length of interview; date of interview; identification of interviewer; sex of interviewer; age of interviewer.

This dataset contains model-based census tract estimates. PLACES covers the entire United States—50 states and the District of Columbia—at county, place, census tract, and ZIP Code Tabulation Area levels. It provides information uniformly on this large scale for local areas at four geographic levels. Estimates were provided by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), Division of Population Health, Epidemiology and Surveillance Branch. PLACES was funded by the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation in conjunction with the CDC Foundation. The dataset includes estimates for 36 measures: 13 for health outcomes, 9 for preventive services use, 4 for chronic disease-related health risk behaviors, 7 for disabilities, and 3 for health status. These estimates can be used to identify emerging health problems and to help develop and carry out effective, targeted public health prevention activities. Because the small area model cannot detect effects due to local interventions, users are cautioned against using these estimates for program or policy evaluations. Data sources used to generate these model-based estimates are Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS) 2021 or 2020 data, Census Bureau 2010 population data, and American Community Survey 2015–2019 estimates. The 2023 release uses 2021 BRFSS data for 29 measures and 2020 BRFSS data for seven measures (all teeth lost, dental visits, mammograms, cervical cancer screening, colorectal cancer screening, core preventive services among older adults, and sleeping less than 7 hours) that the survey collects data on every other year. More information about the methodology can be found at www.cdc.gov/places.

This dataset contains model-based census tract-level estimates for the PLACES project 2020 release. The PLACES project is the expansion of the original 500 Cities project and covers the entire United States—50 states and the District of Columbia (DC)—at county, place, census tract, and ZIP Code tabulation Areas (ZCTA) levels. It represents a first-of-its kind effort to release information uniformly on this large scale for local areas at 4 geographic levels. Estimates were provided by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), Division of Population Health, Epidemiology and Surveillance Branch. The project was funded by the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation (RWJF) in conjunction with the CDC Foundation. The dataset includes estimates for 27 measures: 5 chronic disease-related unhealthy behaviors, 13 health outcomes, and 9 on use of preventive services. These estimates can be used to identify emerging health problems and to inform development and implementation of effective, targeted public health prevention activities. Because the small area model cannot detect effects due to local interventions, users are cautioned against using these estimates for program or policy evaluations. Data sources used to generate these model-based estimates include Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS) 2018 or 2017 data, Census Bureau 2010 population data, and American Community Survey (ACS) 2014-2018 or 2013-2017 estimates. The 2020 release uses 2018 BRFSS data for 23 measures and 2017 BRFSS data for 4 measures (high blood pressure, taking high blood pressure medication, high cholesterol, and cholesterol screening). Four measures are based on the 2017 BRFSS because the relevant questions are only asked every other year in the BRFSS. More information about the methodology can be found at www.cdc.gov/places.

These data represent the predicted (modeled) prevalence of being Overweight or Obese among adults (Age 18+) for each census tract in Colorado. Overweight is defined as a BMI of 25 or greater. Obese is defined as a BMI of 30 or greater. BMI is calculated from self-reported height and weight.The estimate for each census tract represents an average that was derived from multiple years of Colorado Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System data (2014-2017).CDPHE used a model-based approach to measure the relationship between age, race, gender, poverty, education, location and health conditions or risk behavior indicators and applied this relationship to predict the number of persons' who have the health conditions or risk behavior for each census tract in Colorado. We then applied these probabilities, based on demographic stratification, to the 2013-2017 American Community Survey population estimates and determined the percentage of adults with the health conditions or risk behavior for each census tract in Colorado.The estimates are based on statistical models and are not direct survey estimates. Using the best available data, CDPHE was able to model census tract estimates based on demographic data and background knowledge about the distribution of specific health conditions and risk behaviors.The estimates are displayed in both the map and data table using point estimate values for each census tract and displayed using a Quintile range. The high and low value for each color on the map is calculated based on dividing the total number of census tracts in Colorado (1249) into five groups based on the total range of estimates for all Colorado census tracts. Each Quintile range represents roughly 20% of the census tracts in Colorado. No estimates are provided for census tracts with a known population of less than 50. These census tracts are displayed in the map as "No Est, Pop < 50."No estimates are provided for 7 census tracts with a known population of less than 50 or for the 2 census tracts that exclusively contain a federal correctional institution as 100% of their population. These 9 census tracts are displayed in the map as "No Estimate."

This dataset contains model-based census tract-level estimates for the PLACES 2021 release. PLACES is the expansion of the original 500 Cities project and covers the entire United States—50 states and the District of Columbia (DC)—at county, place, census tract, and ZIP Code Tabulation Area (ZCTA) levels. It represents a first-of-its kind effort to release information uniformly on this large scale for local areas at 4 geographic levels. Estimates were provided by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), Division of Population Health, Epidemiology and Surveillance Branch. PLACES was funded by the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation (RWJF) in conjunction with the CDC Foundation. The dataset includes estimates for 29 measures: 4 chronic disease-related health risk behaviors, 13 health outcomes, 3 health status, and 9 on use of preventive services. These estimates can be used to identify emerging health problems and to help develop and carry out effective, targeted public health prevention activities. Because the small area model cannot detect effects due to local interventions, users are cautioned against using these estimates for program or policy evaluations. Data sources used to generate these model-based estimates include Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS) 2019 or 2018 data, Census Bureau 2010 population data, and American Community Survey (ACS) 2015–019 or 2014–2018 estimates. The 2021 release uses 2019 BRFSS data for 22 measures and 2018 BRFSS data for 7 measures (all teeth lost, dental visits, mammograms, cervical cancer screening, colorectal cancer screening, core preventive services among older adults, and sleeping less than 7 hours a night). Seven measures are based on the 2018 BRFSS because the relevant questions are only asked every other year in the BRFSS. More information about the methodology can be found at www.cdc.gov/places.

Tags survey, environmental behaviors, lifestyle, status, PRIZM, Baltimore Ecosystem Study, LTER, BES Summary BES Research, Applications, and Education Description XY Positions for BES telephone survey. The BES Household Survey 2003 is a telephone survey of metropolitan Baltimore residents consisting of 29 questions. The survey research firm, Hollander, Cohen, and McBride conducted the survey, asking respondents questions about their outdoor recreation activities, watershed knowledge, environmental behavior, neighborhood characteristics and quality of life, lawn maintenance, satisfaction with life, neighborhood, and the environment, and demographic information. The data from each respondent is also associated with a PRIZM� classification, census block group, and latitude-longitude. PRIZM� classifications categorize the American population using Census data, market research surveys, public opinion polls, and point-of-purchase receipts. The PRIZM� classification is spatially explicit allowing the survey data to be viewed and analyzed spatially and allowing specific neighborhood types to be identified and compared based on the survey data. The census block group and latitude-longitude data also allow us additional methods of presenting and analyzing the data spatially. The household survey is part of the core data collection of the Baltimore Ecosystem Study to classify and characterize social and ecological dimensions of neighborhoods (patches) over time and across space. This survey is linked to other core data including US Census data, remotely-sensed data, and field data collection, including the BES DemSoc Field Observation Survey. The BES 2003 telephone survey was conducted by Hollander, Cohen, and McBride from September 1-30, 2003. The sample was obtained from the professional sampling firm Claritas, in order that their "PRIZM" encoding would be appended to each piece of sample (telephone number) supplied. Mailing addresses were also obtained so that a postcard could be sent in advance of interviewers calling. The postcard briefly informed potential respondents about the survey, who was conducting it, and that they might receive a phone call in the next few weeks. A stratified sampling method was used to obtain between 50 - 150 respondents in each of the 15 main PRIZM classifications. This allows direct comparison of PRIZM classifications. Analysis of the data for the general metropolitan Baltimore area must be weighted to match the population proportions normally found in the region. They obtained a total of 9000 telephone numbers in the sample. All 9,000 numbers were dialed but contact was only made on 4,880. 1508 completed an interview, 2524 refused immediately, 147 broke off/incomplete, 84 respondents had moved and were no longer in the correct location, and a qualified respondent was not available on 617 calls. This resulted in a response rate of 36.1% compared with a response rate of 28.2% in 2000. The CATI software (Computer Assisted Terminal Interviewing) randomized the random sample supplied, and was programmed for at least 3 attempted callbacks per number, with emphasis on pulling available callback sample prior to accessing uncalled numbers. Calling was conducted only during evening and weekend hours, when most head of households are home. The use of CATI facilitated stratified sampling on PRIZM classifications, centralized data collection, standardized interviewer training, and reduced the overall cost of primary data collection. Additionally, to reduce respondent burden, the questionnaire was revised to be concise, easy to understand, minimize the use of open-ended responses, and require an average of 15 minutes to complete. The household survey is part of the core data collection of the Baltimore Ecosystem Study to classify and characterize social and ecological dimensions of neighborhoods (patches) over time and across space. This survey is linked to other core data, including US Census data, remotely-sensed data, and field data collection, including the BES DemSoc Field Observation Survey. Additional documentation of this database is attached to this metadata and includes 4 documents, 1) the telephone survey, 2) documentation of the telephone survey, 3) metadata for the telephone survey, and 4) a description of the attribute data in the BES survey 2003 survey. This database was created by joining the GDT geographic database of US Census Block Group geographies for the Baltimore Metropolitan Statisticsal Area (MSA), with the Claritas PRIZM database, 2003, of unique classifications of each Census Block Group, and the unique PRIZM code for each respondent from the BES Household Telephone Survey, 2003. The GDT database is preferred and used because of its higher spatial accuracy than other databases describing US Census geographies, including those provided by the US Census. This database includes data only for environmental behaviors: How likely would you be to take part in the following efforts to improve and maintain the quality of the watersheds near where you live, very unlikely, somewhat unlikely, somewhat likely, very likely? A) pay increased recreation or other usage fees, b) support a modest (small) tax increase to be used for water quality issues, c) support legislation to require all developments be set back from streams and flood plains, and d) volunteer to work on cleanup and/or pollution patrols." The response is the percentage of respondents in that Prizm class who score "somewhat likely" or "very likely" on an index across all four of the environmental behavior questions. Credits Publications using data from the Baltimore Ecosystem Study Website shall include the following paragraph: Some data used in this publication was obtained by scientists of the Baltimore Ecosystem Study; this publication has not been reviewed by those scientists. The Baltimore Ecosystem Study operated and maintained by the Institute of Ecosystem Studies, Millbrook, New York. Rules for Use of the Data: As a condition for access to data provided by researchers of the Baltimore Ecosystem Study, I agree to abide by the following: A. I agree to notify the Baltimore Ecosystem Study scientists who gathered data if I would like to use those data in any publication. I acknowledge that these data were gathered by Baltimore Ecosystem Study scientists because they had already perceived the importance of these data for a variety of scientific and societal issues. I will provide them with formal recognition that, at their discretion, may include co-authorship or acknowledgements on publications. B. I realize that the researchers who gathered these data may be using them for scientific analyses, papers or publications that are currently planned or in preparation, and that such activities have precedence over any that I might wish to prepare. In this case, my preparation of any work may be delayed, at the option of the Baltimore Ecosystem Study researchers involved, until their work is completed. C. Because it may be possible to misinterpret a data set if it is taken out of context, I will seek the assistance and opinion of those Baltimore Ecosystem Study researchers involved in the design of a study and the collection of the data as I analyze the data. Moreover, I realize that this computer data set is not complete, and it may contain errors. The complete data set includes extensive written documentation, which should be referenced to reduce the chance of errors in data and errors of interpretation Use limitations none Extent West -76.862916 East -76.348105 North 39.719009 South 39.220513

Abstract

The Census is the official count of population and dwellings in Tonga, providing a ‘snapshot’ of the society and its most precious resource, its people, at a point in time. The official reference period of the census was midnight, the 30th of November, 2006.

The census provides a unique source of detailed demographic, social and economic data relating the entire population at a single point in time. Census information is used for policy setting and implementation, research, planning and other decision-making. The census is often the primary source of information used for the allocation of public funding, especially in areas such as health, education and social policy. The main users of this information are the government, local authorities, education facilities (such as schools and tertiary organizations), businesses, community organizations and the public in general.

The 2006 Census was taken under the authority of Section 8 of Statistical Act Chap. 53 of 1978 which empowers the Minister of Finance to make regulations necessary to conduct the population Census. This regulation was approved by the Cabinet and cited as Census Regulation 2006. The Census regulations also indicate that the Government Statistician would be responsible for the administration and completion of the Census. In addition, the regulations enabled the Statistics Department to carry out the necessary activities required to plan, manage and implement all the necessary Census activities.

Census planning and management

From a planning and management perspective, the Census had two main objectives. Firstly, it was to ensure that the process of collecting, compiling, evaluating, analyzing and disseminating of demographic, economic and social data was conducted in a timely and accurate manner. The development of procedures and processes for the 2006 Census of Population and Housing made use of the lessons learned in previous censuses, and built upon recommendations for improvements.

Secondly, it was a valuable opportunity for building the capacities of employees of the Statistics Department (SD), thus resulting in enhancing the image, credibility and reputation of the Department and at the same time, strengthening its infrastructure. Emphasis was placed on having a senior staff with a wide perspective and leadership qualities. Through the use of vision, planning, coordination, delegation of responsibility and a strong team spirit, the census work was conducted in an effective and efficient manner. Staffs at all levels were encouraged to have an innovative mindset in addressing issues. Incentives for other parties to participate, both within Statistics Department Tonga Tonga 2006 Census of Population and Housing viii and outside the government, were encouraged. As a result, the wider community including donors such as AusAID, the Secretariat of the Pacific Community (SPC) in Noumea, that provided the technical assistance and the general public, were able to support the census project.

Extensive and detailed planning is needed to conduct a successful census. Areas that required planning include: enumeration procedures and fieldwork, public communication, data processing and output systems, mapping and the design of census block boundaries, dissemination procedures, content determination and questionnaire development and training. These aspects, and how they interacted with each other, played a crucial role in determining the quality of all of the census outputs. Each phase therefore required careful, methodical planning and testing. The details of such activities, and their implementation and responsibilities were assigned to 5 subcommittees composed of staff members of the SD.

Organizational structure of the Census

A census organizational structure is designed to implement a number of interrelated activities. Each of these activities was assigned to a specific sub-committee. The census manuals provided guidelines on processes, organizational structures, controls for quality assurance and problem solving. The challenge for managers was developing a work environment that enabled census personnel to perform all these tasks with a common goal in mind. Each sub-committee was responsible for its own outputs, and specific decisions for specific situations were delegated to the lowest level possible. Problem situations beyond the scope of the sub-committee were escalated to the next higher level.

The organizational structure of the census was as follows: a) The Steering Committee (consisting of the Head of both Government and nongovernment organizations), chaired by Secretary for Finance with the Government Statistician (GS) as secretary. b) The Census Committee (consisted of all sub-committee leaders plus the GS, and chaired by the Assistant Government Statistician (AGS) who was the officer in charge of all management and planning of the Census 2006 operations. c) There were five Sub-committees (each sub-committee consisted of about 5 members and were chaired by their Sub-committee leader). These committees included: Mapping, Publicity, Fieldwork, Training and Data Processing. In this way, every staff member of the SD was involved with the census operation through their participation on these committees.

The census steering committee was a high level committee that approved and endorsed the plans and activities of the census. Policy issues that needed to be addressed were submitted to the steering committee for approval prior to the census team and sub-committees designation of the activities necessary to address the tasks.

Part of the initial planning of the 2006 Census involved the establishment of a work-plan with specific time frames. This charted all activities that were to be undertaken and, their impact and dependencies on other activities. These time frames were an essential part of the overall exercise, as they provided specific guides to the progress of each area, and alerted subcommittees’ team leaders (TL) to areas where problems existed and needed to be addressed. These also provided the SD staff with a clear indication of where and how their roles impacted the overall Census process.

Monitoring of the timeframe was an essential part of the management of the Census program. Initially, weekly meetings were held which involved the GS, AGS and team leaders (TL) of the Census committee. As the Census projects progressed, the AGS and TL’s met regularly with their sub-committees to report on the progress of each area. Decisions were made on necessary actions in order to meet the designated dates. Potential risks that could negatively affect the deadlines and actions were also considered at these meetings.

For the 5 sub-committees, one of their first tasks was to verify and amend their terms of reference using the “Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities and Threats” (SWOT) analysis methodology, as it applied to past censuses. Each committee then prepared a work-plan and listed all activities for which that particular sub-committee was responsible. This listing included the assignment of a responsible person, together with the timeline indicating the start and end dates required to complete that particular activity. These work-plans, set up by all the 5 sub-committees, were then used by the AGS to develop a detailed operational plan for all phases of the census, the activities required to complete these phases, start and end dates, the person responsible and the dependencies, - all in a Ghant chart format. These combined work-plans were further discussed and amended in the Census team and reported to the Steering committee on regular basis as required.

Geographic coverage

National coverage, which includes the 5 Divisions and both Urban and Rural Areas of Tonga.

Analysis unit

Individual and Households.

Universe

All individuals in private and institutional households.

Kind of data

Census/enumeration data [cen]

Sampling procedure

The National Population Census was a complete enumeration census, hence no sampling procedure was employed. A Mapping Sub-committee was formed to ensure complete coverage of the country.

The Mapping Sub-committee

Led by Mr. Winston Fainga'anuku, this committee's mandate was to ensure that good quality maps were produced. The objective was to ensure that the maps provided complete coverage of the country, were designed to accommodate a reasonable workload of one census enumerator and, that geographic identifiers could be used for dissemination purposes by the PopGIS system. Collaborations with the Ministry of Land, Survey and Natural Resources (MLSNR) began in 2004 to ensure that digitized maps for Tonga could be used for 2006 Census. Mr. Fainga'anuku was attached to the MLSNR in April 2005 to assist 'Atelea Kautoke, Samuela Mailau, Lilika and others to complete the task of digitizing the maps for Tonga. In addition, frequent visits by Mr. Scott Pontifex from the Secretariat of the Pacific Community (SPC) in Noumea, assisted to ensure that quality digitized maps were prepared. SPC also assisted by lending its digitizer which was used in this mapping project. The staff of the Statistics Department (SD) visited household sites throughout Tongatapu and the main outer islands. This exercise was to redesign the Census Block boundaries by amalgamating or splitting existing census blocks to achieve an average of 50 households per census block. Various updates within the census block maps were made. These included the names of the head of household; roads and other landmarks to ensure that current and accurate information was provided to the enumerators. Reliable maps, both for enumerators and supervisors are necessary ingredients to assist in avoiding any under or over - counting during

Abstract

The Census is the official count of population and dwellings in Tonga, providing a ‘snapshot’ of the society and its most precious resource, its people, at a point in time. The official reference period of the census was midnight, the 30th of November, 2006.

The census provides a unique source of detailed demographic, social and economic data relating the entire population at a single point in time. Census information is used for policy setting and implementation, research, planning and other decision-making. The census is often the primary source of information used for the allocation of public funding, especially in areas such as health, education and social policy. The main users of this information are the government, local authorities, education facilities (such as schools and tertiary organizations), businesses, community organizations and the public in general.

The 2006 Census was taken under the authority of Section 8 of Statistical Act Chap. 53 of 1978 which empowers the Minister of Finance to make regulations necessary to conduct the population Census. This regulation was approved by the Cabinet and cited as Census Regulation 2006. The Census regulations also indicate that the Government Statistician would be responsible for the administration and completion of the Census. In addition, the regulations enabled the Statistics Department to carry out the necessary activities required to plan, manage and implement all the necessary Census activities.

Census Planning and Management From a planning and management perspective, the Census had two main objectives. Firstly, it was to ensure that the process of collecting, compiling, evaluating, analyzing and disseminating of demographic, economic and social data was conducted in a timely and accurate manner. The development of procedures and processes for the 2006 Census of Population and Housing made use of the lessons learned in previous censuses, and built upon recommendations for improvements.

Secondly, it was a valuable opportunity for building the capacities of employees of the Statistics Department (SD), thus resulting in enhancing the image, credibility and reputation of the Department and at the same time, strengthening its infrastructure. Emphasis was placed on having a senior staff with a wide perspective and leadership qualities. Through the use of vision, planning, coordination, delegation of responsibility and a strong team spirit, the census work was conducted in an effective and efficient manner. Staffs at all levels were encouraged to have an innovative mindset in addressing issues. Incentives for other parties to participate, both within Statistics Department Tonga Tonga 2006 Census of Population and Housing viii and outside the government, were encouraged. As a result, the wider community including donors such as AusAID, the Secretariat of the Pacific Community (SPC) in Noumea, that provided the technical assistance and the general public, were able to support the census project.

Extensive and detailed planning is needed to conduct a successful census. Areas that required planning include: enumeration procedures and fieldwork, public communication, data processing and output systems, mapping and the design of census block boundaries, dissemination procedures, content determination and questionnaire development and training. These aspects, and how they interacted with each other, played a crucial role in determining the quality of all of the census outputs. Each phase therefore required careful, methodical planning and testing. The details of such activities, and their implementation and responsibilities were assigned to 5 subcommittees composed of staff members of the SD.

Organizational Structure of the Census A census organizational structure is designed to implement a number of interrelated activities. Each of these activities was assigned to a specific sub-committee. The census manuals provided guidelines on processes, organizational structures, controls for quality assurance and problem solving. The challenge for managers was developing a work environment that enabled census personnel to perform all these tasks with a common goal in mind. Each sub-committee was responsible for its own outputs, and specific decisions for specific situations were delegated to the lowest level possible. Problem situations beyond the scope of the sub-committee were escalated to the next higher level.

The organizational structure of the census was as follows: a) The Steering Committee (consisting of the Head of both Government and nongovernment organizations), chaired by Secretary for Finance with the Government Statistician (GS) as secretary. b) The Census Committee (consisted of all sub-committee leaders plus the GS, and chaired by the Assistant Government Statistician (AGS) who was the officer in charge of all management and planning of the Census 2006 operations. c) There were five Sub-committees (each sub-committee consisted of about 5 members and were chaired by their Sub-committee leader). These committees included: Mapping, Publicity, Fieldwork, Training and Data Processing. In this way, every staff member of the SD was involved with the census operation through their participation on these committees.

The census steering committee was a high level committee that approved and endorsed the plans and activities of the census. Policy issues that needed to be addressed were submitted to the steering committee for approval prior to the census team and sub-committees designation of the activities necessary to address the tasks.

Part of the initial planning of the 2006 Census involved the establishment of a work-plan with specific time frames. This charted all activities that were to be undertaken and, their impact and dependencies on other activities. These time frames were an essential part of the overall exercise, as they provided specific guides to the progress of each area, and alerted subcommittees’ team leaders (TL) to areas where problems existed and needed to be addressed. These also provided the SD staff with a clear indication of where and how their roles impacted the overall Census process.

Monitoring of the timeframe was an essential part of the management of the Census program. Initially, weekly meetings were held which involved the GS, AGS and team leaders (TL) of the Census committee. As the Census projects progressed, the AGS and TL’s met regularly with their sub-committees to report on the progress of each area. Decisions were made on necessary actions in order to meet the designated dates. Potential risks that could negatively affect the deadlines and actions were also considered at these meetings.

For the 5 sub-committees, one of their first tasks was to verify and amend their terms of reference using the “Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities and Threats” (SWOT) analysis methodology, as it applied to past censuses. Each committee then prepared a work-plan and listed all activities for which that particular sub-committee was responsible. This listing included the assignment of a responsible person, together with the timeline indicating the start and end dates required to complete that particular activity. These work-plans, set up by all the 5 sub-committees, were then used by the AGS to develop a detailed operational plan for all phases of the census, the activities required to complete these phases, start and end dates, the person responsible and the dependencies, - all in a Ghant chart format. These combined work-plans were further discussed and amended in the Census team and reported to the Steering committee on regular basis as required.

Geographic coverage

The Population Census covers the whole of the Kingdom of Tonga, which includes the 5 Divisions and both Urban and Rural Areas.

Analysis unit

Individuals, families and private households

Universe

All individuals in private and institutional households.

Kind of data

Census/enumeration data [cen]

Sampling procedure

The National Population Census was a complete enumeration census, hence no sampling procedure was employed. A Mapping Sub-committee was formed to ensure complete coverage of the country.

The Mapping Sub-committee Led by Mr. Winston Fainga'anuku, this committee's mandate was to ensure that good quality maps were produced. The objective was to ensure that the maps provided complete coverage of the country, were designed to accommodate a reasonable workload of one census enumerator and, that geographic identifiers could be used for dissemination purposes by the PopGIS system. Collaborations with the Ministry of Land, Survey and Natural Resources (MLSNR) began in 2004 to ensure that digitized maps for Tonga could be used for 2006 Census. Mr. Fainga'anuku was attached to the MLSNR in April 2005 to assist 'Atelea Kautoke, Samuela Mailau, Lilika and others to complete the task of digitizing the maps for Tonga. In addition, frequent visits by Mr. Scott Pontifex from the Secretariat of the Pacific Community (SPC) in Noumea, assisted to ensure that quality digitized maps were prepared. SPC also assisted by lending its digitizer which was used in this mapping project. The staff of the Statistics Department (SD) visited household sites throughout Tongatapu and the main outer islands. This exercise was to redesign the Census Block boundaries by amalgamating or splitting existing census blocks to achieve an average of 50 households per census block. Various updates within the census block maps were made. These included the names of the head of household; roads and other landmarks to ensure that current and accurate information was provided to the enumerators. Reliable maps, both for enumerators and supervisors are necessary ingredients to assist in

Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) Division of Behavioral Health (DBH) behavioral health regions. Nebraska behavioral health resources are organized into six local units of government for the purposes of planning and service implementation. This digital resource was created from the 2020 US Census Bureau county file.

Geocoded for Baltimore City County. The BES Household Survey 2003 is a telephone survey of metropolitan Baltimore residents consisting of 29 questions. The survey research firm, Hollander, Cohen, and McBride conducted the survey, asking respondents questions about their outdoor recreation activities, watershed knowledge, environmental behavior, neighborhood characteristics and quality of life, lawn maintenance, satisfaction with life, neighborhood, and the environment, and demographic information. The data from each respondent is also associated with a PRIZM(r) classification, census block group, and latitude-longitude. PRIZM(r) classifications categorize the American population using Census data, market research surveys, public opinion polls, and point-of-purchase receipts. The PRIZM(r) classification is spatially explicit allowing the survey data to be viewed and analyzed spatially and allowing specific neighborhood types to be identified and compared based on the survey data. The census block group and latitude-longitude data also allow us additional methods of presenting and analyzing the data spatially. The household survey is part of the core data collection of the Baltimore Ecosystem Study to classify and characterize social and ecological dimensions of neighborhoods (patches) over time and across space. This survey is linked to other core data including US Census data, remotely-sensed data, and field data collection, including the BES DemSoc Field Observation Survey. The BES 2003 telephone survey was conducted by Hollander, Cohen, and McBride from September 1-30, 2003. The sample was obtained from the professional sampling firm Claritas, in order that their "PRIZM" encoding would be appended to each piece of sample (telephone number) supplied. Mailing addresses were also obtained so that a postcard could be sent in advance of interviewers calling. The postcard briefly informed potential respondents about the survey, who was conducting it, and that they might receive a phone call in the next few weeks. A stratified sampling method was used to obtain between 50 - 150 respondents in each of the 15 main PRIZM classifications. This allows direct comparison of PRIZM classifications. Analysis of the data for the general metropolitan Baltimore area must be weighted to match the population proportions normally found in the region. They obtained a total of 9000 telephone numbers in the sample. All 9,000 numbers were dialed but contact was only made on 4,880. 1508 completed an interview, 2524 refused immediately, 147 broke off/incomplete, 84 respondents had moved and were no longer in the correct location, and a qualified respondent was not available on 617 calls. This resulted in a response rate of 36.1% compared with a response rate of 28.2% in 2000. The CATI software (Computer Assisted Terminal Interviewing) randomized the random sample supplied, and was programmed for at least 3 attempted callbacks per number, with emphasis on pulling available callback sample prior to accessing uncalled numbers. Calling was conducted only during evening and weekend hours, when most head of households are home. The use of CATI facilitated stratified sampling on PRIZM classifications, centralized data collection, standardized interviewer training, and reduced the overall cost of primary data collection. Additionally, to reduce respondent burden, the questionnaire was revised to be concise, easy to understand, minimize the use of open-ended responses, and require an average of 15 minutes to complete. The household survey is part of the core data collection of the Baltimore Ecosystem Study to classify and characterize social and ecological dimensions of neighborhoods (patches) over time and across space. This survey is linked to other core data, including US Census data, remotely-sensed data, and field data collection, including the BES DemSoc Field Observation Survey. Additional documentation of this database is attached to this metadata and includes 4 documents, 1) the telephone survey, 2) documentation of the telephone survey, 3) metadata for the telephone survey, and 4) a description of the attribute data in the BES survey 2003 survey. This database was created by joining the GDT geographic database of US Census Block Group geographies for the Baltimore Metropolitan Statisticsal Area (MSA), with the Claritas PRIZM database, 2003, of unique classifications of each Census Block Group, and the unique PRIZM code for each respondent from the BES Household Telephone Survey, 2003. The GDT database is preferred and used because of its higher spatial accuracy than other databases describing US Census geographies, including those provided by the US Census. This database includes data only for environmental behaviors: How likely would you be to take part in the following efforts to improve and maintain the quality of the watershe... Visit https://dataone.org/datasets/knb-lter-bes.335.570 for complete metadata about this dataset.

This study contains selected economic, demographic, and electoral data for counties, cities, and incorporated areas of 25,000 inhabitants or more, urbanized areas, and Standard Metropolitan Statistical Areas (SMSAs), in the entire United States. For each of the seven data files, information is provided on population characteristics, income, occupation, education, household characteristics, age, and nationality. Data are also provided on presidential votes, the leading party, Social Security and public assistance, and rural population and agriculture (Parts 2 and 3), local government general revenue and expenditures, taxes, employment, manufacturing establishments, retail trade, wholesale establishments, and yearly payroll (Parts 2, 3, and 6), and crime, hospitals, and seasonal weather conditions (Part 6).

The School Survey on Crime and Safety (SSOCS) is managed by the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) on behalf of the United States Department of Education (ED). SSOCS collects extensive crime and safety data from principals and school administrators of United States public schools. Data from this collection can be used to examine the relationship between school characteristics and violent and serious violent crimes in primary schools, middle schools, high schools, and combined schools. In addition, data from SSOCS can be used to assess what crime prevention programs, practices, and policies are used by schools. SSOCS has been conducted in school years 1999-2000, 2003-2004, and 2005-2006. A fourth collection is planned for school year 2007-2008. SSOCS:2006 was conducted by the United States Census Bureau. Data collection began on March 17, 2006, when questionnaire packets were mailed to schools, and continued through May 31, 2006. A total of 2,724 public schools submitted usable questionnaires: 715 primary schools, 948 middle schools, 924 high schools, and 137 combined schools.

Descriptive summary of dataset using median values.

These data represent the predicted (modeled) prevalence of adult (Age 18+) Marijuana use for each census tract in Colorado. Marijuana use is defined as using marijuana or hashish 1 or more days out of the past 30 days.The estimate for each census tract represents an average that was derived from multiple years of Colorado Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System data (2014-2017).CDPHE used a model-based approach to measure the relationship between age, race, gender, poverty, education, location and health conditions or risk behavior indicators and applied this relationship to predict the number of persons' who have the health conditions or risk behavior for each census tract in Colorado. We then applied these probabilities, based on demographic stratification, to the 2013-2017 American Community Survey population estimates and determined the percentage of adults with the health conditions or risk behavior for each census tract in Colorado.The estimates are based on statistical models and are not direct survey estimates. Using the best available data, CDPHE was able to model census tract estimates based on demographic data and background knowledge about the distribution of specific health conditions and risk behaviors.The estimates are displayed in both the map and data table using point estimate values for each census tract and displayed using a Quintile range. The high and low value for each color on the map is calculated based on dividing the total number of census tracts in Colorado (1249) into five groups based on the total range of estimates for all Colorado census tracts. Each Quintile range represents roughly 20% of the census tracts in Colorado. No estimates are provided for census tracts with a known population of less than 50. These census tracts are displayed in the map as "No Est, Pop < 50."No estimates are provided for 7 census tracts with a known population of less than 50 or for the 2 census tracts that exclusively contain a federal correctional institution as 100% of their population. These 9 census tracts are displayed in the map as "No Estimate."

These data represent the predicted (modeled) prevalence of Diabetes among adults (Age 18+) for each census tract in Colorado. Diabetes is defined as ever being diagnosed with Diabetes by a doctor, nurse, or other health professional, and this definition does not include gestational, borderline, or pre-diabetes.The estimate for each census tract represents an average that was derived from multiple years of Colorado Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System data (2014-2017).CDPHE used a model-based approach to measure the relationship between age, race, gender, poverty, education, location and health conditions or risk behavior indicators and applied this relationship to predict the number of persons' who have the health conditions or risk behavior for each census tract in Colorado. We then applied these probabilities, based on demographic stratification, to the 2013-2017 American Community Survey population estimates and determined the percentage of adults with the health conditions or risk behavior for each census tract in Colorado.The estimates are based on statistical models and are not direct survey estimates. Using the best available data, CDPHE was able to model census tract estimates based on demographic data and background knowledge about the distribution of specific health conditions and risk behaviors.The estimates are displayed in both the map and data table using point estimate values for each census tract and displayed using a Quintile range. The high and low value for each color on the map is calculated based on dividing the total number of census tracts in Colorado (1249) into five groups based on the total range of estimates for all Colorado census tracts. Each Quintile range represents roughly 20% of the census tracts in Colorado. No estimates are provided for census tracts with a known population of less than 50. These census tracts are displayed in the map as "No Est, Pop < 50."No estimates are provided for 7 census tracts with a known population of less than 50 or for the 2 census tracts that exclusively contain a federal correctional institution as 100% of their population. These 9 census tracts are displayed in the map as "No Estimate."

The census date was midnight, the 30th of November 2016. It is the official count of population, dwellings and households in Tonga and it provides a ‘snapshot’ of the country at one specific point in time: 30th of November 2016. Since 1956 until 2006, Census has been taken once in every ten years.

The Population and Housing Census (PHC) provides a unique source of detailed demographic, social and economic data relating the entire population and its most precious resource of its people. This information is used for policy making and planning, monitoring and evaluation, research and other decision-making.

The PHC is often the primary source of information such as used for allocation of public funding, especially in areas such as health, education and social policy. The main users of this information are the government, local authorities, education facilities (such as schools and tertiary organizations), businesses, community organizations and the public in general.

The population census 2016 was the second population census by 5 years interval after the previous census in 2011. This was requested by the Electoral Boundary Commission (EBC) according to its Act 2010, Section 21(1) which states that: (1) To facilitate the second determination of boundaries under this Act, the Minister responsible for the administration of the Statistics Act shall cause a general population census to be carried out before the next General Election. (2) The Government Statistician shall certify and provide to the Commission such Information, calculations and projections that the Commission may enable it to perform its functions under this Act.

Government Approval

The Statistics Department first sought the Minister of Finance’s approval to conduct this census. Once, this approval was received, the census proposal was prepared. The proposal was submitted to the Minister of Finance for endorsement to the Cabinet with the recommendation “That the Statistics Department conduct the Tonga Population Census and Housing on 30th November 2016(census date), and Ministry of Finance and National Planning assist with obtaining of necessary funding for the census be approved.”

Version 01: edited data of the de-identified dataset.

Geographical ID
Dwelling Type
Household Roster
Population Characteristics
Functioning, Social Behaviour & Illness
Education, Languages And Literacy
Economic Activities Last Week
Fertility And Mortality
Communications And Internet
Housing
Agriculture And Fishing
Visitors
GPS + Photo

• Collection start: 2016
• Collection end: 2016